wrote:
robert casey wrote:
wrote:

Recently there have been some claims about "what the
majority wants" in regards to FCC NPRMs.

THe FCC doesn't make rules based on how polling comes out.


I was speaking about comments, not polls. But you're right
either way, in that the FCC can ignore the majority
if it wants to.

The FCC is legaly bound to ignore the majority in what it sees as the
public interest

One very
good comment can trump many "me toos".

Or one comment that FCC just happens to agree with.

Look at the BPL situation....

Besides, the FCC isn't
in the business of handing out gold stars. If a requirement
serves no regulatory purpose, the FCC doesn't want to bother
with it.

Or if FCC doesn't want to be bothered in the first place...

Indeed the FCC doesn't want to be bothered with much from the ARS, we
should count ourselves lucky to get any enforcement action

However, none of that is really what I was driving at.

My point is simply that the majority of comments on code testing
(57%) on 98-143 were in favor of at least two code test speeds,
including at least 12 wpm for Advanced and Extra. That fact is
proved by KC8EPO's published results, right here on rrap back
in March of 1999. (WA6VSE/WK3C posted them).

so?


FCC ignored the majority opinion back then and reduced code
testing to 5 wpm. The majority opinion was *not* acted upon
by FCC.

and No one ever promised or sugessted it would be

the FCC has a DUTY to the PUBLIC interest first and only then to the
interests of the ARS and finaly to the WISHES of the ARS


Whether FCC did the best thing or not is a matter of opinion.
But the plain simple fact is that the majority was *not*
anti-code-test.

so


Now of course if the majority of comments on 05-235 are in
favor of no more code testing, FCC will most certainly say
they are simply doing what the majority wants.

Not likely

The FCC will simply issue it's report and order



73 de Jim, N2EY

an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
robert casey wrote:
wrote:

Recently there have been some claims about "what the
majority wants" in regards to FCC NPRMs.

THe FCC doesn't make rules based on how polling comes out.


I was speaking about comments, not polls. But you're right
either way, in that the FCC can ignore the majority
if it wants to.

The FCC is legaly bound to ignore the majority in what it sees as the
public interest

"...legaly (legally) bound to ignore..."

I don't think so.

One very
good comment can trump many "me toos".

Or one comment that FCC just happens to agree with.

Look at the BPL situation....

Besides, the FCC isn't
in the business of handing out gold stars. If a requirement
serves no regulatory purpose, the FCC doesn't want to bother
with it.

Or if FCC doesn't want to be bothered in the first place...

Indeed the FCC doesn't want to be bothered with much from the ARS, we
should count ourselves lucky to get any enforcement action

Us or anyone else. However the FCC has demonstrated significant
enforcement actions over All services in recent years. Refer to the
FCC's NOV/NOUO archives.

However, none of that is really what I was driving at.

My point is simply that the majority of comments on code testing
(57%) on 98-143 were in favor of at least two code test speeds,
including at least 12 wpm for Advanced and Extra. That fact is
proved by KC8EPO's published results, right here on rrap back
in March of 1999. (WA6VSE/WK3C posted them).

so?

FCC ignored the majority opinion back then and reduced code
testing to 5 wpm. The majority opinion was *not* acted upon
by FCC.

and No one ever promised or sugessted it would be

Sure it was.

It was called the Constitution of the Untied States.

That concept has been lost in the caucophony of
least-common-denominatior bar-lowerings.

the FCC has a DUTY to the PUBLIC interest first and only then to the
interests of the ARS and finaly to the WISHES of the ARS

"The "wishes" you refer to are by citizens of the United States
who told the government what they wanted.

The government ignored them.

Whether FCC did the best thing or not is a matter of opinion.
But the plain simple fact is that the majority was *not*
anti-code-test.

so

So the wishes of the citizens were ignored.

The Consitution was violated.

Now of course if the majority of comments on 05-235 are in
favor of no more code testing, FCC will most certainly say
they are simply doing what the majority wants.

Not likely

Absolutely. Watch.

The FCC will simply issue it's report and order

And in that R&O they will say "...the majority of respondents..."

Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
robert casey wrote:
wrote:

Recently there have been some claims about "what the
majority wants" in regards to FCC NPRMs.

THe FCC doesn't make rules based on how polling comes out.


I was speaking about comments, not polls. But you're right
either way, in that the FCC can ignore the majority
if it wants to.

The FCC is legaly bound to ignore the majority in what it sees as the
public interest

cuting speling cop

I don't think so.

of course you don't

that is one of the problems you don't bother learning what the turth is

One very
good comment can trump many "me toos".

Or one comment that FCC just happens to agree with.

Look at the BPL situation....

Besides, the FCC isn't
in the business of handing out gold stars. If a requirement
serves no regulatory purpose, the FCC doesn't want to bother
with it.

Or if FCC doesn't want to be bothered in the first place...

Indeed the FCC doesn't want to be bothered with much from the ARS, we
should count ourselves lucky to get any enforcement action

Us or anyone else. However the FCC has demonstrated significant
enforcement actions over All services in recent years. Refer to the
FCC's NOV/NOUO archives.

your point?


However, none of that is really what I was driving at.

My point is simply that the majority of comments on code testing
(57%) on 98-143 were in favor of at least two code test speeds,
including at least 12 wpm for Advanced and Extra. That fact is
proved by KC8EPO's published results, right here on rrap back
in March of 1999. (WA6VSE/WK3C posted them).

so?

FCC ignored the majority opinion back then and reduced code
testing to 5 wpm. The majority opinion was *not* acted upon
by FCC.

and No one ever promised or sugessted it would be

break
Sure it was.

BUZZZ wrong answer


It was called the Constitution of the Untied States.

nope an other Stevie lie

That important document say nothing of the sort

It says nothing about govening rules by direct public referendum

Indeed it says nothing giving the FCC any power at all, except the
socalled supremacy clasue declaering itself and any TREATIES we sign
the supreme law of the land, that and the neccasary and proper clause
are all that allow the FCC exist to exist as a legal body, neither says
anything about governing the reags by referendum


That concept has been lost in the caucophony of
least-common-denominatior bar-lowerings.

not at all

what has been lost by you is the notion that Radio rules and regs are
there to serve the PUBLIC interest not you narrow cliquish whims


the FCC has a DUTY to the PUBLIC interest first and only then to the
interests of the ARS and finaly to the WISHES of the ARS

"The "wishes" you refer to are by citizens of the United States
who told the government what they wanted.

and they come last by law, and very properly, nor of course are all of
them citizens


The government ignored them.

another Stevie Lie, the Govt heard them, and found other things more
pressing

Whether FCC did the best thing or not is a matter of opinion.
But the plain simple fact is that the majority was *not*
anti-code-test.

so

So the wishes of the citizens were ignored.

happen all the time


The Consitution was violated.

nope


Now of course if the majority of comments on 05-235 are in
favor of no more code testing, FCC will most certainly say
they are simply doing what the majority wants.

Not likely

Absolutely. Watch.

the FCC is very unlikely to do so because it would esteablish for the
first time an expectation that it was bound to follow the will f the
majority of the folks that comented


The FCC will simply issue it's report and order

And in that R&O they will say "...the majority of respondents..."

It might note that fact but that is unlikely to attribute that any
weight and if it does one the lawyers that reviews it before release
should be fired


Steve, K4YZ

K4YZ wrote:
an_old_friend wrote:
wrote:
robert casey wrote:
wrote:

Recently there have been some claims about "what the
majority wants" in regards to FCC NPRMs.

THe FCC doesn't make rules based on how polling comes out.

I was speaking about comments, not polls. But you're right
either way, in that the FCC can ignore the majority
if it wants to.

The FCC is legaly bound to ignore the majority in what it sees as the
public interest

"...legaly (legally) bound to ignore..."

I don't think so.

In this case, the truth is in the middle. FCC is not required to follow
majority opinion, but neither are they supposed to ignore it.

The main point is that the majority opinion on 98-143 wanted more code
testing than 5 wpm. But that opinion was ignored by FCC. The majoriy
wanted 5 wpm for General but *not* for all code-tested licenses.

KC8EPO's analysis proves it.

One very
good comment can trump many "me toos".

Or one comment that FCC just happens to agree with.

Look at the BPL situation....

Besides, the FCC isn't
in the business of handing out gold stars. If a requirement
serves no regulatory purpose, the FCC doesn't want to bother
with it.

Or if FCC doesn't want to be bothered in the first place...

Indeed the FCC doesn't want to be bothered with much from the ARS, we
should count ourselves lucky to get any enforcement action

Us or anyone else. However the FCC has demonstrated significant
enforcement actions over All services in recent years. Refer to the
FCC's NOV/NOUO archives.

Sure.

However, none of that is really what I was driving at.

My point is simply that the majority of comments on code testing
(57%) on 98-143 were in favor of at least two code test speeds,
including at least 12 wpm for Advanced and Extra. That fact is
proved by KC8EPO's published results, right here on rrap back
in March of 1999. (WA6VSE/WK3C posted them).

so?

FCC ignored the majority opinion back then and reduced code
testing to 5 wpm. The majority opinion was *not* acted upon
by FCC.

and No one ever promised or sugessted it would be

Sure it was.

It was called the Constitution of the Untied States.

That's not what the Constitution promises.

What the Constitution does is to set the structure of our govt. and
limit its power. What that means in specific cases is what keeps the
Supremes busy.

Note that the Constitution is particularly concerned with protecting
the rights of the individual and the minority against those of the mob
and the majority. That's why we have trial-by-jury instead of
trial-by-public-opinion-poll.

And it takes a 2/3 vote to amend the constitution, not just a majority.
The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA - remember that?) failed to be enacted
because of the lack of a 2/3 majority, even after a time extension.

That concept has been lost in the caucophony of
least-common-denominatior bar-lowerings.

It's called checks and balances. The wishes of the majority are
balanced against the rights of the individual.

the FCC has a DUTY to the PUBLIC interest first and only then to the
interests of the ARS and finaly to the WISHES of the ARS

"The "wishes" you refer to are by citizens of the United States
who told the government what they wanted.

The government ignored them.

Yep, they did.

Actually, the only time the govt. is required to submit to the will of
the majority of the people is in certain elections and referenda. (In a
presidential election, the candidate with the majority of votes can
still lose - it's already happened).

Whether FCC did the best thing or not is a matter of opinion.
But the plain simple fact is that the majority was *not*
anti-code-test.

so

So the wishes of the citizens were ignored.

Yup.

The Consitution was violated.

Nope. There's no requirement for FCC to do what the majority of
commenters want.

Now of course if the majority of comments on 05-235 are in
favor of no more code testing, FCC will most certainly say
they are simply doing what the majority wants.

Not likely

Absolutely. Watch.

Of course!

The FCC will simply issue it's report and order

And in that R&O they will say "...the majority of respondents..."

Because FCC has to include verbiage justifying its actions.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"K4YZ" wrote


So the wishes of the citizens were ignored.

The Consitution(sic) was violated.


OK folks, you read it right here!

FCC Docket 98-143 is unconstitutional!

The FCC proceeding has been struck down by the County Court of Franklin County
Tennessee, the Honorable Judge Steven J Robeson presiding. Hope the VEC's
didn't throw away their 13 and 20WPM testing materials.

Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep
de Hans, K0HB

.... interesting, now county courts are going to start ruling of federal
regulations?

John

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 01:49:08 +0000, KØHB wrote:


"K4YZ" wrote


So the wishes of the citizens were ignored.

The Consitution(sic) was violated.


OK folks, you read it right here!

FCC Docket 98-143 is unconstitutional!

The FCC proceeding has been struck down by the County Court of Franklin County
Tennessee, the Honorable Judge Steven J Robeson presiding. Hope the VEC's
didn't throw away their 13 and 20WPM testing materials.

Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep
de Hans, K0HB

"John Smith" wrote


... interesting, now county courts are going to start ruling of federal
regulations?


Seems that way. Judge Steven J. Robeson (aka "K4YZ/K4CAP") has ruled FCC Docket
98-143 was crafted in violation of the Consitution (sic). You could look it up
on Google!

Beep Beep
de Hans, K0HB

.... obviously a joke I am barely aware of ...

John

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 03:07:15 +0000, KØHB wrote:


"John Smith" wrote


... interesting, now county courts are going to start ruling of federal
regulations?


Seems that way. Judge Steven J. Robeson (aka "K4YZ/K4CAP") has ruled FCC Docket
98-143 was crafted in violation of the Consitution (sic). You could look it up
on Google!

Beep Beep
de Hans, K0HB