[ARRL-OK] Another Legislative Issue

[Kim Elmore]

While I don't wish to take anything from the private vendors, in many cases 
the essentially repackage exactly what the NWS provides for free. It's 
inappropriate to make us pay for a simple repackaging.

However, where the private vendors have it all over the NWS is in tailored 
products: they can provide products that are very specifically tailored to 
a user's needs, which is something the NWS cannot do. Also, the private 
vendors can provide all manner of additional products derived from the data 
streams that the NWS does not, or can not, provide. Things like that *are* 
worth paying for.

However, as written the bill is simply too broad.

Kim Elmore

At 04:22 PM 4/23/2005, you wrote:
>  >From Eddie - K5EMS
>
>Thanks to Dave - KD5FX, for letting me know about this.   Seems there is 
>always something brewing in the wings .... check out the latest 
>legislation that has been introducted in the US Senate.   The jest of it 
>reads as follows:
>=============================================
>NEW BILL WOULD BAN PUBLIC NOAA WEATHER DATA  [partial copy from article]
>
>Feds' weather information could go dark
>By Robert P. King
>Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
>Thursday, April 21, 2005
>Do you want a seven-day weather forecast for your ZIP code?  Or 
>hour-by-hour predictions of the temperature, wind speed, humidity and 
>chance of rain?  Or weather data beamed to your cellphone?  That 
>information is available for free from the National Weather Service.
>But under a bill pending in the U.S. Senate, it might all disappear.
>The bill, introduced last week by Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., would 
>prohibit federal meteorologists from competing with companies such as 
>AccuWeather and The Weather Channel, which offer their own forecasts 
>through paid services and free ad-supported Web sites.  Supporters say the 
>bill wouldn't hamper the weather service or the National Hurricane Center 
>from alerting the public to hazards - in fact, it exempts forecasts meant 
>to protect "life and property." [MUCH MORE IN THE ARTICLE]
>================================================
>To see the full article go to WWW.QRZ.COM and read the title as given 
>above.   The name & bill number is <>"National Weather Services Duties Act 
>of 2005  -- S 786", so you can cite this issue and voice your opinion!!
>Thanks
>Eddie - K5EMS
>
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>___________________ Information __________________________
>ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT wb5syt at arrl.org
>Oklahoma Section Web page http://www.qsl.net/wb5syt/index.html
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>
>ARRL-OK mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/faq.htm
>Post: mailto:ARRL-OK at mailman.qth.net

                           Kim Elmore, Ph.D.
                        University of Oklahoma
         Cooperative Institute for Mesoscale Meteorological Studies
"All of weather is divided into three parts: Yes, No, and Maybe. The
greatest of these is Maybe" The original Latin appears to be garbled.