[Boatanchors] The ARRL's next move

[B Farrell]

Isn't there already a radio service like that, FERS or GERMS or some such?

I can't think of one rulemaking petition the ARRL has put before the FCC in
the past 25 years that benefited the Amateur Radio Service.  The League
through the years has gone from one scheme to another, band refarming,
license restructuring, etc., in the desparate hope that the change will
swell the ranks of hams the League hopes will buy QST subscriptions and
merchandise.  But has  any of it really served Amateur Radio well?  The
no-code Tech license did bring in a lot of new hams, but how many remained
active or renewed their license?

I agree, elimination of the CW exam was brought on by a small group of
whiners, but the ARRL's rep quietly endorsed it at one of the IARU
conferences and then didn't ARRL have a stateside group submit the petition
to the FCC?

What is encouraging is that I'm aware of a number of newer hams who are
learning CW.

73,
Brad K4RT

On Friday, March 2, 2018, Rob Atkinson <ranchorobbo at gmail.com> wrote:

> There really needs to be a separate radio service established for
> people who just want a VHF rig, and repeater for emcomm stuff and 2
> meter CB etc., so the current amateur radio service can focus on real
> radio technology and other affairs that have been the traditional
> basis for ham radio.  And licenses for that service can involve
> testing for CW and radio theory and so on.  It won't happen for a
> variety of reasons though, one being FCC doesn't want more burden,
> only less.
>
> CW test was eliminated by No Code International, a New Zealand group
> of zealots who came out of nowhere and blind sided everyone with a
> grass roots organizing of opposition that welled up in the IARU then
> ITU, and suddenly there was no more international requirement for CW
> testing, and FCC scrapped it.  Before that happened, a tiny minority
> of Americans sued FCC claiming the CW test discriminated against them
> because they had a disability of some sort that prevented them from
> passing the CW test.  And before that happened the CW test had been
> deskilled to where you only had to pass a multiple guess test about
> what had been sent, instead of turning in a minute of solid copy.
>
> So to bring back CW FCC would have to get around the ADA.  Never going
> to happen.
>
> Rob
> K5UJ
> ______________________________________________________________
> Boatanchors mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/boatanchors
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Boatanchors at mailman.qth.net
>
> List Administrator: Gary Harmon, K5JWK
> ** For Assistance: gharmon at idworld.net **
>
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>