[CW] A Call to Arms

Wed Nov 25 08:53:18 EST 2020

"Fee-free" licensing is new?  Well I've never paid a fee, and I've had a ham license since 1976.  That's 44 years.  Hardly new.    

Why do I care if there is a fee?  It is not about me personally.  I am concerned about the overall impact.
In my time as a ham I have observed periodic proposals by the Commission and others to either charge fees or abolish them. 
Each time these proposals were considered, the resulting analyses repeatedly concluded that two factors 
strongly argued against charging such fees:
1. FCC fees would tend to discourage potential new amateur operators from pursuing their
license in what is otherwise a non-commercial, volunteer service.
2. The cost of collecting and managing the fee programs would exceed the amount collected or
reduce the value returned to the FCC to a de minimus level.
If you are interested, here is some further reasoning...
Point 1:
There is no question that FCC fees would tend to discourage potential new amateur operators
from pursuing their license. It has been repeatedly demonstrated that it is in the public interest to
encourage new and especially youthful amateur radio participants. A $50 FCC fee for a beginner
to get his or her license would certainly be a deterrent, especially for young people. The fee
becomes even more of a negative factor in a service in which the starter equipment costs can be
very low - even lower than the so-called "nominal" $50 fee!
I would also point out that charging a fee to get involved in a volunteer service like amateur
radio would tend to discourage potential amateurs from economically challenged families to a
greater degree than more affluent families. This is certainly not a desired outcome.
Point 2:
A few minutes of research confirmed my recollection that the past analyses concluded the cost of
collecting fees and managing the fee programs would have exceeded the amount collected or
reduce the value returned to the FCC to a de minimus level.
The current NPRM itself reports that "Applications for personal licenses are mostly automated
and do not have individualized staff costs for data input or review." In earlier fee proposal
situations, license processes were not automated, and costs would have been higher then, yet the
analysis revealed it was not helpful to charge fees. What has changed now?
The NPRM itself is making the point that costs are lower than ever - so why charge fees at all?

I submitted these comments to the Commission back in September...

Steve WD8DAS

sbjohnston at aol.com
http://www.wd8das.net/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Radio is your best entertainment value.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris R. NW6V <chrisrut7 at gmail.com>
To: CW Reflector <cw at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Tue, Nov 24, 2020 10:15 pm
Subject: Re: [CW] A Call to Arms

Hans,
I agree that fee-free is fairly new. But look at it this way; for a person of limited means, it's not $5 per year - it's 50 bucks upfront. Not much for you (or me)? Yay us. But for a 10-year-old kid? Somebody retired and living on a small fixed income? (I know some). I believe it's the highest fee ever for amateur licenses, and amounts to a profoundly regressive tax.
Based on info from the ARRL NW Div director, who attended our monthly meeting last week, the ARRL made strong protests on our behalf. I'm sure details are available on their site. 
In my opinion, how it will turn out will depend on the motivations behind the change. If it's stemmed from a mistaken administrative desire to make the FCC and the services they serve pay their own way, it can be worked out. However, if it's an effort to squeeze the amateur fraternity, with an eye toward more frequency appropriations for commercial services (for whom the $50 is a trifle), then that's another matter. A shrinking ham community could have truly disastrous consequences as competition for bandwidth continues to heat up.

The outcome will be a strong clue. Either they'll say "oops" or "ef off." 
When I was a kid back in the early sixties we used to call the FCC "Friendly Cousin Charlie" knowing only too well there was nothing friendly about it. Hams are today an anachronism. We need to keep the administrative barriers to the hobby as low as possible.
73 Chris NW6V

On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 2:23 PM Hans Brakob <kzerohb at gmail.com> wrote:

For many years, starting over 60 years ago, I paid license fees and renewal fees for my Amateur Radio licenses.  “Free Ham Licenses” is a fairly new thing, and I’m surprised it has lasted long as it has. The proposal of $50.00 for 10 years ($5 per year) isn’t even worth mentioning.  Back in 1958 I think I paid $8 for a 5-year license.  In todays dollar, the 10-year license would cost on the order of $140.  $50 is a bargain. 73, de Hans, KØHB“Just a Boy and his Radio”™   From: D.J.J. Ring, Jr.
Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2020 19:24
To: CW Reflector
Subject: [CW] A Call to Arms I just received this plea: A Call to ArmsAct NOW to save ham radio!The FCC has proposed a $50 fee on all new ham radio licenses, renewals, upgrades, vanity call signs requests, etc.  Voice your opinion before it’s too late!The period for new comments closed on November 16th, but you can still reply to existing comments until November 30th.  Look for comments that align with your views and add your opinion as a reply.  Let's overwhelm the FCC with responses!73DRN1EA ______________________________________________________________
CW mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:CW at mailman.qth.net
CW List ARCHIVES: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/
Unsubcribe send email to
cw-unsubscribe at mailman.qth.net
Subscribe send email to cw-subscribe at mailman.qth.net
Support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

=30=
______________________________________________________________
CW mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:CW at mailman.qth.net
CW List ARCHIVES: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/
Unsubcribe send email to
cw-unsubscribe at mailman.qth.net
Subscribe send email to cw-subscribe at mailman.qth.net
Support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

=30=
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/attachments/20201125/8a46f241/attachment.html>