[Fists] FISTS vs. the ARRL

[JimV]

Larry -

I agree with most of what you say, but tend to disagree on several key
points.

There have been many proposals, including the one sanctioned by FISTS,
that have agreed to elimination of morse code for certain classes of
licenses
(tech/tech plus) while expanding their privileges, retention of testing
at a
low level (5WPM) for the general class license and 12 WPM for the Extra
class license.  There have been other proposals that retained morse code
testing for only the extra class license; these exhibit a willingness to
be
flexible and hardly constitute a no-compromise, "take-no-prisoners"
attitude, which would imply that they are insisting on retention of
morse
code testing for all amateur radio licenses.  The no-code proponents
would seem to be the only ones that remain totally inflexible.

There is, of course, no way that the ARRL or any other organization can
possibly appease everyone on the issue of morse code requirements for
amateur radio licenses, or anything else for that matter.  However, if
the
driving force  of the ARRL is only to "make getting a ham ticket as
quick,
easy, and painless as possible for the purpose of  increasing the total
number
of hams, selling more equipment, and keeping their organization alive in
the
only way that matters -- financially",  they are not, in my opinion,
representing
the best interests of the amateur radio community, which is what I
always
believed to be their mission.

I have always supported the ARRL as the voice of the radio amateur in
the US and will continue to do so; however, I am beginning to feel that
perhaps they are not as deserving of my support as they once were.
They recently posted a survey which included the code/no-code question
(albeit intermingled with other issues), but when it appeared that the
outcome was not going to support what they wanted as the result, the
survey was removed, citing "ballot box stuffing".  The survey should
have been available only to ARRL members, and if there was a definitive
outcome one way or the other, that is the position that the ARRL should
have embraced, and legitimally so.

It is interesting to speculate how the ARRL would have handled the issue
of morse code testing if it did not have BPL as an overriding threat.
It
is also interesting to speculate just how much influence the ARRL has
in dealing with the BPL issue; I would imagine that FEMA's denouncement
of the plan will carry far more weight against BPL than anything the
League
could possibly have done.  Yes, BPL is the most serious threat facing
amateur radio; however, I wonder if the ARRL is channeling all of its'
efforts toward an issue that is mostly beyond its' sphere of influence.
Perhaps the organization would have better served the amateur community
by devoting a bit more time to other things, including being more
proactive
in dealing with the morse code issue.

I agree that morse code testing will soon be a thing of the past;
however,
I disagree that FISTS bears responsibility for this outcome.  Yes, we as
individual FISTS members might have been more vocal, but we certainly
were not silent on the issue.  It is organizations such as FISTS,
perhaps
along with QRP groups who primarily use CW, that will help insure that
the art of morse code will not be lost.

I look forward to a QSO with you - on CW, of course.

73,
Jim, N3JV
FISTS #9365
Member, ARRL

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <YoDoc@aol.com>
To: <fists@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 11:10 PM
Subject: [Fists] FISTS vs. the ARRL


> Dear Fellow FISTS:
>
> I have been following the threads recently involving comments from
certain
> ARRL Officials when questioned regarding their position on the future
of Morse
> code testing in Amateur Radio licensing in the U.S.  While I do not
condone the
> tone of their replies, which have, at times, been quite pointedly
sarcastic,
> I do understand the thinking that lies beneath the attitudes
expressed.  I
> think it can be analyzed thus:  A.)  They are faced with what they
consider to be
> a much more important issue which has far greater potential to do
permanent
> harm to the ARS, that is, BPL.  B.)  The no-code/pro-code factions
represent a
> single interest which causes the proponents of each faction to have a
"take no
> prisoners" attitude, one which is unwilling to compromise with the
other.
> This leaves them in a position where, on the code issue at least, they
have no
> way to satisfy every ham concerned with the issue of code testing,
therefore,
> there is nothing for them to look forward to but endless controversy.
>
> While I as a FISTS member, and a radio amateur who has been at the
sharp end
> of the code-testing debate for my entire 23-year career as a ham,
certainly
> would have preferred to retain the status-quo of code testing in the
> Pre-Restructuring Era, I cannot with any sort of intellectual
credibility deny that there
> is bound to be change.  Unfortunately, that change will inevitably
take the
> form of the total elimination of code testing as a part of the amateur
radio
> licensing process.  There, I've said it.  Code testing will go away.
In view of
> the elimination of the ITU Radio Rules S25.5 International Treaty code
> testing requirement at WRC-2003, it will be almost impossible to
justify the
> retention of a code testing requirement in any country with an Amateur
Radio Service.
>  There are bound to be a few exceptions, but it is highly unlikely
that the
> United States will be one.
>
> What concerns us most, particularly those of us who are ARRL members,
is the
> fact that the ARRL seems to be intransigent on this issue.  Whether
they
> actually are or not is a matter of perception; however, I have had the
saying
> "Perception is reality" drilled into me most of my adult life.  The
fact that ARRL
> officials appear to respond to the concerns of pro- or no-code
factions in a
> less than satisfactory manner is, IMHO, a perception which will not
ever be
> resolved to the individual satisfaction of any given member.  However,
I will
> state that I do firmly believe that when they say that BPL is a more
important,
> if not overriding consideration, is, in fact, the proper position for
the ARRL
> to take.  BPL is something which can make our HF frequencies virtually
useless
> for most radio amateurs.  The big problem with BPL is that it is a
technology
> which has the potential to create literally billions of dollars of new
wealth
> in the telecommunications industry, and we all know the old saying,
"Money
> talks."  In this case, the corollary would be, "Hobbies (like amateur
radio)
> walk."
>
> Fortunately for amateur radio, we have some powerful forces on our
side in
> the battle against BPL, such as the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA)
> and commercial broadcasters and utility communications services which
employ
> the HF spectrum.  With any luck, and with intelligent and dedicated
effort on
> the part of the ARRL in representing the primary interests of all
radio
> amateurs, we may possibly prevail over the BPL interests.  However, in
order for this
> to happen, all radio amateurs, regardless of our passions regarding
Morse/CW,
> need to rally on this one, common, and universal objective.
>
> As far as the code testing issue is concerned, I think it is time to
realize
> that we (those who favor continued code testing) are not going to win.
And,
> as FISTS, I believe that the reason we're about to lose is because we
blew our
> chance to make a real difference as far as this issue is concerned.
At the
> 1997 Dayton Hamvention, Nancy Kott, WZ8C, made a quite devastatingly
effective
> presentation in favor of Morse code testing against the then head of
No Code
> International, Fred Maia, W5YI.  However, instead of taking that
momentum and
> rallying the FISTS membership to take an active role in fighting
against any and
> all actions to further reduce or eliminate code testing, Nancy
seemingly
> abandoned the issue, pretty much leaving it up to the individual FISTS
members
> whether or not they would take the matter seriously.  Well, since
then, we've
> seen the "Restructuring" of the amateur radio licensing system in the
U.S. to
> where the only code test is now down to a mere 5 WPM.  I have no doubt
that if
> the FCC had received a response to the Restructuring NPRM from
thousands of
> FISTS members, each individually supporting the retention of the
status quo in
> code testing, that the outcome would have been quite different -- 
perhaps a
> workable compromise such as a 5 WPM and ultimately Zero WPM General,
and a
> permanently fixed 12- or 13-WPM code testing requirement for the
Amateur Extra Class.
> But, that didn't happen, because the overwhelming support was not
there.  The
> support was not there because there was no leadership to make it
happen.  So,
> we must now live with the consequences. BTW -- I'm not blaming Nancy
for the
> outcome of Restructuring, because any other FISTS member, myself
included,
> could have "led the charge" as it were.  We all share equal blame for
the
> complacency which led to our present situation.
>
> The FISTS CW Club calls itself "The International Morse Preservation
> Society."  I believe that this particular taxonomy has a very hollow
ring.  In
> reality, all we are as FISTS are a bunch of mainly old-timer hams who
already know,
> use, and love CW, who simply get together on-the-air to exchange
meaningless
> numbers in order to achieve even more meaningless awards.  While all
this was
> happening, the code testing issue was won by the opposition.  In
effect, the
> FISTS fiddled while Rome burned to a cinder!  Don't get me wrong, I'm
not opposed
> to the FISTS "mission" of creating ever escalating awards programs and
> encouraging OTA use of CW, but I don't call that "preserving" the
Morse code, when
> the one and only thing which gets people to learn to use CW in the
first place,
> code testing as a licensing requirement, has been shot down in flames
by our
> opposition.  So, the question now is -- what happens next?
>
> I predict that code testing will be abolished by the FCC before this
year is
> over.  That is, of course, unless they simply don't consider it an
important
> enough issue to take action that quickly.  However, with all the
Petitions for
> Rulemaking (on both sides) currently on the FCC docket, something will
happen,
> and I believe it will be sooner rather than later.
>
> Do not look for the ARRL to be on our side in this matter now, or at
any time
> in the future.  Their unspoken, but nevertheless clear objective, is
to
> simply watch code testing die away, hopefully as quietly as possible.
They (the
> ARRL Board of Directors) see code testing as something which has the
potential
> to limit the growth of new radio amateurs, and potential ARRL members.
There
> would be no "upside" for them if code testing were either retained or,
as in
> the FISTS Petition, increased for the Extra Class.  The ARRL wants to
make
> getting a ham ticket as quick, easy, and painless as possible for the
purpose of
> increasing the total number of hams, selling more equipment, and
keeping their
> organization alive in the only way that matters -- financially.  If
you follow
> the money, you learn the truth.  Therefore, don't be surprised when
your
> local, Section, or Division-level ARRL officials don't respond with
upbeat
> enthusiasm to your demands to support code testing.
>
> One last thing -- it will never be a useful response to threaten to
cancel
> your ARRL membership simply because they can't, or won't, give you any
> satisfaction on the code testing issue.  Think about it -- what other
organization has
> the legal, technical, and political resources to even put up a fight
against
> the powerful commercial interests behind BPL?  I'll give you two
hints:  It
> isn't NCI, and it certainly isn't FISTS!
>
> 73 de Larry, K3LT
> FISTS 2008
> Member, ARRL
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fists mailing list
> Fists@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fists
>