NLI Meets with Congressman King regarding HR 607 - 70cm is SAFE!!!

Yes, Leroy, the success of this particular delegation of constituents is something to note when there's an issue we want to take action on, for- or -opposed. Even one of the League people, posting above, acknowledges that his group's lobbyist(s) can be out-done by a voter's direct outreach.

This is a good opportunity to point out how, in addition to the legislative stage, the regulatory arena is also a place to take action by active, concerned licensees in our radio hobby. In the "old days," pre-internet, and before email and the whole category of electronic communications, it was difficult for individual hobbyists to make their views known to the Federal Communications Commission. The two main problems were becoming aware of rulemaking proposals in time to then comment on them as the FCC deliberated what to do.

These days, we no longer have to rely on any organization or club with paid staff who monitor the proceedings. The rulemaking process can be viewed on the agency's website, and a simple search of "Amateur Service" and other keywords will reveal petitions from a variety of groups and individuals whose interests may collide with or support your own interests in the hobby. It is very easy to form your response and file it electronically for the FCC's staff to consider before making a decision.

Then too, there are broadbased proposals, some of them misguided, that could affect what you do regardless of your specific operating activity. The ARRL a few years ago went ahead and made such a petition to coordinate our activities by bandwidth rather than the traditional and popular use of mode categories to array our various types of communications on the bands. A majority of subscribers had told the ARRL they did not support the idea, but because of one bullheaded staffer*, the proposal moved to the FCC were it was discredited by hundreds of public comments.

It was an embarrassing failure for the ARRL, whose attorney eventually withdrew the idea before the FCC could act upon it. The guy who railroaded it has since retired, but not without doing an end-run for his cause at a volunteer bandplan coordinating group known as the International Amateur Radio Union. Fortunately, its influence is fairly weak in the domestic U.S. aspect of our hobby.

I bring it up because, as with the Long Island group, these conduits that are available to us as individuals can step around problems created by others, and yield a successful outcome, including incremental progress like we have here.

I'm glad you're seeing it, Leroy, and perhaps we will find ourselves participating toward the common good of the Amateur Service in some venue or other.

Best regards

 

From http://www.arrl.org/grassroots:

That looks like more than mere "recognition to me, Mike. The League has set up the SGL position within the ARRL Field Organization for good and important reason, as in the end, ALL such legislative activity is finalized at the local level. You guys did exactly what you should have done, and you did it well. Any emphasis on letter writing by ARRL is done because for most hams, that is all they are able or willing to do. I would love to see every ham make an appointment with his or her representative to talk about issues important to Amateur Radio.

I do take exception to the "70 cm is safe" announcement because until that bill is changed, or dies in committee, that is not at all true. It is much more likely to be safe with King recognizing the reasons not to have included the 70 cm band in the bill, but I am concerned that the announcement could lead some to conclude that they don't need to contact their representative, and that is not the case. Until the bill is changed, this is very much on the table. If 70 cm is not removed from the bill, there is always a risk that unknowledgeable legislators could vote for it its present form.

73.
Ed Hare, W1RFI

 

Not acknowledges, Paul -- encourages! Local contact by constituents is the most effective way of all to influence legislators. They want to hear from constituents far more than they want to hear from lobbyists. It's another "hmmm..." moment to realize from your posts that you could think that ARRL would think otherwise.

Ed Hare, W1RFI

This is a good opportunity to point out how, in addition to the legislative stage, the regulatory arena is also a place to take action by active, concerned licensees in our radio hobby. In the "old days," pre-internet, and before email and the whole category of electronic communications, it was difficult for individual hobbyists to make their views known to the Federal Communications Commission. The two main problems were becoming aware of rulemaking proposals in time to then comment on them as the FCC deliberated what to do.

These days, we no longer have to rely on any organization or club with paid staff who monitor the proceedings. The rulemaking process can be viewed on the agency's website, and a simple search of "Amateur Service" and other keywords will reveal petitions from a variety of groups and individuals whose interests may collide with or support your own interests in the hobby. It is very easy to form your response and file it electronically for the FCC's staff to consider before making a decision.

Then too, there are broadbased proposals, some of them misguided, that could affect what you do regardless of your specific operating activity. The ARRL a few years ago went ahead and made such a petition to coordinate our activities by bandwidth rather than the traditional and popular use of mode categories to array our various types of communications on the bands. A majority of subscribers had told the ARRL they did not support the idea, but because of one bullheaded staffer*, the proposal moved to the FCC were it was discredited by hundreds of public comments.

It was an embarrassing failure for the ARRL, whose attorney eventually withdrew the idea before the FCC could act upon it. The guy who railroaded it has since retired, but not without doing an end-run for his cause at a volunteer bandplan coordinating group known as the International Amateur Radio Union. Fortunately, its influence is fairly weak in the domestic U.S. aspect of our hobby.

I bring it up because, as with the Long Island group, these conduits that are available to us as individuals can step around problems created by others, and yield a successful outcome, including incremental progress like we have here.

I'm glad you're seeing it, Leroy, and perhaps we will find ourselves participating toward the common good of the Amateur Service in some venue or other.

Best regards[/QUOTE]

 

Nice post Paul.

I've written to everyone that represents me on different topics over the past 5 years. Before that I thought I was a lone voice in the woods that would not be heard. I'm still that lone voice in the woods but at least I think I am being heard now! I've met with state and national congressmen. You never know if you will have success but you have to keep trying.