FCC proposes new filing fee structure, new fees for ham radio

I would not support the line item veto, and here is why. Imagine a bill, debated vigorously in Congress where both sides finally agree that taxes from X goes to fund project Y. As an example perhaps it's a tax on tires to pay for roads. With a line item veto then POTUS (whomever it may be at the time) can then line out either one of those items. This means the roads are funded but no new taxes to pay for it, or a new tax but no funds for the roads. No matter which side you are on here there can be a coin toss on who wins or loses. If POTUS and members of Congress all vote along party lines then this gives a political party far more power than it should.

POTUS should not have a line item veto. It should be all or nothing. If he doesn't sign then there's still a process to override a veto. Does this not also mean that a line item veto can be overridden? Yes. That means we don't need a line item veto because there's a process to override a veto of the entire bill.

The power of the executive order has been abused in recent history, and it's been Congress not acting on this abuse that has allowed people that held the office of POTUS to feel free to continue pushing the boundaries of what the executive branch can do.

I believe that President Trump does not have the authority, or the will, to ignore the text of the law so blatantly. What the executive branch could do is declare Amateur radio stations as fitting the non-commercial exemption defined in the law. Congress allowed for non-commercial stations to be exempt from these fees, if Congress intended to have this fee apply to Amateur radio then that should have been in the original bill or it can be added later once their error was revealed by the executive order.

What is also unAmerican, in my opinion, is violating the letter and spirit of the US Constitution. The executive branch should not be in the business of writing law. A line item veto is, in effect, writing law. An executive order in violation of a law is writing law.

The federal government has got itself in the habit of writing "sloppy" laws and allowing the executive branch to fill in the details as it pleases. Too many members of Congress have allowed POTUS too much latitude in how the government is run. This means POTUS has far too much influence on the government. In my opinion President Trump has shown considerable restraint in the use of executive orders. It would be to our benefit in the long run that he and future Presidents show restraint and not abuse the executive order.

If there is a bad law passed then we need to have it followed or good laws run the risk of not being followed. Bad law can be rectified with a new law, being challenged in court, and more.

We should not punish the many for the actions of the few, and we should not allow POTUS to have too much authority over our lives. In fact the federal government should not have so much authority over our lives, but that's not a topic over FCC regulations any more so I leave that as something for the reader to ponder.

 

this is just plain goofy.

the law comes from congress.

also, the fcc doesn't get this money--it goes to the general fund.

and NOBODY cares how "prestigious" the FCC might be. we just care that they do their job competently.

 

lol. this is an ourageous leap of logic ..

 

removed

 

Sorry, that didn’t go as planned. As far as EOs, they have evolved as Congress has abrogated their responsibility to pass meaningful law.

 

I love how everybody is so ready to spend someone else's money around here.

 

Anyone who gets something for "free", is spending someone else's money.

 

I proposed Lifetime Licenses for Amateurs a couple of years ago. Many hams poopood it saying it would tie up preferred calls from vanity applications.

N7MK

 

Thank you all for helping me “see the forest, not just the trees.” William Safire said, “Nobody stands taller than those willing to stand corrected.”
Implementation of the RAYBAUMS Act should be considered to be certain. Docket 20-270 is merely a suggestion by the FCC about how the implementation will be achieved. Fortunately, the NPRM, Docket 20-270 is changeable during, and by means of, a comment period.
Therefore, I submit the following for discussion:
There are about seven hundred thousand hams in the USA, and the license term is 10 years. That means that around seventy thousand hams are expected to renew their licenses in a given year. At $50 (proposed) per application, fees would generate 3.5 million dollars a year.
My question now is whether a reasonable federal excise (sales) tax on new amateur transmitters/transceivers be adequate to raise that $3.5M, rather than application fees. I suggest that somebody do research to see if this is feasible.
If this method of funding is feasible, it would dramatically ease the burden on hams that are not as well-off financially as professional people in the primes of their careers, such as (but not limited to) minors, young adults, and retirees.
I suggested a tax on new transmitters/transceivers, above, because other types of amateur equipment can be used by people without licenses, and they shouldn't be forced to pay for something they're not able/authorized to use, and so that second-hand transmitters/transceivers would not be subject to said tax.
Finally, I consent to and suggest this comment be submitted for use in FCC hearings about Docket 20-270.

 

I suggest you do your own research to see if it's feasible.

I suggest you're out of your mind.

Finally, I suggest you submit your own formal comments to FCC's NPRM.

 

Talk about killing an institution! Wannabe hams are NOT going to pay $50 and take a test for a hobby they want to be in. $50 is way to much for some hams who want to stay in the hobby. Between the two, there goes a lot of ARES and RACES volunteers and public service hams! Ham radio would become a dying art. HAM RADIO OPERATORS MATTER!

 

Nonsense. The flaw in this argument has been pointed out many times in this thread.

Nonsense. On so many levels I don't know where to begin.

 

There has long been the position that amateur radio is getting too expensive for those who want to get involved. So looking at the new comer,
how do we encourage their involvement? Especially classes of school age kids? We could just say to hell with it, let them figure it out. Maybe that will make them more determined. Well it might keep the riff raff out. That just does not seem like a reasonable answer. Maybe "victims" are all we will create? Maybe. They will not value it unless we make them sweat. That has some merit. I can still hear,"no lids, no kids, no space cadets, no 5 letter calls, just genuine A1 operators." Was that from w2oy-sk?For those those love the hobby, encouraging youth involvement is the goal. How do we get there?

 

How dare FCC want me to pay for my own license for my own hobby that I love???

No way!!! I want somebody else subsidize MY LICENSE AND MY HOBBY that I love!!!