As much as I objected when initially read the healdines, further contemplation and consideration made me realize this is a legitimate request. $50 for 5 years is 5 bucks a year. I pay more for my drivers license, for access to State Parks, for accesss to launch my boat ($5 everytime I back the trailer down the ramp), for a fishing or hunting license. So, really, this is not out of line. and, for those saying "but amatuear radio provides a servcice," I ask "yes, but how many folks actually actively particpiate in ARES or RACES? How many of us actually contribute?" Very few. So, as much as it bothers me to say it...I cannont find an agrugement agaiust charging for our license.
The FCC screwed up royally by giving the FCC an out to exclude those 26 years old and younger from application fees. It should be all or nothing. There are many groups, besides young people, without the ability to pay. The argument for waiving the fees is that the amateur radio service is volunteer-based and contributes in times of emergency and disaster in addition to being self-sustaining. If they had stuck with that, it would have been a much more convincing argument.
Amateur Radio is much larger part of FCC ULS than expected. License Grants in the past year (11/22/19 to date) Aircraft......3229 Amateur...79591 Comm'l....15035 GMRS......31343 Ship...........6121 Total.......135319 I still don't believe the cost is anywhere near $50 per application.
I have to laugh at this. While I don't like the idea of having to pay $50 to renew my license, it's funny how so many are complaining about $50 when they have no problem dropping thousands of dollars on radios, towers, antennas and other equipment.
I think you are missing the point. It's not the $50, it's the fact that the FCC states that this amount of money is what it costs them (in labor costs) to process each initial or renewal application. If all of that money went to FCC employees, they would have to have 36 full time employees, working on nothing but amateur renewals and initial licenses. They don't have that many people working on strictly ham license applications, it may be ten percent of that number, since almost all of the process is totally automated. For example, the VE teams do all the paperwork, forward it to the VEC who gives it a cursory check, then it gets sent to the FCC as a batch. The FCC then issues callsigns (automatically) and updates to the ULS (automatically). There is no FCC employee looking at each and every application, scrutinizing it for accuracy. It runs through a process that checks names against a "naughty list", and if your name is on that list, it gets offlined for actual manual review. From the time the batch is submitted to the FCC to the time it appears on the ULS can be less than an hour. Therefore, no one at the FCC is expending any inordinate amount of time on the great majority of applications. The batch is run through a verification program, names are offlined as needed, and the batch uploads to become part of the ULS. So, the fee, as proposed, is arbitrary and not really a reflection of the costs. If it was reflecting the costs, as it is supposed to be, it would be a fraction of that $50. At some level, it becomes small enough that it is not worth collecting the cost, and it gets waived. That is what happened in the case of the vanity callsigns. The FCC determined that the $21.40 fee it was charging for vanity callsigns was not worth their time to collect: “The Commission spends more resources on processing the regulatory fees and issuing refunds than the amount of the regulatory fee payment,” the FCC said. “As our costs now exceed the regulatory fee, we are eliminating this regulatory fee category.” The current vanity call sign regulatory fee is $21.40, the highest in several years. The FCC reported there were 11,500 “payment units” in FY 2014 and estimated that it would collect nearly $246,100. So, if it is determined that the actual fee should be $20 or less (and it would be, based on how the fee is supposed to be calculated), then why would the FCC want to be burdened with collecting it and all the hassles that come with that duty? They didn't think the $21.40 was worth it.
You guys really need to give this angle up. No one believes it except hams. Cell phones and LMR replaced us decades ago. At best you just get in the way. It is just a hobby and nothing more.
I am not ok with adding 50 dollar fees for applications and nor would our applicants that test with us in the state of Vermont! 73's
What about people who live in $300 a month through disability, regardless of age? I blew the finals in a BAOFENG and can't afford to replace it. (I know, right?)
1. Nobody in radio has a license but does not have a phone. 2. Subject matter is always best learned within the subject, obviously they're not going to know everything when they become licensed. 3. and? 4. No. 5. That's not what happened when CB required a license...
Here's an idea. Do away with all fees, licenses, and all that stuff which is the government just "generating revenue" from something. The FCC gives us our licenses electronically, the tests aren't administered by them, they basically don't enforce any rules on it letting hams police themselves for the most part. Outside of them just wanting to auction off the bands to companies, they have no part in this. The few people who work for the FCC that DO deal with hams are tax payer funded already! We don't work for them, they work for US... and they already are paid. All this bickering in here, just more division. Hasn't this year been dark enough? There's two groups of you. Those who enjoy paying fees for some reason, and those with backbone.
Bonjour ...C'est mal parti pour une augmentation à une époque ou les jeunes trouvent 1000 $ sans problème pour acheter une console de jeux ou un smartphone dernier model ! :rouler des yeux:
