Here's the Deal on the Amateur Radio Parity Legislation: Update from Some Ham in Mississippi

Stay on target please.

We need to make it clear to the ARRL that re-introduction of a parity bill MUST be changed in its wording: previous posts strongly elaborate on the issues posed by the present, broken wording on this bill.

These will be repeated when the present bill introduction fails to pass in the Senate.

73
Chip W1YW

 

Any official observer who has more than 'citizen complaining' capacity to the FCC will also be liable to the due process of the accused. That means the 'OO on steroids' option will invoke the legal system, and exposure to same individuals by the accused.

Under those auspices, I would never consider being an 'OO on steroids'.

Hams should not be DEFENDING Part 97, only REPORTING infractions (as is the context here).

73
Chip W1YW

 

I wish that folks would consider not only themselves but others in assessing whether this bill is needed. And by "others" I don't primarily mean existing operators. I mean potential future operators.

If the trends in place continue then at a point in the not-too-distant future we may find that essentially all available housing in all urban areas has become subject to HOAs and CC&Rs, consigning the vast majority of operators to indoor or stealth antennas. In that state, HF operation would be significantly compromised. Most operators would end up working VHF/UHF bands where small antennas are the norm. DXCC, WAS, and other awards would rarely be attempted because the vast majority of contacts would be restricted to line-of-sight and therefore not often involve distances beyond 30 miles or so.

That isn't amateur radio as I understand it. The unchecked power of HOAs needs somehow to be curtailed if amateur radio is to continue in its present form. I think ARRL understands that. And I think that's exactly why ARRL has backed this bill. ARRL knows its own future most likely depends on successfully adjusting the balance of power between HOAs and amateur radio operators.

 

If the lobbyist in Newington, CT had presented a list of 10,000 HOA hams ready to train and drill for emcomm, I might feel differently. The legislation is NOT about evil HOAs or making HOA hams comfortable or fighting the wrongs of HOAs. The Newington, CT lobbying organization pushed the legislation under the false premise that it was needed for emergency comms. Apparently the agenda (which only represents 20% of hams) includes lying to congress. The FCC studied the issue. Based on comments, HOA hams do not need antennas at home to participate in emcomm - Nor is there any evidence HOA hams will ever participate in emcomm training or drills. Federal preemption can be appropriate in certain cases, but not in this case.

Only 7 more days to the death of ARPA.

Senate in session:

December 6, 7, 8, 13, 14, 15, 26

https://democrats.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/2016-Senate-Calendar.jpg

 

Yes. Conspicuously absent are pleadings from ARES and/or RACES stating that more hams are needed on the air from their homes, using antennas at those homes.

 

I think I may have come up with a way to re-write the legislation for next year. The potential need for emcomm in HOAs (the stated purpose of the legislation) could easily come in the form of a waiver.

Let's say a duly trained and active emcomm ham has tried to negotiate in good faith for an effective stealth antenna in his HOA and he's been turned down. First, he must demonstrate that he's trained and he intends to actively participate in drills from his home. He can file a waiver form and the HOA can rebut by saying the area is already saturated with emcomm guys or the area's well served, etc.

The FCC official in charge of reviewing emcomm waivers makes a decision, and he or she grants or denies the waiver within 30 days, based on the facts, plus documented need. Public safety concern satisfied, no blanket permission needed in every HOA in the country. If the HOA wants to appeal, the waiver goes to a review board with a decision mandated within 60 days of filing a petition for review.

There is a precedent for FCC waivers. When hams could demonstrate they could not learn code, they could file a physician's waiver and still get on the air. It worked well before no-code licenses became a fact of life. Comments please?

 

This legislation is about the survival of the Amateur Radio Service (and Amateur Satellite Service) as viable in the United States given the proliferation of HOAs and CCRs. Everyone knows that. Emcomm has next to nothing to do with it other than a way to grease the wheels in Congress.

 

The ending of one Congress and the start of another doesn't necessarily kill a bill.

It just means that it needs to be reintroduced and re-passed.

Happens all the time.

 

HOAs threaten the very survival of ham radio? Sounds dramatic. Tell me more.

It's never happened with THIS legislation, in any of its former iterations, has it?

Only 6 more days to the death of ARPA.

Senate in session:

December 7, 8, 13, 14, 15, 26

https://democrats.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/2016-Senate-Calendar.jpg

 

ARPA bill was forwarded by Sen. Thune S1685 to the floor with amendment by substitution. This bill is on the move!!

 

ARPA is in its second Congress. The only real difference is that the primary public proponent and primary public opponent found a compromise, addressing the concerns that the key Congressional opponents had.

If the lobbyists are any good, and if HOA folks don't decide to be difficult again, it'll be back if it fails to pass this time around.

 

Done 12-7-16n!

 

Except, being on the calendar as the 700th item to be considered isn't actually done. One Senator placed it on the calendar. If 50 Senators and he vote for it, then it will pass, assuming they actually get to it in the next few days.

 

Actually, it means it will be placed on the senate Calendar ASAP, as business to be cleared, item 699 was cleared!!

 

As I said; introduced, not passed.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/1685/all-info