K1VR Shows HR555 (ARPA) to Be a 'HAM RADIO KILLER'

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by W1YW, Aug 9, 2017.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: L-rfparts
ad: l-gcopper
ad: Subscribe
  1. W0PV

    W0PV Ham Member QRZ Page

    There is a post on another message board from a high level ARRL insider, the former Southwestern Division Vice Director Marty N6VI.

    In it he reveals and details the reasons for his change of mind, from supporting the original Parity Act, to rejecting the modified version that became HR555 in Feb 2016.

    73 de John - WØPV

    Introduction and conclusion excerpts cut & pasted below. Read the details of his entire statement here -



    "Now that I am a former ARRL Vice Director, I am free to speak my mind on
    this matter. As a long-time proponent of antenna rights, it is with great
    disappointment that I say I do not favor passage of HR-555. I should add up
    front, by way of disclaimer, that I am not an attorney.


    I was a big supporter of the original Amateur Radio Parity Act - the PRB-1
    version. The ability to put up outdoor antennas and the structures
    necessary to support them on your property is crucial to being an active Ham
    for many licensees. Since 2010 I have visited the offices of numerous
    elected officials, sent over a thousand e-mail messages, spent entire
    convention weekends generating letters from Hams to their elected
    representatives and spoken at countless club meetings to drum up support for
    this legislation. It's fair to say that I invested a major chunk of my time
    in support of the original Parity Act, and I certainly respect ARRL
    leadership for its persistence in seeking relief for all impacted Amateurs,
    whether League members or not. However, in February of 2016 the language
    that mirrored PRB-1 was removed from HR-1301 (now HR-555), and this is a
    critique of the result, not of the intent or effort. ...

    Because of the aforementioned shortcomings of HR-555 and the likely adverse
    consequences of its passage, I cannot support it any longer. There may be a
    better path than the one the League is now pursuing; I don't know if we can
    ever get there, but I certainly don't want us to make things worse for a
    significant number of Amateurs or expose them to being found in violation of
    Federal law and FCC regulations. Please consider these points when you are
    asked to write letters of support for HR-555 to your legislators." ...


    Marty N6VI
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2017
    W1YW likes this.
  2. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    I'm not a member, and I got it anyway. :rolleyes:
  3. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    That's probably good advice, regardless... it's what @W1YW and others have been doing with ARPA -- they have been getting attorney's opinions to see how the legislation will affect them. They are doing a service to everybody by sharing what they are learning from those attorneys.

    ARPA is a short bill. Most hams should be able to read it and understand the terms in it. The original ARPA bill was only a sentence or two. The current version is a bit longer, but still not bad. My suggestion would be that everybody read through it a couple of times and think about how it could be used... not just by a ham in an HOA situation, but how could it be used by an HOA or a neighbor in an HOA who doesn't want ham antennas? That applies to HOAs whose CC&R have antenna restrictions and those who don't. If you think through some scenarios, you'll see that the bill has some fairly significant flaws.

    In that respect, the original bill was better. Not great, but at least better.
  4. KN4AQ

    KN4AQ Subscriber QRZ Page

    Here they are...

  5. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    Hot off the presses. :) Listening to the discussion, thanks for getting the guys together.
  6. W1YW

    W1YW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Thank you Gary...

    This is definitely NEWS.

    Chip W1YW
  7. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    This is a very good discussion on the subject by Fred Hopengarten. Again, thanks to Gary, @KN4AQ for putting this discussion together.

    In the end, the net is that this bill makes the ham radio situation for many hams worse, in exchange for not having any guarantee for making anyone's situation better. Maybe it's time to give up on making CAI happy, and do what is right for hams, regardless of whether CAI can be made happy or not.

    It seems there are three broad options for salvaging this situation:
    1. Go back to the original ARPA language, which was essentially a single paragraph directing FCC to extend PRB-1 to CC&R.
    2. Add whatever patches are needed to the current bill language to convert it from "net harmful" to "net helpful" to hams, even if that offends CAI. That includes dropping "prior approval," shifting the "or" to "and" and so on.
    3. Withdraw the bill for now and to back to the drawing board.
    Continuing with the current bill is simply not an option that we can inflict on the future of the amateur service.
  8. KB1PA

    KB1PA Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    I didn't know where else to post this, but CONGRATULATIONS Chip!

    A number of hams were announced as RCA Fellows:... Nathan Cohen, W1YW;...
    W1YW likes this.
  9. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    One critique, Gary... you mentioned that the League is the 800lb gorilla, and that there is no grass-roots alternative to ARPA. Many people have been doing a great job of offering alternatives, and suggesting them to the League and in the forums. Unfortunately, the directors aren't currently allowed to even consider alternatives to ARPA, or changes to its language, due to the loyalty language you mentioned earlier. It's a catch-22, and so the ARRL directors are not going to be part of the solution to the problem. I spoke at length with one of the ARRL directors on this issue, and he made it quite clear that his hands were tied.

Share This Page