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: Go back to the original ARPA language, which was essentially a single paragraph directing FCC to extend PRB-1 to CC&R. 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. 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.
I didn't know where else to post this, but CONGRATULATIONS Chip! A number of hams were announced as RCA Fellows:... Nathan Cohen, W1YW;...
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.
