Parity Act of 2017 Introduced - HR 555

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by KK5JY, Jan 17, 2017.

Tags:
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: abrind-2
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-3
ad: Left-2
  1. N5PZJ

    N5PZJ Subscriber QRZ Page

    A presidential declaration declaring "The Communications Infrastructure under Title 47 of the Federal Code as part of the Nation Defense System as Public Policy. Public Policy is a theory whereas it is almost inviolate to rule against in a Court of Law. Example, it is against Public Policy to do many things such as hold slaves, multiple spouses, charging usury, impede the military, impede police, Sale of Children, Sales of Succession before death, and so forth. It is an interesting concept, a little intimidating.
     
  2. N5PZJ

    N5PZJ Subscriber QRZ Page

    For regulations mandated by Law, this Executive Order does not countermand, the Agency must enforce the order of Congress,
     
  3. WA7PRC

    WA7PRC Ham Member QRZ Page

    For a limited time, we're offering two for the price of one. Just pay an additional handling charge. Don't delay... call NOW! Operators are standing by!!!!! :p:rolleyes:
     
  4. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    I don't dispute that, but that is only true after the bill has been signed, or a veto overridden by Congress. Until then, it's just a piece of paper.

    So hot on the heels of his two-for-one order, they put a bill in front of him that acts contrary to the spirit of his two-for-one order. Even better, given the language you quoted, he could take that as an attempt to bypass his two-for-one order.

    Just sayin' ... it could get interesting. ;)
     
  5. N1FM

    N1FM Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    KA4AQM likes this.
  6. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    Hey, look at that...

    "Do Your Research - This is the most critical step of the process. The last thing you want to find out is that there is an undisclosed HOA or that the existing CC&Rs will not allow you to put up an antenna or operate."​

    Eh, I'm wasting my breath, and so was he. :(
     
  7. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    By the way everybody, the text of 555 isn't quite the same as that in HR1301, as ARRL has led us to believe.

    As reported by ARRL, the text of 1301 (3)(b)(1) read as follows [arrl.org]:

    ...require any licensee in an amateur radio service to notify and obtain prior approval from a community association, if any, concerning installation of an outdoor antenna...

    The current 555 text before the Senate reads as follows [congress.gov]:

    ...require any licensee in an amateur radio service to notify and obtain prior approval from a community association concerning installation of an outdoor antenna...

    The difference is highlighted. That sure is an interesting place to drop text.
     
    1 person likes this.
  8. N1FM

    N1FM Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    If I don't have an association currently, does this mean I'm required to seek one out?

    "Excuse me sir, I don't have an association, but... pursuant to FCC rules, I'm now required to notify and obtain approval from an association, so, would you mind signing here, indicating that I notified your association to obtain approval...?"

    ;)
     
    KK5JY likes this.
  9. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    I'm glad somebody else appreciates how silly this bill has become.
     
    1 person likes this.
  10. N1FM

    N1FM Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    I think the bill also falls short of Constitutional authority. It's based on a specious set of opinions, which were contradicted by two expert agencies: DHS and FCC, just four and a half years ago, in the "Uses and Capabilities of Amateur Radio Service Communications in Emergencies and Disaster Relief: Report to Congress," as well as the 5th Amendment's "takings clause" and the 14th Amendment's "guarantee of rights."

    The very purpose of the bill is actually fully contraindicated by both DHS and FCC, and by the U.S. Constitution, in both the 5th and the 14th Amendments. Therefore, I think it could be successfully argued that this bill represents an unconstitutional overreach on the part of the author.

    http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/amendments/5/essays/151/takings-clause

    https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-1342A1_Rcd.pdf


    Constitutional Authority Statement: From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office.

    [www.gpo.gov]

    By Mr. KINZINGER: H.R. 555.

    Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant to the following:

    The Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1 [Rights Guaranteed]; .. . the means employed to effect its exercise may be neither arbitrary nor oppressive but must bear a real and substantial relation to an end that is public, specifically, the public health, safety, or morals, or some other aspect of the general welfare.

    [Page H547]

    FCC said it developed its report to congress in conjunction with the DHS Office of Emergency Communications and subsequently, FCC concluded it's report with "Consequently, we do not believe that Congressional action is necessary to address any of these issues."

    At present, the courts cannot overrule the opinion of two expert agencies. See e.g., the Chevron and Auer doctrines which provide deference to expert federal agencies. Unless a new FCC study contradicts the previous study, undertaken only 4.5 years ago, a court cannot overrule the FCC/DHS opinion, because the opinions expressed in the Arp! Arp! bill are not expert opinions, and no "real and substantial relation" to the "public safety" has or ever will be established (pursuant to the requirements of the 14th Amendment) by amateurs using "effective" antennas at their homes.

    Q.E.D.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2017
    KK5JY likes this.

Share This Page