I posted this on Yacht-L, and thought it would be of interest to others in the sailing community. * On April 14, 2005, Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) introduced the National Weather Service Duties Act of 2005(S.789) to the 109th Congress to limit the duties and responsibilities of the National Weather Service (NWS). If enacted, this legislation prohibits the NWS from providing weather products and services that are or could be provided by the private sector. The bill appears to be an effort by the commercial weather vendors to remove NWS as a "competitor" in the production of weather products. This legislation could result in the NWS no longer being permitted to provide the aviation weather products used by pilots, the DUAT system, and the flight service station system. Instead, the FAA would have to purchase these products from private companies. The link of the full text is http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/air_traffic/nws.html * Short version is that if this passes you might have to pay for all the things that NOAA now gives you for free, like Radar & Sat maps, weather and wind forecasts, etc. The only thing that are exempted from the bill seem to be severe weather warnings. It even has language to prevent NOAA from commenting on (forecasting or advising) after they issue the warning. You'd have to buy that from Accu-Weather or someone. * You can see who is on the Senate Commerce committee at http://commerce.senate.gov/about/membership.html and click on your Senator's name to link to their webpage. Please send them an e-mail opposing this bill.
- Status
Stupid arguement
The arguement being used is that the government should provide a service that the private sector does. Hmmm...does that mean the government shouldn't provide security because there are private sectors that do? It's all a bunch of BS...proof that some people can be paid off easily and have no moral values, in this case it's Senator Rick Santorum.
The arguement being used is that the government should provide a service that the private sector does. Hmmm...does that mean the government shouldn't provide security because there are private sectors that do? It's all a bunch of BS...proof that some people can be paid off easily and have no moral values, in this case it's Senator Rick Santorum.
Senate bill to stop government weather reports
Jim the correct bill number is S786. Here is the link
Jim the correct bill number is S786. Here is the link
First of all I believe that this thread violates
Forum policy. But since it has not been snuffed yet, Please read the Bill again with brain engaged. This act is making sure that anything NOAA or the NWS knows is released right away. This would put info into all weather service hands so it could be communicated to the public. Yes that would be by private companies. It would insure that the government could not withhold important weather info for it's own recognition or reason. It is not to compete but to compliment and cooperate with the private sector to forcast weather. Why duplicate with government money what the private sector can supply to the government? What it is saying is we (Americans) don't want the weather information to be the property of the United States Government but shared info with the private sector. That information that the government has should be released ASAP. Thank you Rick for putting forth this Bill. r.w.landau
Forum policy. But since it has not been snuffed yet, Please read the Bill again with brain engaged. This act is making sure that anything NOAA or the NWS knows is released right away. This would put info into all weather service hands so it could be communicated to the public. Yes that would be by private companies. It would insure that the government could not withhold important weather info for it's own recognition or reason. It is not to compete but to compliment and cooperate with the private sector to forcast weather. Why duplicate with government money what the private sector can supply to the government? What it is saying is we (Americans) don't want the weather information to be the property of the United States Government but shared info with the private sector. That information that the government has should be released ASAP. Thank you Rick for putting forth this Bill. r.w.landau
WE PAY NOW!!! Are we stupid enough to loose it?
I have just now read the comments in this forum on, "Senate bill to stop government Weather reports" I have been aware of this situation for some time now as I am also a pilot and this issue has escalated within the aviation world. This weather service can be, (IS) a very valuable service to off shore sailors, as well as pilots, if you know how to use it, properly. We, all Americans, already pay for this service through tax revenues. (That is another whole story that needs attention, NOW!) Granted, most people do not know what to do with the raw data that is produced by NOAA weather services. However, what this senate bill is proposing, will cost the taxpayers double. We already fund the NOAA program and we benefit from it. These changes would eliminate the public access to the data unless we pay a private enterprise for it. If you have not paid attention to this bill, in a nut shell, the government will take the data compiled by NOAA (That WE now pay for) and give it to private companies, or worse, sell it to them, who will use that data to form new reports in various formats then sell it back to the public. Do you think we (The Taxpayers) will get any kind of reduction from our tax obligations? Not on your life! Just take a real good look at our tax system now. WE have been being screwed for at least the past forty or fifty years with OUR tax system. Problem is,,,, most Americans do not even know how they are being screwed in the first place. DUMB Americans are already paying the bill for the illegal immigrant’s coming into the country as well the rich, smart Americans. (Who know how to get around taxes) The government wants to give state drivers license to people who are in America illegally. People who pay NO EMPLOYMENT TAXES, SOCIAL SECURITY TAX or MEET ANY OTHER OBLIGATIONS REQUIRED of us dumb Americans. Little do you know, they also get FREE health care, welfare HELP and other handouts AT YOUR TAX EXPENCE! How long is it going to take before must Americans wake up and see what is happening? What will it take to wake you up? Ask yourselves, would it be better for the country, if we collected tax from everyone, including the people in this country illegally, rather then just a small percentage of U S citizens, who pay taxes? Now, ask how do you do it and be fair to everyone? With a National Sales Tax, paid FAIRLY, by everyone; businesses and individuals alike, and stop collecting employment tax, close the tax loopholes that give the smart guys a free tax ride. That is how you accomplish improvement and keep it fair. My guess is, it will never happen, not before America fails; or at least not in my lifetime. From the beginning of American history, it was the very few, (10 to 15% of the public) that led and financed Americas wars and missions. Is there ten percent of Americans left, willing to lead and carry the rest of the dumb Americans? Or, will the ten percent take care of them selves, building their fortunes and covering their own needs and let the rest of the country flounder? I wonder. SO,,,, until something happens to change my mind or I can help make it happen, I guess the answer is; YESSSS! AMERICANS ARE STUPID ENOUGH TO LOOSE THIS NOAA service; along with all the other ways, the American people are letting themselves be screwed by the government.
I have just now read the comments in this forum on, "Senate bill to stop government Weather reports" I have been aware of this situation for some time now as I am also a pilot and this issue has escalated within the aviation world. This weather service can be, (IS) a very valuable service to off shore sailors, as well as pilots, if you know how to use it, properly. We, all Americans, already pay for this service through tax revenues. (That is another whole story that needs attention, NOW!) Granted, most people do not know what to do with the raw data that is produced by NOAA weather services. However, what this senate bill is proposing, will cost the taxpayers double. We already fund the NOAA program and we benefit from it. These changes would eliminate the public access to the data unless we pay a private enterprise for it. If you have not paid attention to this bill, in a nut shell, the government will take the data compiled by NOAA (That WE now pay for) and give it to private companies, or worse, sell it to them, who will use that data to form new reports in various formats then sell it back to the public. Do you think we (The Taxpayers) will get any kind of reduction from our tax obligations? Not on your life! Just take a real good look at our tax system now. WE have been being screwed for at least the past forty or fifty years with OUR tax system. Problem is,,,, most Americans do not even know how they are being screwed in the first place. DUMB Americans are already paying the bill for the illegal immigrant’s coming into the country as well the rich, smart Americans. (Who know how to get around taxes) The government wants to give state drivers license to people who are in America illegally. People who pay NO EMPLOYMENT TAXES, SOCIAL SECURITY TAX or MEET ANY OTHER OBLIGATIONS REQUIRED of us dumb Americans. Little do you know, they also get FREE health care, welfare HELP and other handouts AT YOUR TAX EXPENCE! How long is it going to take before must Americans wake up and see what is happening? What will it take to wake you up? Ask yourselves, would it be better for the country, if we collected tax from everyone, including the people in this country illegally, rather then just a small percentage of U S citizens, who pay taxes? Now, ask how do you do it and be fair to everyone? With a National Sales Tax, paid FAIRLY, by everyone; businesses and individuals alike, and stop collecting employment tax, close the tax loopholes that give the smart guys a free tax ride. That is how you accomplish improvement and keep it fair. My guess is, it will never happen, not before America fails; or at least not in my lifetime. From the beginning of American history, it was the very few, (10 to 15% of the public) that led and financed Americas wars and missions. Is there ten percent of Americans left, willing to lead and carry the rest of the dumb Americans? Or, will the ten percent take care of them selves, building their fortunes and covering their own needs and let the rest of the country flounder? I wonder. SO,,,, until something happens to change my mind or I can help make it happen, I guess the answer is; YESSSS! AMERICANS ARE STUPID ENOUGH TO LOOSE THIS NOAA service; along with all the other ways, the American people are letting themselves be screwed by the government.
Where does it say that it stops
government forecasts? NOAA will not be eliminated. It would be required to release data.NOAA will always be there. NOAA will be called not to compete with private companies. I take this to mean that some of the NOAA data will be submitted to NOAA by private source to eliminate costly govenment duplication.Unless the Secretary says to duplicate it. as noted in the Bill. This bill also says that the NOAA and NWS cannot promote (endorse) one private service over another. This will not affect already existing NOAA and NWS broadcasts that are available. r.w.landau
government forecasts? NOAA will not be eliminated. It would be required to release data.NOAA will always be there. NOAA will be called not to compete with private companies. I take this to mean that some of the NOAA data will be submitted to NOAA by private source to eliminate costly govenment duplication.Unless the Secretary says to duplicate it. as noted in the Bill. This bill also says that the NOAA and NWS cannot promote (endorse) one private service over another. This will not affect already existing NOAA and NWS broadcasts that are available. r.w.landau
And where does it say that we pay for it?
Read the bill again. 99% of all weather information is already distributed by private enterprise. Probably what it means is those guys will have to pay for it.
Read the bill again. 99% of all weather information is already distributed by private enterprise. Probably what it means is those guys will have to pay for it.
Right here
"(b) Competition With Private Sector.--The Secretary of Commerce shall not provide, or assist other entities in providing, a product or service (other than a product or service described in subsection (a)(1)) that is or could be provided by the private sector" That's what this is all about...taking away something that is free so companies can sell it for a profit.
"(b) Competition With Private Sector.--The Secretary of Commerce shall not provide, or assist other entities in providing, a product or service (other than a product or service described in subsection (a)(1)) that is or could be provided by the private sector" That's what this is all about...taking away something that is free so companies can sell it for a profit.
Franklin, You have to read this Bill as a whole
Bill and not take parts of it out of context. Read the whole Bill again and see if that section you isolated doesn't change context from what you are seeing now. I think you will find that the Government will pay private industry for service ( which they already do)and not individuals. respectfully r.w.landau
Bill and not take parts of it out of context. Read the whole Bill again and see if that section you isolated doesn't change context from what you are seeing now. I think you will find that the Government will pay private industry for service ( which they already do)and not individuals. respectfully r.w.landau
I have read the bill and other related info
Sure, NOAA will always be there, as long as taxpayer dollars are funding it. This Senator Rick Santorum, has an agenda other then the benefits of the general taxpayer in his mind, I bet HE stands to profit some how from the bill submission. Check out the "Link submitted by author" and actually click on the: 1. National Weather Service Duties Act of 2005 2. ADDS Web site 3. National Weather Service Web site These and several other services are what you will not be able to access as a General Taxpayer after this bill is passed. You and I, everyone will still have access to some from of that same information but only after you pay for it from one of the private enterprises that will have access to it. This does not make a whole lot of good sense to me. It is the general taxpayer who funds the NOAA operations in the first place, why would we want to pay for it twice. Hey! I would really like to debate this topic more, but there is a bad storm brewing here and I am singing off this PC for now. Just think this situation through and make sure you truly understand what it is you are supporting before you vote, and remember, Americans voted Clinton into office twice. Do we want that again? Really think and VOTE FREEDOM FIRST! FAIR WINDS TO ALL AMERICANS
Sure, NOAA will always be there, as long as taxpayer dollars are funding it. This Senator Rick Santorum, has an agenda other then the benefits of the general taxpayer in his mind, I bet HE stands to profit some how from the bill submission. Check out the "Link submitted by author" and actually click on the: 1. National Weather Service Duties Act of 2005 2. ADDS Web site 3. National Weather Service Web site These and several other services are what you will not be able to access as a General Taxpayer after this bill is passed. You and I, everyone will still have access to some from of that same information but only after you pay for it from one of the private enterprises that will have access to it. This does not make a whole lot of good sense to me. It is the general taxpayer who funds the NOAA operations in the first place, why would we want to pay for it twice. Hey! I would really like to debate this topic more, but there is a bad storm brewing here and I am singing off this PC for now. Just think this situation through and make sure you truly understand what it is you are supporting before you vote, and remember, Americans voted Clinton into office twice. Do we want that again? Really think and VOTE FREEDOM FIRST! FAIR WINDS TO ALL AMERICANS
Politics alert
I like most of this thread so far... we're trying to sort out something that could have direct impact on us. But PLEASE, let's not drift off into our opinons of presidents past or present and their respective administrations. If this stays on topic great, if goes Rush Limbaugh or Al Franken on us, it's in the dumpster. Thank you for your restraint. Ruler in hand searching for knuckles, Phil
I like most of this thread so far... we're trying to sort out something that could have direct impact on us. But PLEASE, let's not drift off into our opinons of presidents past or present and their respective administrations. If this stays on topic great, if goes Rush Limbaugh or Al Franken on us, it's in the dumpster. Thank you for your restraint. Ruler in hand searching for knuckles, Phil
Hooyasailor, TheBill is written and everyone
can read it. The post questioned the Bill. He made statments about the Bill that were not in the Bill. How do you debate with someone that will not debate the issue being talked about? Yes, I am refering to your comments also. r.w.landau
can read it. The post questioned the Bill. He made statments about the Bill that were not in the Bill. How do you debate with someone that will not debate the issue being talked about? Yes, I am refering to your comments also. r.w.landau
Phil, a request.
If the thread goes off track, please only delete the offtrack posts and not the whole thread. r.w.landau
If the thread goes off track, please only delete the offtrack posts and not the whole thread. r.w.landau
Beware unintended consequences !!!
Perhaps our debate over what effect the Bill may have on NOAA services - what it means or doesn’t - illuminates one of it’s biggest deficiencies. It’s much too broadly written, in simple, but ambiguous language. Whatever it means, and whatever our (various) opinions on the efficacy of that meaning, any Bill must be clear and unambiguous about it’s specific provisions. This one certainly fails the test on that standard. Beware unintended consequences !!! In this case, I fear (what I believe are) Sen. Santorum’s intended consequences. FWIW, Gord
Perhaps our debate over what effect the Bill may have on NOAA services - what it means or doesn’t - illuminates one of it’s biggest deficiencies. It’s much too broadly written, in simple, but ambiguous language. Whatever it means, and whatever our (various) opinions on the efficacy of that meaning, any Bill must be clear and unambiguous about it’s specific provisions. This one certainly fails the test on that standard. Beware unintended consequences !!! In this case, I fear (what I believe are) Sen. Santorum’s intended consequences. FWIW, Gord
rw? do you have a vested interest in this?
rw, Your responses are reasoned and well-thought out, albeit contrary to my view of private industry's attempt to hijack America. Your views are sooooo clear that I must question your motives. Honestly, now,do you or have you worked for either the industry in question or the Pennsylvania political machine pushing this? thanks, Joe
rw, Your responses are reasoned and well-thought out, albeit contrary to my view of private industry's attempt to hijack America. Your views are sooooo clear that I must question your motives. Honestly, now,do you or have you worked for either the industry in question or the Pennsylvania political machine pushing this? thanks, Joe
None of us here are legislators...
or staff members thereto, and a plain reading of a bill rarely if ever fully and clearly states the intended effect. Everyone involved, including each of us here at HOW, has an agenda in the process. Plus it will change many times throughout the course of it's life. Believe me, I used to work with the stuff daily. This issue is of importance to boaters. All of the press releases and reports I've heard and read on this bill took the position that the bill could restrict the availability of information from NOAA to the public. Maybe that's a stretch, maybe it's not. Read it yourself, check out the press, read the web and make your opinions known to the powers that be. Don't rely on anyone here to tell you what the bill will or won't do. Everyone has their own agenda.
or staff members thereto, and a plain reading of a bill rarely if ever fully and clearly states the intended effect. Everyone involved, including each of us here at HOW, has an agenda in the process. Plus it will change many times throughout the course of it's life. Believe me, I used to work with the stuff daily. This issue is of importance to boaters. All of the press releases and reports I've heard and read on this bill took the position that the bill could restrict the availability of information from NOAA to the public. Maybe that's a stretch, maybe it's not. Read it yourself, check out the press, read the web and make your opinions known to the powers that be. Don't rely on anyone here to tell you what the bill will or won't do. Everyone has their own agenda.
Strange this came up!
Morning Guys: This has been discussed before. The last time this was around I had sent a letter to the Senate regarding this matter. I received a response just yesterday and am going to try to post it. I hope you can make this out as my scanner is giving me problems so I had to photograph the document, hope it works. You read and decide!
Morning Guys: This has been discussed before. The last time this was around I had sent a letter to the Senate regarding this matter. I received a response just yesterday and am going to try to post it. I hope you can make this out as my scanner is giving me problems so I had to photograph the document, hope it works. You read and decide!
I have contacted Santorum's office
And asked the question: "What was Santorum's reasoning for having to introduce this Bill". The Staffer said that I will get a written responce by mail. I will post it when I get. I am not an advocate nor do I have special intrest in this. I am always concerned when someone has a document in front of them and then begins to take it out of context or makes character insinuations based on feelings and not facts. Believe me, If I am wrong in what I am saying, I will be the first to fess-up and admit my wrong. As I believe that the infomation here on this forum is as accurate as possible, I also believe that it does us a individuals and a country not to deal in facts. Wow, that turned out to be a soapbox. fair NOAA winds r.w.landau
And asked the question: "What was Santorum's reasoning for having to introduce this Bill". The Staffer said that I will get a written responce by mail. I will post it when I get. I am not an advocate nor do I have special intrest in this. I am always concerned when someone has a document in front of them and then begins to take it out of context or makes character insinuations based on feelings and not facts. Believe me, If I am wrong in what I am saying, I will be the first to fess-up and admit my wrong. As I believe that the infomation here on this forum is as accurate as possible, I also believe that it does us a individuals and a country not to deal in facts. Wow, that turned out to be a soapbox. fair NOAA winds r.w.landau
- Status