US Senator proposes to ban NOAA from providing free weather information

Under the guise of "modernization", Rick Santorum (R-Pa) is proposing that
any weather service already provided by a for-pay service must be prohibited
from being provided by NOAA.

http://tinyurl.com/cfxzj

(long link:
http://santorum.senate.gov/public/in...TOKEN=83234716 )

Perfect. Now, all I have to do is license the NOAA data for aviation
weather reports, resell the data, and the only folks who will be permitted
to compete with me will be those who also license the data and resell it.
NOAA will have to take all that stuff off their web site, ensuring that the
poor pilot will have to pay *someone* for it.

Yeah, this makes sense.

Pete

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 00:49:07 -0700, "Peter Duniho"
wrote in
::

Under the guise of "modernization", Rick Santorum (R-Pa) is proposing that
any weather service already provided by a for-pay service must be prohibited
from being provided by NOAA.

http://tinyurl.com/cfxzj

(long link:
http://santorum.senate.gov/public/in...TOKEN=83234716 )


Just for the record, here's the good senator's press release:

Santorum Proposes to Modernize National Weather Service to Better
Serve Public

April 14, 2005 - For Immediate Release Contact: Christine Shott
(202) 224-0610

Washington, DC - U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), Chairman of
the Senate Republican Conference, today introduced the National
Weather Services Duties Act of 2005 to clarify the duties and
responsibilities of the National Weather Service (NWS) within the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

“With the support of my colleagues, we can pass this legislation
to modernize the description of the National Weather Service’s
roles within the national weather enterprise, so that it reflects
today’s reality in which the National Weather Service and the
commercial weather industry both play important parts in providing
weather products and services to the nation,” said Senator
Santorum.

Fourteen years ago the NWS took the extra step of carefully
delineating the respective roles of the NWS and the commercial
weather industry, in addition to pledging its intention not to
provide products or services that were or could be provided by the
commercial weather industry.

However, the parent agency of the NWS, NOAA, repealed the 1991
non-competition and non-duplication policy in December 2004. Its
new policy only promises to “give due consideration” to the
abilities of private sector entities. The new policy has enabled
NWS and NOAA to expand into areas that are already well served by
the commercial weather industry.

“This decision by NOAA to repeal the non-competition and
non-duplication policy detracts from NWS’s core missions of
maintaining a modern and effective meteorological infrastructure,
collecting comprehensive observational data, and issuing warnings
and forecasts of severe weather that imperil life and property,”
said Senator Santorum.

Senator Santorum’s bill restores the NWS non-competition policy.
However, the legislation leaves NWS with complete and unfettered
freedom to carry out its critical role of preparing and issuing
severe weather warnings and forecasts designed for the protection
of life and property of the general public.

Personally, I have found NWS forecasts to be far superior to
commercial weather information. But This Republican senator want's to
prevent the NWS from providing citizens with the product of the
infrastructure their tax dollars funded in the name of 'better serving
the public'! This is a sterling example of outrageous Republican
hubris, and reeks of PAC influence and Orwellian doublespeak. Write
your congressmen now.

You can tell the honorable Senator Rick Santorum what you think of his
bill he
http://santorum.senate.gov/public/in....ContactFor m

Santorum is a liberal. Old country club Republican lefty. A leftover
from when the Democrats were conservative and the Repbulicans were
liberials.

"Sport Pilot" wrote in message
oups.com...
Santorum is a liberal. Old country club Republican lefty. A leftover
from when the Democrats were conservative and the Repbulicans were
liberials.


What does liberal or conservative have to do with this issue. He is
pandering to commercial interests. That makes him a whore.

Mike
MU-2

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 00:49:07 -0700, "Peter Duniho"
wrote:

Under the guise of "modernization", Rick Santorum (R-Pa) is proposing that
any weather service already provided by a for-pay service must be prohibited
from being provided by NOAA.

http://tinyurl.com/cfxzj

(long link:
http://santorum.senate.gov/public/in...TOKEN=83234716 )

I wrote to Senator Santorum urging him to rescind his support of this
Act.

I also wrote to the US Senators (Obama/Durbin) and asked for their
support against the Act.

Everyone should do the same.

I let AOPA know about this issue as well.

-Nathan

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 13:36:31 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
wrote:


"Sport Pilot" wrote in message
roups.com...
Santorum is a liberal. Old country club Republican lefty. A leftover
from when the Democrats were conservative and the Repbulicans were
liberials.


What does liberal or conservative have to do with this issue. He is
pandering to commercial interests. That makes him a whore.

Exactly. I could care less if he supports liberal or conservative
views. His proposed Act will take away a free aviation weather
service in order to benefit a commerical entity.

Pa. is the home of AccuWeather.

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 13:36:31 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
wrote in
.net::

He is pandering to commercial interests. That makes him a whore.

Right. Our congressmen are supposed to represent the will of the
people of this nation, not inanimate corporate entities.

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 13:36:31 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
wrote in

He is pandering to commercial interests. That makes him a whore.

Right. Our congressmen are supposed to represent the will of the
people of this nation, not inanimate corporate entities.

And what planet are you living on these days?

Under the guise of "modernization", Rick Santorum (R-Pa) is proposing that
any weather service already provided by a for-pay service must be
prohibited
from being provided by NOAA.

Sounds suspiciously like how NIGA is trying to remove a public aeronautical
database (DAFIF) under the guise of 'security' so Jeppesen can charge us
more for our own information. Are we just going to sit here and take this
BS ?