US Senator proposes to ban NOAA from providing free weather information

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Tango Whiskey 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.

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 ?

Either way, this might not be an issue at all. Take a look at
this part of the proposed bill:

- --snip--
(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 unless--

(1) the Secretary determines that the private sector is unwilling or
unable to provide such product or service; or

(2) the United States Government is obligated to provide such product
or service under international aviation agreements to provide
meteorological services and exchange meteorological information.
- --snip--

Part to there could be used as a loophole, exempting anything
aviation based for compliance, should this pass. Something to keep in
mind. Do all that you can to kill this bill, but if it passes, the
senator is too much of an airheaded PITA to use good, qualified english
on his proposals.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.sbcglobal.net/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCaVYYyBkZmuMZ8L8RAsW6AKDKJSGr0KkQGPXfDQqdES sxtwc+swCg0MQ3
Gt18bk5fJoHi/W6Le+sJNOY=
=YEe1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 19:52:57 GMT, A Guy Called Tyketto
wrote in
::

Take a look at this part of the proposed bill:

Are you able to provide a link to the proposed bill?

I am not really concerned that "I" or "We" (pilots) might have to pay. It
is wrong after funding all the weather research, observing stations,
satellites ect with taxpayer money to not make the results of that
investment availible to the people who paid for it...Everybody

Mike
MU-2


"A Guy Called Tyketto" wrote in message
m...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Tango Whiskey 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.

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 ?

Either way, this might not be an issue at all. Take a look at
this part of the proposed bill:

- --snip--
(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 unless--

(1) the Secretary determines that the private sector is unwilling or
unable to provide such product or service; or

(2) the United States Government is obligated to provide such product
or service under international aviation agreements to provide
meteorological services and exchange meteorological information.
- --snip--

Part to there could be used as a loophole, exempting anything
aviation based for compliance, should this pass. Something to keep in
mind. Do all that you can to kill this bill, but if it passes, the
senator is too much of an airheaded PITA to use good, qualified english
on his proposals.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.sbcglobal.net/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCaVYYyBkZmuMZ8L8RAsW6AKDKJSGr0KkQGPXfDQqdES sxtwc+swCg0MQ3
Gt18bk5fJoHi/W6Le+sJNOY=
=YEe1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Larry Dighera ) wrote:
: 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.
:

Don't forget India...

http://www.usindiafriendship.net/con...ds/friends.htm
Friends of India in the US Senate

"U.S. Senate India Caucus
by Aziz Haniffa in Washington DC (March 31, 2004)

A new bipartisan organisation called 'Friends of India' has been
formed in the US Senate, similar to the 10-year-old Congressional
Caucus on India and Indian Americans in the US House of Representatives.

This is the first time in the history of the US Senate that a
country-focused caucus has been constituted and announcing its
formation was the driving force behind the move Senator John Cornyn, a
freshman Republican Senator from Texas who recently visited India.

Cornyn, who was the keynote speaker at the Second Annual Capitol Hill
Gala Dinner of the American Association of Physicians of Indian Origin
on Tuesday night following AAPI's two-day legislative conference, said
co-chairing 'Friends of India' in the US Senate would be Democratic
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

He said that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Tennessee Republican
and Minority Leader Thomas Dachle,South Dakota Democrat had also
agreed to become members of the Friends of India group and so had 18
other Senators from both sides of the aisle.

Cornyn said he 'undertook the job of creating an India Caucus in the
US Senate, because of the incredible experience I had in India and
because of the importance of US-India relations'.

"The response has been really outstanding across the political
spectrum to the formation of such a Caucus and to me that says a lot
to work on the good relationship we have in the Senate toward
promoting ties between our two democracies," he said.

Cornyn acknowledged that it was unfortunate that over the years, and
particularly during the Cold War years, despite both the US and India
being democracies with so much in common 'did not have good
relations', and described it 'as an accident of history', which has to
be put right. "We have to make up for lost time," he said.

Indian Ambassador Lalit Mansingh who has been promoting the idea of
the Friends of India Caucus in the US Senate among Indian American
groups said he was ecstatic over the news.

Mansingh, who was also present at the AAPI dinner, as Cornyn was
announcing the launch, said he had been in touch with the Senators and
others over forming such a group. He told rediff.com: "I have to
commend all the Indian leaders of the Indian American community that
finally made this happen."

"Cornyn came back very charged after his trip to India and said 'I
want to do something to promote US-India relations' and so we said
'this is something you can do'," Mansingh said. "So we were in contact
with him."

"Even though he was aware of the formation of such a group I wanted
them to say it," Mansingh said. He said there would be a formal
launch.

It is believed that some of the most powerful and influential
lawmakers like Senator Orrin Hatch, chairman of the Senate Judiciary
Committee, Charles Grassley, head of the Finance Committee, Thad
Cochran,chairman of the Appropriations Committee -- all Republicans --
and leading Democrats like Senators Paul Sarbanes, Joe Lieberman, and
Edward M Kennedy have all enthusiastically agreed to be part of the
'Friends of India' Caucus.

Members of Senate Caucus

John Cornyn, Senator Who Made the Difference"


--Jerry Leslie
Note: is invalid for email

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mike Rapoport wrote:
I am not really concerned that "I" or "We" (pilots) might have to pay. It
is wrong after funding all the weather research, observing stations,
satellites ect with taxpayer money to not make the results of that
investment availible to the people who paid for it...Everybody

Mike
MU-2

I agree totally, don't get me wrong. It is quite wrong to make
us have to pay for something we are already paying for. It's definitely
time to get SIGs and the like involved (AOPA, possibly NATCA, etc.),
even amateur meteorologists. This is going to affect everyone, and the
more people say no, the more it's going to be shot down. But if it's
left quietly, and the money that AccuWeather feeds this guy under the
table, it's going to become reality. So we all need to start shouting.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.sbcglobal.net/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCafTJyBkZmuMZ8L8RAsdeAJ0ctvDP+q3yHSWqb9dHCl LprmW7wQCeO095
PKlaz7U7Ue5Nt8nELFQnsQo=
=Fq99
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Mike Rapoport wrote:
"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


No. Actually Santorium is doing his job as a conservative. Less
government means that private business would do this. The fact that
they may charge more money, or not do the job as effectively, should
not be a factor. That said I do not believe in conservatism for it own
sake. If the government has been doing a good job then perhaps it
should be bid out to both the government and the weather service,
similar to the way many government sectors are contracted out.

"Sport Pilot" wrote in message
ups.com...

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

No. Actually Santorium is doing his job as a conservative. Less
government means that private business would do this.

No. If the private business were providing all of the data from scratch,
your point might hold. But AccuWeather (the company who bought this bill)
obtains their data from the NWS. The NWS still has to do the work; the bill
simply mandates a middle-man, blocking the people who have already paid for
the data from getting it at no additional cost.

That's hardly a true conservative attitude. Granted, those who call
themselves conservative these days, aren't very much any more. But Mike's
characterization is more apt than any "liberal vs conservative" take on the
issue.

I do find it amusing that you would initially say that "Santorum is a
liberal", but that he is "doing his job as a conservative". I guess that's
just par for the course on Usenet.

Pete

Sport Pilot wrote:

No. Actually Santorium is doing his job as a conservative. Less
government means that private business would do this.

Not so. Accuweather doesn't actually do any of the things the NWS does. All this
bill does is force the NWS to turn over data that we have already paid for to
Accuweather so that Accuweather can levy a surcharge.

If the bill forced Accuweather to hire a bunch of meteorologists and generate
the data themselves, I'd say "go to it", but the bill simply mandates taking
something I already own and forcing me to pay someone else to get it back.
That's theft, plain and simple.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

[This followup was posted to rec.aviation.piloting and a copy was sent
to the cited author.]

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


Santorum is a pointy headed loony.

Repo Man wrote:

Santorum is a pointy headed loony.

No, he seems to be what has become a rarity these days -- an honest politician.
Once he's bought, he stays bought.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.