Senate bill to make it illegal for NHC to release products

[hookemfins]

Senate bill 786 is being proposed to make it illegal for the NHC/NWS to release some products. The goal is for the public to get the info from the private sector like accuweather. Problem is most of the important information at accuweather is from the pay service. I saw the report on WFOR in Miami and here's a link to the bill: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:s786: There is a pettition at http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/SaveTheNWS/ to oppose such a law.


Article from the Palm Beach Post http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/news/epaper/2005/04/21/m1a_wx_0421.html

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

That would be a very sad day for America!

[HURAKAN]

That sounds even Anti-American. To give power to the private sector and leave the common people behind. But after all, those are the companies that feed the government literally speaking.

[drudd1]

What the bill would mean is that we would pay for access to weather information that we have already paid for. Our tax dollars fund the agencies who provide the data, and for that matter, provide much of the data the pay services are using. I don't see that this bill will have much of a chance, but I agree that everyone needs to make themselves heard on this subject just in case.

[Air Force Met]

What the bill would mean is that we would pay for access to weather information that we have already paid for. Our tax dollars fund the agencies who provide the data, and for that matter, provide much of the data the pay services are using. I don't see that this bill will have much of a chance, but I agree that everyone needs to make themselves heard on this subject just in case.

I wonder if accuweather is going to start paying for launching the ballons...dropsounds...paying all the military weather observers around the word...satellite costs for sat winds...etc...all those things that are invovled in GATHERING the data so that those forecasts can be made?

Somehow I doubt it.

[HurryKane]

So, the answer is: don't just get mad about it here or write SanitariumKrazyMan; write the senators on the Senate Commerce Committee, where the bill has been referred:

http://commerce.senate.gov/about/membership.html

(the website has links to each senator's webpage and further contact information)

* Ted Stevens - Alaska
Hart 522 202-224-3004

* John McCain - Arizona
Russell 241 202-224-2235

* Conrad Burns - Montana
Dirksen 187 202-224-2644

* Trent Lott - Mississippi
Russell 487 202-224-6253

* Kay Bailey Hutchison - Texas
Russell 284 202-224-5922

* Olympia Snowe - Maine
Russell 154 202-224-5344

* Gordon Smith - Oregon
Russell 404 202-224-3753

* John Ensign - Nevada
Russell 364 202-224-6244

* George Allen - Virginia
Russel 204 202-224-4024

* John Sununu - New Hampshire
Russell 111 202-224-2841

* Jim DeMint - South Carolina
Hart 825 202-224-6121

* David Vitter - Louisiana
Hart 825A 202-224-4623



* Daniel K. Inouye - Hawaii
Hart 722 202-224-3934

* John D. Rockefeller IV - West Virginia
Hart 531 202-224-6472

* John F. Kerry - Massachussetts
Russell 304 202-224-2742

* Byron L. Dorgan - North Dakota
Hart 322 202-224-2551

* Barbara Boxer - California
Hart 112 202-224-3553

* Bill Nelson - Florida
Hart 716 202-224-5274

* Maria Cantwell - Washington
Hart 717 202-224-3441

* Frank Lautenberg - New Jersey
Hart 324 202-224-3224

* E. Benjamin Nelson - Nebraska
Hart 720 202-224-6551

* Mark Pryor - Arkansas
Russell 217 202-224-2353

[dhweather]

Thanks for posting the contact information HurryKane

EVERYONE NEEDS TO CALL AND LET THEIR REPRESENTATIVES KNOW
THIS BILL NEEDS TO DIE. LEAVE THE NWS ALONE.

Rick Sanotorum and his Accuweather cronies can kiss off.

[dhweather]

AirForceMet has already said what I've said many times on here, but
I'll say it again.

If the "private" weather industry wants to play this game, then they need
to pony up billions of dollars to pay for what they get for free now:

Over 100 WSR-88D installations
GOES Satellites
countless ASOS stations
countless data buoys
several research ships
several research planes

[Steve]

And on the 3rd day, God seperated the land from the sea....

(50th thread on the topic, but still a good one)

Steve

[senorpepr]

AirForceMet has already said what I've said many times on here, but
I'll say it again.

If the "private" weather industry wants to play this game, then they need
to pony up billions of dollars to pay for what they get for free now:

Over 100 WSR-88D installations
GOES Satellites
countless ASOS stations
countless data buoys
several research ships
several research planes

You didn't even mention the countless human observers across the US as well as the US military observers around the world. Their observations play a HUGE role in model initialization.

[CA _Tracker]

Wow...A Republican Congressman buttering up to the private sector.

That NEVER happens...

[cyclonaut]

THIS GARBAGE BETTER NOT PASS!!

[senorpepr]

Here's another thought that crossed my mind: if this bill restricts information that the NWS provides if the private sector can provide it, then what about surface observations? The private sector (such as AccuWeather) could provide observations. What does that mean, the automated weather network that processes surface observations would be closed to the public. That means the civil airlines would then have to pay a service like AccuWeather for data, thus costing them money. Oh, but wait: the airlines are already hurting for money so this cost would be relayed to the customers. Therefore, people like you and I, who pay for this weather data to begin with via tax dollars, would have to pay [i]again/[i] when flying an airplane.

Just a thought...

[Matt-hurricanewatcher]

If I can't track weather or tropical cyclones any more because of the goverment. Which we pay for through our tax dollars. We are no different then the USSR. Maybe even worst...It will no longer be free in the united states. In which are men in women in the arm forces died to defend. This is a load. In if this passes I loss what is important to me in all the people on storm2k. This will be a very sad day for all...Please by the lord Jesus don't do this to happen to this country.

[Andrew92]

I think Inaccu-Weather really needs to make a credible, official forecast before even requesting a bill like this. And Insanatorum should look more at both Inaccu-Weather AND the NWS before proposing this bill. Inaccu-Weather's forecasts don't make sense and are generally inaccurate; NWS forecasts, while certainly not perfect, are well-written and easy to understand. And they say A LOT MORE than just "warm and sunny," like that one guy quote in the Palm Beach Post article. To that guy who quoted that, what are Inaccu-Weather forecasts like? Give me your very detailed opinion.

Sorry, but this bill needs to get defeated. BAD.

-Andrew92

[HurryKane]

If you really want to make an impact with a letter, note that several of the Senate Commerce Committee senators are from states that lie in direct danger of a hurricane hit: Mississippi, South Carolina, Virginia, Louisiana, West Virginia, Texas, and Florida.

Still others are from states that suffer indirect consequences of hurricane strikes--New Jersey, Arkansas, New Hampshire.

It might be eyecatching to mention to those senators that their states stand to lose the most should this bill be passed.

[Hybridstorm_November2001]

Frankly it is absurd that the Senate would even entertain this notion. Making the public PAY TWICE for their weather forecasts, is like biting your own tongue; painful and pointless


Hybridstorm_November2001

[TexasStooge]

SAMTORUM, GET OFF THIS WEATHER COMPETITION FIXATION!!!!!!!

[dhweather]

SAMTORUM, GET OFF THIS WEATHER COMPETITION FIXATION!!!!!!!

How do you really feel?

[Robert]

Thanks for posting the contact information HurryKane

EVERYONE NEEDS TO CALL AND LET THEIR REPRESENTATIVES KNOW
THIS BILL NEEDS TO DIE. LEAVE THE NWS ALONE.

Rick Sanotorum and his Accuweather cronies can kiss off.

I wrote to all of them (even though none of them are from my state). I also wrote Sanotorum and told him that I felt his actions were much more driven by contributions to his coffers from folks like Accuweather, then by interest in serving the public. I asked him what else he would support, if enough money was given to him? Out of all the contacts, only 2 or 3 responded (with nice notes saying that since I was not living in their state, they really didn't care what I had to say). I would love to have the NWS put together a bill to Accuweather (and other private companies, several of which are located in PA, surprise surprise) dividing up the cost of the collecting the data they are going to give them. When they are willing to absorb the costs of satalites, planes, data gathering, etc..., I might consider paying for their forcasts (since I would not be paying for it with my tax dollars). Until that time comes, I believe the data belongs to the public, not to private companies.

The other thing that has crossed my mind is the idea of a value added service. Example, most of us can get the major network TV with an antenna. However, many (most) of us have chosen to buy cable or a dish. These companies (especially cable) have taken take what is "free," add to it, make it better and offer it to us for a price. If accuweather (or another company) can take what the NWS offers, repackage it and make it appealing to people, they should be able to sell their product (or go out of business). Imagine the uproar if 25 (+?) years ago, before most people had cable, a cable company had paid off a senitor to submit a bill to pull all networks from the airwaves. That is basically how I see this bill. I would be happy to pay Accuweather (or somebody else) if they could provide me the something better then what the NWS does now, but until they can show me that their product is better then what I now get for "free" (through my tax dollars), they have no right to charge me for something that is not as good.

Robert