Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
National Weather Service
I read in the New York Times this weekend that Sen. Rick Santorum (R PA) has
introduced a bill to limit the amount of information that the National Weather Service, a taxpayer funded organization, may disseminate to the public. Apparently, Sen. Santorum has accepted campaign contributions from several private weather services located in Pennsylvania which have complained to him that information disseminated by NWS is too much competition for the pivate services and they want to restrict the free flow of weather information. Duh? Is there something wrong with this picture? Tom R. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Do you find it strange that Accuweather is based in Pa. and has
contributed ~$11,000 to Santorum's campaign fund? Can you say "PORK". krj Tom R. wrote: I read in the New York Times this weekend that Sen. Rick Santorum (R PA) has introduced a bill to limit the amount of information that the National Weather Service, a taxpayer funded organization, may disseminate to the public. Apparently, Sen. Santorum has accepted campaign contributions from several private weather services located in Pennsylvania which have complained to him that information disseminated by NWS is too much competition for the pivate services and they want to restrict the free flow of weather information. Duh? Is there something wrong with this picture? Tom R. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On a point of detail: if true, that motivation would not just be pork
( = supporting less than worthy projects because they benefit the home state), but rather purchase of influence - which is indictable if proved. Brian Whatcott. On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 17:41:13 -0400, krj wrote: Do you find it strange that Accuweather is based in Pa. and has contributed ~$11,000 to Santorum's campaign fund? Can you say "PORK". krj Tom R. wrote: I read in the New York Times this weekend that Sen. Rick Santorum (R PA) has introduced a bill to limit the amount of information that the National Weather Service, a taxpayer funded organization, may disseminate to the public. Apparently, Sen. Santorum has accepted campaign contributions from several private weather services located in Pennsylvania which have complained to him that information disseminated by NWS is too much competition for the pivate services and they want to restrict the free flow of weather information. Duh? Is there something wrong with this picture? Tom R. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Brian Whatcott wrote:
On a point of detail: if true, that motivation would not just be pork ( = supporting less than worthy projects because they benefit the home state), but rather purchase of influence - which is indictable if proved. Brian Whatcott. On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 17:41:13 -0400, krj wrote: Do you find it strange that Accuweather is based in Pa. and has contributed ~$11,000 to Santorum's campaign fund? Can you say "PORK". krj Tom R. wrote: I read in the New York Times this weekend that Sen. Rick Santorum (R PA) has introduced a bill to limit the amount of information that the National Weather Service, a taxpayer funded organization, may disseminate to the public. Apparently, Sen. Santorum has accepted campaign contributions from several private weather services located in Pennsylvania which have complained to him that information disseminated by NWS is too much competition for the pivate services and they want to restrict the free flow of weather information. Duh? Is there something wrong with this picture? Tom R. Google "Santorum" to find the out what it really means (for those who don't read Dan Savage's column) Evan Gatehouse |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 22:14:36 -0700, Evan Gatehouse
wrote: Brian Whatcott wrote: On a point of detail: if true, that motivation would not just be pork ( = supporting less than worthy projects because they benefit the home state), but rather purchase of influence - which is indictable if proved. Brian Whatcott. On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 17:41:13 -0400, krj wrote: Do you find it strange that Accuweather is based in Pa. and has contributed ~$11,000 to Santorum's campaign fund? Can you say "PORK". krj Tom R. wrote: I read in the New York Times this weekend that Sen. Rick Santorum (R PA) has introduced a bill to limit the amount of information that the National Weather Service, a taxpayer funded organization, may disseminate to the public. Apparently, Sen. Santorum has accepted campaign contributions from several private weather services located in Pennsylvania which have complained to him that information disseminated by NWS is too much competition for the pivate services and they want to restrict the free flow of weather information. Duh? Is there something wrong with this picture? Tom R. Google "Santorum" to find the out what it really means (for those who don't read Dan Savage's column) Evan Gatehouse I try to stay away from politics and politicians where possible, so I regret I probably won't be following up on this worthy suggestion. What does it really mean? Brian W |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
What it means, if it passes is that all info that the NWS now provides,
i.e. marine forecast, weatherfax, radar displays, ham skywarn, etc. would probably become a "pay for use" from a private company. The NWS could not provide these if a private company wants to provide them. The NWS still provides the data that we pay them to collect with our taxes, but will be provided "1) through a |set of data portals designed for volume access by commercial providers |of products or services". Meaning high speed data links like T1 or T3 to which the general public will not have access. Excerpts of S 786 below. Write or call your senator now to oppose this bill! krj | (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. | | (1) IN GENERAL- All data, information, guidance, |forecasts, and warnings received, collected, created, or prepared by |the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or the National |Weather Service shall, to the maximum extent practicable, be issued in |real time, and without delay for internal use, in a manner that ensures |that all members of the public have the opportunity for simultaneous |and equal access to such data, information, guidance, forecasts, and |warnings. | | (2) MODE OF ISSUANCE- Data, information, guidance, |forecasts, and warnings shall be issued under paragraph (1) through a |set of data portals designed for volume access by commercial providers |of products or services and by such other mechanisms as the Secretary |of Commerce considers appropriate for purposes of that paragraph. Brian Whatcott wrote: On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 22:14:36 -0700, Evan Gatehouse wrote: Brian Whatcott wrote: On a point of detail: if true, that motivation would not just be pork ( = supporting less than worthy projects because they benefit the home state), but rather purchase of influence - which is indictable if proved. Brian Whatcott. On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 17:41:13 -0400, krj wrote: Do you find it strange that Accuweather is based in Pa. and has contributed ~$11,000 to Santorum's campaign fund? Can you say "PORK". krj Tom R. wrote: I read in the New York Times this weekend that Sen. Rick Santorum (R PA) has introduced a bill to limit the amount of information that the National Weather Service, a taxpayer funded organization, may disseminate to the public. Apparently, Sen. Santorum has accepted campaign contributions from several private weather services located in Pennsylvania which have complained to him that information disseminated by NWS is too much competition for the pivate services and they want to restrict the free flow of weather information. Duh? Is there something wrong with this picture? Tom R. Google "Santorum" to find the out what it really means (for those who don't read Dan Savage's column) Evan Gatehouse I try to stay away from politics and politicians where possible, so I regret I probably won't be following up on this worthy suggestion. What does it really mean? Brian W |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't you go to his website, and leave him a polite email asking him
to reconsider and withdraw the legislation? I did. The only way to get politicians to respond to the public is for the public to show that they are paying attention. Sadly most of the time they are not Don W. Tom R. wrote: I read in the New York Times this weekend that Sen. Rick Santorum (R PA) has introduced a bill to limit the amount of information that the National Weather Service, a taxpayer funded organization, may disseminate to the public. Apparently, Sen. Santorum has accepted campaign contributions from several private weather services located in Pennsylvania which have complained to him that information disseminated by NWS is too much competition for the pivate services and they want to restrict the free flow of weather information. Duh? Is there something wrong with this picture? Tom R. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Since I believe he has already been bought and paid for, I wrote to both of
my Senators instead. "Don W" wrote in message m... Why don't you go to his website, and leave him a polite email asking him to reconsider and withdraw the legislation? I did. The only way to get politicians to respond to the public is for the public to show that they are paying attention. Sadly most of the time they are not Don W. Tom R. wrote: I read in the New York Times this weekend that Sen. Rick Santorum (R PA) has introduced a bill to limit the amount of information that the National Weather Service, a taxpayer funded organization, may disseminate to the public. Apparently, Sen. Santorum has accepted campaign contributions from several private weather services located in Pennsylvania which have complained to him that information disseminated by NWS is too much competition for the pivate services and they want to restrict the free flow of weather information. Duh? Is there something wrong with this picture? Tom R. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
krj wrote in
: What it means, if it passes is that all info that the NWS now provides, i.e. marine forecast, weatherfax, radar displays, ham skywarn, etc. would probably become a "pay for use" from a private company. The NWS could not provide these if a private company wants to provide them. The NWS still provides the data that we pay them to collect with our taxes, but will be provided "1) through a |set of data portals designed for volume access by commercial providers |of products or services". Meaning high speed data links like T1 or T3 to which the general public will not have access. Excerpts of S 786 below. Write or call your senator now to oppose this bill! krj I wonder if we simply file a Freedom Of Information Act request, required by other laws, to get the data. I got data from several agencies who were reluctant to send it successfully.... |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
rec.boats.paddle sea kayaking FAQ | General | |||
Kerry really concedes | General | |||
Just a few names... | General | |||
OT--Not again! More Chinese money buying our politicians. | General |