Why does Rick want weather info restricted?

I'm largely in agreement and even though I'm a Republican I don't care
much for Santorum.

As your statement demonstrates, there's a large difference between
Republicans and the Extreme Right.

vince norris

JohnH wrote:

Notice the company this "donor" represents:

http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/ind_detail/MYERS|JOEL+N+DR|STATE+COLLEGE|PA|16801|ACCU+WEATHE R/

Talk about a blatant bribe. Weather info you've paid for sold off for a
measly $4050.

While I disagree with the bill under discussion, I don't think it is a "bribe" either. The NWS had
been restricted from offering many weather products that were more refined than the basically raw
data & forecasts they have always produced. This restriction ended December 2004.

Now imagine if you were a business that had invested in broadcasting music over satellites for
example and the government now decided that it was going to use its satellites to broadcast music to
anyone for free. (For the sake of the argument ignore the copyright aspects of the music itself,
just focusing here on the act of broadcasting). You'd probably be unhappy with having to compete
with the government producing a final product (sat. transmission) as well.

So is there a coincidence that Santorum and Accuweather are in the same state? Not all. Probably
filed a bill at the request of his constituents, and Accuweather does hire a lot of people in
central Pennsylvania. Even if Santorum himself disagrees with the bill, it would be nice of him to
file a bill on behalf of constituents. Many politicians wouldn't bother.

Finally it is important to note that under no circumstances would Aviation or Marine forecasts be
affected under the bill.

On Wed, 03 Aug 2005 23:18:59 -0400, John wrote in
::


Finally it is important to note that under no circumstances would Aviation or Marine forecasts be
affected under the bill.

What of observed weather, satellite images, etc? I doubt that the
bill's proposed change would fail to impact pilots negatively.

Now imagine if you were a business that had invested in broadcasting
music over satellites for example and the government now decided that
it was going to use its satellites to broadcast music to anyone for
free. (For the sake of the argument ignore the copyright aspects of
the music itself, just focusing here on the act of broadcasting).

The difference here is us taxpyers have paid for these satellites on which
this private company wants a free ride. Huge difference. If Accuweather
wants to launch THEIR own satellites (as per your example), more power to
them.

You'd probably be unhappy with having to compete with the government
producing a final product (sat. transmission) as well.

Ridiculous. It's more like the taxpayers paying for the musicians and
infrastructure for a broadcast, then having some company charging you
admission to hear it.


So is there a coincidence that Santorum and Accuweather are in the
same state? Not all. Probably filed a bill at the request of his
constituents, and Accuweather does hire a lot of people in central
Pennsylvania. Even if Santorum himself disagrees with the bill, it
would be nice of him to file a bill on behalf of constituents. Many
politicians wouldn't bother.

Right. Maybe I will go into the public park entrance fee charging business
and pay off. uh - I mean "lobby" my senator to pass a bill making it into
law. Since it's what I want, he should mindlessly do as I ask, right?

Finally it is important to note that under no circumstances would
Aviation or Marine forecasts be affected under the bill.

Many sources which aviators and mariners use would be affected.

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
The difference here is us taxpyers have paid for these satellites on which
this private company wants a free ride. Huge difference. If Accuweather
wants to launch THEIR own satellites (as per your example), more power to
them.

The taxpayers have also funded all the research that the private companies
use for their forcasting.

Mike
MU-2

Even if Santorum himself disagrees with the bill.....

Why would he disagree? It is part of Republican political philosophy
to privatize everything and allow the market free rein.

vince norris