NOAA weather to be off limits to the public

[fao110]

congressman wants to limit publics access to noaa weather information

did any one see the news thurs. some congressman wants to limit the public access to the noaa weather information that we pay for with our taxes.

the private weather broadcaters want us to pay them for weather information that they will get from were:NOAA most likely for free.
i don't like to pay for the same thing twice

what is you're opinion about this, and additional info anyone?

[Weruj1]

got a link to the story ?

[ThNozzleman]

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:s786:

[ThNozzleman]

http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=4&tstamp=200505

[ThNozzleman]

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/news/epaper/2005/04/21/m1a_wx_0421.html

[Dave1983]

Yeah, thats a good idea. What is this guy thinking?:mad:

[Weruj1]

thanks Noz............

[ShaversFork]

Mr. SANTORUM introduced the bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. He then later picked up his checks from the Weather Ch., Intellicast and Weather.com.
We should be glad that he doesn't "support" the Fire Service or the NFA. I bet he supports BRAC-Base Realignment and Closings.
I'm guessing that he figures on average that there will be 10 hurricanes in the Atlantic and a Tsunami or two on the West Coast. Perhaps a Tornado or twenty in the Mid West.
We can still rely on Boise Fire to get our fire weather.

A little research in to the Senator illuminated the reasoning behind his bill:

In his most widely quoted (and excoriated) remark, Santorum says, "If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything."

Clearly, Sen. Santorum is making a classic slippery-slope argument here — a fact that has been completely lost amidst the claims that he has "equated" homosexuality with, say, incest. In his statement, Santorum gives a number examples, all different, yet all cases in which he claims that the government has some legitimate interest in regulating sexuality. Sen. Santorum is obviously concerned that, if the Supreme Court rules that the state has no right to regulate sexuality in the case of sodomy, a court might someday deny the state the right to regulate even incest.
Or perhaps our right to access weather safety alerts!

[nmfire]

First of all, this whole issue isn't even worth worrying about because it has no chance of passing to begin with. It is going to die a lonely death along with hundreds of other stupid worthless bills. By the way, the moron who started this (Rick Santorum) out of PA happens to be the same place that "AccuWeather" is based. AccuWeather is a huge commericalized weather service which wants more money and less free stuff for us little people.

Secondly, the bill is not to cut off all public data from NOAA. That is an exagerated hyped up interpretation. The weather radio isn't going anywhere. The typical forcast stuff isn't going anywhere. It simply means they can not provide specialized services for free that other private companies charge for.

[ThNozzleman]

By the way, the moron who started this (Rick Santorum) out of PA happens to be the same place that "AccuWeather" is based.
Not only that, but the founder and CEO of "AccuWeather" (Joel Myers) has also donated several thousand dollars to Santorum over the last few years.
The typical forcast stuff isn't going anywhere. It simply means they can not provide specialized services for free that other private companies charge for.
This bill is so generally worded, it could be taken any way one wants to take it. It is nothing more than an attempt by a right-wing nut to use a dedicated, successful government-based public service as a means to make money for a few people. Nobody can argue with the success and usefulness of the NWS/NOAA. The attempt by these people to take the info provided by these dedicated professionals and tart it up to make a buck is disgusting. One of their main goals is to shut down the highly informative website operated by NWS/NOAA, and force people to pay for the same info they receive for free from NWS/NOAA. It's a sham from top to bottom.

[hwoods]

Scary as it may sound, I'm with Noz. :eek: :eek: This is Stupid, Stupid, Stupid. I am writing the two Senators from Maryland, asking for their support in defeating this bill. Thanks Noz, Your bringing this to light just might be enough to kill it.

[wvfd05]

I would agree with others here who believe that such a poorly written bill will die in committee, which is where it belongs.

TF

[fao110]

thanks for the replys and link information.

pick you're battles to fight and this seems like a good proper fight for the little people, who work for a living.

we are expected to be prepared and equiped to handle anything and everything, and clowns like this are working to tie are hands.

[SamsonFCDES]

What the hell, is he going to classify the weather info top secret???

Because thats the only taxpayer bought info that is not for general consumption.

Everything else bought with taxpayer dollars is supposed to be public domain.

I am goin to forward this to my Weather Service friends and see what they have to say...they are likly to be appauled.

I would classify this as criminal and at the very least an excellent reson to run this dumb SOB out of any and all leadership roles in our goverment.

[ThNozzleman]

First of all, this whole issue isn't even worth worrying about because it has no chance of passing to begin with.
Yeah, sure. Many say this, blathering on about the "free market" and the "free reign" capitalism. It's easy to sit and rant about these concepts, until it's YOUR job, or a government service that directly affects you, that's eliminated. How many threads/posts have materialized every time Rural/Metro (or a similar company) comes knocking? Face it; there are some things that most Americans do NOT want privatized, including things like the NWS/NOAA, public safety, and the military. It's easy for some of the guys here to wail about the waste of taxpayer dollars then, three threads later, whine about pay and position cuts and corporate takeovers that affect THEIR particular government position. To my knowledge, the NWS/NOAA offers a tremendous return for the few dollars per citizen, per year, that is invested in them. There are many legit areas of government spending that need to be curtailed immediately, but the National Weather Service is NOT one of them. These guys are in it for the love and dedication to their service, not the money...just like the majority of professional firefighters from coast to coast.

[CaptainGonzo]

Santorum's bill would also have a dramatic effect on general aviation. Pilots of everything from small Cessna's to 747's rely on the NOAA weather forecasts while setting up flight plans. The bill would endanger the safety of the public both in the air and on the ground, not to mention public safety employees when they would have to respond to an incident.

[ElChup175]

As a taxpaying citizen there are a few things I would rather a non-profit organization (such as the gov't) handling than a private company. The list includes but isn't limited to protection of property and life which includes police, fire, ems, military, ect. I also don't want to trust my food to private companies, even though a private company may process my beef, grow my veggies, milk the cows...they are all regulated by the government. Also the weather is one thing I don't want to have trusted entirely to private companies. I would prefer to get my info "straight from the horses" mouth in that the National Weather Service gives me the information. Although I would compromise on the idea of the National Weather Service being in a "varification" role in that private weather forcasters get a rating on there "correctness" in forcasting events. I just hope that we can still get our info from the national weather service on daily forcast info and severe weather info...because we have the "weather radio" channels built into our radio, I would rather listen to my radio on scene than have to set up my tv or internet connection on scene to get the weather (extremely important on stuff like grass fires, floods, and hazmat situations).

[CaptainGonzo]

From the AOPA website...
AOPA President Phil Boyer appeared on ABC World News Tonight with Peter Jennings Thursday in a story about proposed legislation that would restrict public access to the National Weather Service (NWS). Boyer presented general aviation's opposition and explained that obtaining weather data is a critical part of preflight planning for pilots.

"Forty percent of all fatalities are caused by weather-related factors," Boyer said.

The proposed bill, introduced by Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), would prohibit the NWS from offering any "product or service that is or could be provided by the private sector."

On the newscast, Boyer demonstrated how he uses a computer to access weather data as a routine and necessary part of preflight planning. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) emphasized the need for public access to the NWS, particularly in Florida, which was ravaged by hurricanes last year. Santorum was also interviewed in the story.

This is not the first time NWS products have been threatened, and AOPA has successfully protected access to it in the past.

[DennisTheMenace]

Originally posted by ShaversFork
Mr. SANTORUM introduced the bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. He then later picked up his checks from the Weather Ch., Intellicast and Weather.com.
We should be glad that he doesn't "support" the Fire Service or the NFA. I bet he supports BRAC-Base Realignment and Closings.
I'm guessing that he figures on average that there will be 10 hurricanes in the Atlantic and a Tsunami or two on the West Coast. Perhaps a Tornado or twenty in the Mid West.
We can still rely on Boise Fire to get our fire weather.

A little research in to the Senator illuminated the reasoning behind his bill:

In his most widely quoted (and excoriated) remark, Santorum says, "If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything."

Clearly, Sen. Santorum is making a classic slippery-slope argument here — a fact that has been completely lost amidst the claims that he has "equated" homosexuality with, say, incest. In his statement, Santorum gives a number examples, all different, yet all cases in which he claims that the government has some legitimate interest in regulating sexuality. Sen. Santorum is obviously concerned that, if the Supreme Court rules that the state has no right to regulate sexuality in the case of sodomy, a court might someday deny the state the right to regulate even incest.
Or perhaps our right to access weather safety alerts! Why the heck would anyone not be in favor of BRAC unless their particular district was losing jobs. Anyone that is in favor of a storng military and saving tax payers money through effiency and the elimination of waste should favor BRAC, even in fact if it effects your local economy. And more important to this conversation, what does BRAC or social/moral issues have to do with the NOAA's role creaping into what has become a privatized industry? You are confusing social political idiology with economic idiology, the two are very seperate with cross-overs in both directions and does nothing but distract the issue when trying to convince others that NOAA weather information and data should be kept in the public realm.

Originally posted by Conster74
The three ugliest words you can ever say to someone were ones often spoken to me by my (now ex) husband over the course of our ill fated marriage:

Not "I hate you" or "go **** yourself" or even "FFFF off B****" but "Justify your existence."
I believe, by becoming a firefighter and doing my absolute best, I have done just that, while he's playing at being a "Doctor of Divinity" and floundering badly in life's path. Sucks to be him.

Sounds like the lawmakers are trying to "justify their existence" and failing just as miserably. Some of these idiotic laws, such as the ones requiring the collection of tax on out of state internet purchases, pass. Others fail miserably.
It seems to me we need to rebuild this entire system from the ground up. Get rid of all the incumbents, period. Strip the job of anything other than a few modest health benefits and an ADEQUATE (not cushy) retirement plan. Better yet pay Senators and Congressman only about $20,000 a year and make it REALLY suck. Vote people in there who have a good solid brain (and not one whose intellect has been corrupted by absolute power) and make accepting lobbyist bribes a crime punishable by death.... political economic death that is. :D
Same with the Supreme Court and the Presidency. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. They should not hold the kind of power they apparently do now. :mad: Is it possible to type anymore clichés without touching on the subject at hand?


This will never get out of committee as written. International flight rules require the FAA to provide this information to pilots and others in the aviation world. This is a private sector versus public sector economic question that should be debated, what role should the government have when the private sector can provide the same service, often at an economic and quality advantage? Is this one of those instances? Is it not? Debates like this should be made. Should they always go forward as planed? No. Should they be rejected out right? No. Weather.com and others might be able to provide as good of service and save the tax payers money, or maybe they can't. There is no reason to not discuss it.


Sen. Santorum and I are on the same side of the aisle on many things, but I will say since our frind from Snowshoe Mt., ShaversFork, brought it up, that some of the things about the guy do scare and disturbe me.

[DennisTheMenace]

Originally posted by CaptainGonzo
From the AOPA website..
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AOPA President Phil Boyer appeared on ABC World News Tonight with Peter Jennings Thursday in a story about proposed legislation that would restrict public access to the National Weather Service (NWS). Boyer presented general aviation's opposition and explained that obtaining weather data is a critical part of preflight planning for pilots.

"Forty percent of all fatalities are caused by weather-related factors," Boyer said.

The proposed bill, introduced by Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), would prohibit the NWS from offering any "product or service that is or could be provided by the private sector."

On the newscast, Boyer demonstrated how he uses a computer to access weather data as a routine and necessary part of preflight planning. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) emphasized the need for public access to the NWS, particularly in Florida, which was ravaged by hurricanes last year. Santorum was also interviewed in the story.

This is not the first time NWS products have been threatened, and AOPA has successfully protected access to it in the past.

Do they have any of Sen. Santorum's justification, from the interview, for the bill in the article?

[CaptainGonzo]

The "private weather companies" are using the information gathered by the NOAA and NWS to make their forecasts! All they do is analyze the data they get from the NOAA and NWS, put their take on it and then sell advertsing time on their cable network or charge the radio and TV stations for their "information services", who in turn charge for the advertising time for their respective stations based on their Arbitron and Neilsen ratings.

Why not ask the stockholders of the Weather Channel, Accuweather and the like if they are willing to plunk down the billions of dollars to pay for the costs of launching the satellites and to pay for all of the Nexrad and Doppler radars and ground instrumentation that the taxpayers have already paid for?

This is a bad bill motivated by greed, period. As a student pilot, it directly affects me and all pilots.

As a firefighter, it affects all of us. Can your FD afford a line item in the budget for weather forecasting to do storm preparations?

[DennisTheMenace]

Originally posted by CaptainGonzo
The "private weather companies" are using the information gathered by the NOAA and NWS to make their forecasts! All they do is analyze the data they get from the NOAA and NWS, put their take on it and then sell advertsing time on their cable network or charge the radio and TV stations for their "information services", who in turn charge for the advertising time for their respective stations based on their Arbitron and Neilsen ratings.

Why not ask the stockholders of the Weather Channel, Accuweather and the like if they are willing to plunk down the billions of dollars to pay for the costs of launching the satellites and to pay for all of the Nexrad and Doppler radars and ground instrumentation that the taxpayers have already paid for?

This is a bad bill motivated by greed, period. As a student pilot, it directly affects me and all pilots.

As a firefighter, it affects all of us. Can your FD afford a line item in the budget for weather forecasting to do storm preparations? How is this bill motivated by greed? You think that the Senator from PA will be profiting from this? How? It is a bill based in an economic/political philosophy.

The private weather services use the NOAA and NWS data to a degree, but they have their own assets as well. Just as your local news stations have their own weather radar and contract with weather satellites to supplement the data provided by the government.

This might not turn out to be the right idea to do. And it is really not a good bill as written, so it will never get out of any committee as written, but it is an idea worth debateing and exploreing.

[GeorgeWendtCFI]

Random Thoughts

1. "Stand by for the McDonald's Severe Weather Alert"

2. Coca-Cola logo on the side of the Weather Satelite

3. Seriously, aside from aviation, this will have a drastic effect on marine travel as well.

4. If you look at a typical legislative session, there are a boatload of bills introduced, but only a handful passed.

5. Legislators get notoriety and publicity by introducing bills

6. I agree with nm, no chance of passage.

7. Santorumm is an idiot. Somebody from his home state tell me one redeeming quality he possesses.

[CaptainGonzo]

Originally posted by DennisTheMenace
How is this bill motivated by greed? You think that the Senator from PA will be profiting from this? How? It is a bill based in an economic/political philosophy.

By barring any agency from using the services of the NOAA and NES, which, may I remind you we pay for through our taxes, it insures that the private weather people will rape, I mean reap a fortune from the public. Santorum will probably get healthy campaign donations from the executives of the private weather companies, as well as corporate donations

The private weather services use the NOAA and NWS data to a degree, but they have their own assets as well. Just as your local news stations have their own weather radar and contract with weather satellites to supplement the data provided by the government.

Only major market tv stations can afford to have their own doppler radar. Boston is a major market (5th in size) and each network affilaited station has their own dopplers and helos for weather, traffic, etc. There are times where they still don't get it right, despite all of the technology... weather forecasting in New England, where 3 major weather systems converge is the "World Series" of forcasting.

Smaller markets rely on private weather forecasters and the NWS for their data, provided they even have a NWS certifed meteorologist on their news staff. Many small markets don't and have a reporter just "rip and read" based on NWS and privately acquired data.

This might not turn out to be the right idea to do. And it is really not a good bill as written, so it will never get out of any committee as written, but it is an idea worth debateing and exploreing.

Just like privatizing the fire service, eh? :rolleyes:

[ThNozzleman]

Only major market tv stations can afford to have their own doppler radar.
And most of them suck compared to NWS.
How is this bill motivated by greed? You think that the Senator from PA will be profiting from this? How? It is a bill based in an economic/political philosophy.
It is both. As I already posted, the good senator has already received thousands of dollars from Accuweather. It only stands to reason that when the windfall created for the private weather corporations by this stupid bill happens, he will receive more. It has to be a scheme, because that the only thing that makes sense. We paid for this system and the valuable info it provides with our tax dollars. It belongs to US...not some greedy CEO, looking to make a buck.

[DennisTheMenace]

Originally posted by ThNozzleman

And most of them suck compared to NWS.

It is both. As I already posted, the good senator has already received thousands of dollars from Accuweather. It only stands to reason that when the windfall created for the private weather corporations by this stupid bill happens, he will receive more. It has to be a scheme, because that the only thing that makes sense. We paid for this system and the valuable info it provides with our tax dollars. It belongs to US...not some greedy CEO, looking to make a buck. He can't receive more money then the law allows, and he has likely hit the limit with them. If these companies have PAC's, which is the only way to make a corporate contribution, then they are limited to $2,100 a piece. With the money pot on this issue limited to essentually Accuweather and the Weather Channel, saying that he is doing it for any motivation of personal greed is just ignoring the campaighn finance laws. you really think that $10K is going to allow you to "buy" a Senator in a state where he will have to pay $10-20 million a campaign? It is no scheme or conspiracy, it is just an economic/political philosophy that things that can be done by the private sector in a competative atmosphire should be moved out of the governments realm, with the idea that it will create economic savings, and more importantly spur inovation.

The only reason why the NWS appears any better then your local commercial TV/Radio Weatherman, is that the NWS gives you instant up to the minute what's going on, rather then any long time forcast like you would like from your weather man. The NWS is no better(or worse) then the TV/Radio weather guy/girl at multi-day forecasts. Private innovation might get better long term predictions.

[ThNozzleman]

Private innovation might get better long term predictions.
Nope. All it will bring is the commercialized senationalized nonsense the rest of our news suffers from, today.

[DennisTheMenace]

Originally posted by ThNozzleman

Nope. All it will bring is the commercialized senationalized nonsense the rest of our news suffers from, today. How would that be different? If they need to compete to supply the local stations their predictions, they will have to show that they are more accurate then the other, that will force them to innovate. Right now the NWS is GREAT at telling me what is going on right now, yesterday, and maybe what will happen 2-3 hours from now. But what will happen tomorrow or the next day they are still about as good as anyone else. Others will most likely get better if they have the economic incentive.

[Resq14]

Originally posted by DennisTheMenace
The only reason why the NWS appears any better then your local commercial TV/Radio Weatherman, is that the NWS gives you instant up to the minute what's going on, rather then any long time forcast like you would like from your weather man. The NWS is no better(or worse) then the TV/Radio weather guy/girl at multi-day forecasts. Private innovation might get better long term predictions.

They all use NWS data, and the same models... don't kid yourself. The local knowledge of NWS forecasters is important to successful forecasting. The models can only do so much.

It would be a very bad move to limit the free-flow of information regarding weather. Private innovation can continue and coexist just fine... and if there is any truth to this, their customers will continue to pay for the innovation.

Show me the innovation first, though, and don't cut off access to the sharing of government information.

Oh yeah, and I highly doubt that this senator is just pushing this out of his concern for innovation... please.

[Resq14]

"If someone claims that our core mission is just warning the public of hazardous conditions, that's really impossible unless we forecast the weather all the time," Johnson said. "You don't just plug in your clock when you want to know what time it is."
Ed Johnson, the weather service's director of strategic planning and policy

[DennisTheMenace]

Originally posted by Resq14

Oh yeah, and I highly doubt that this senator is just pushing this out of his concern for innovation... please. Then you have not studied his economic political philosophy.

[Resq14]

And E229lt has a bridge in the big city that he might be willing to part with for el cheapo, too...
http://www.tvnewslies.org/assets/images/bb1.jpg

[Resq14]

wasted space, see subsequent post by nmfire if you care to read the pointless information that was originally here

[bobsnyder]

Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI
7. Santorumm is an idiot. Somebody from his home state tell me one redeeming quality he possesses.

Speaking as a lifelong citizen of Pennsylvania, I will say without hesitation that Rick Santorum is an embarrassment to Pennsylvania. His presence in the Senate is made possible entirely by the special interests that own him, party hacks who can't bring themselves to oppose a Republican candidate regardless of how asinine or outlandish he becomes, and an array of crazed religious fundamentalists, mostly of the 1000-yard cult stare variety. If it can be said that there are politicians in this country who would like to scrap the Constitution and establish a totalitarian theocracy built in their own image, then he is one of them. He's one politician I would walk 50 miles on two broken legs to vote against.

If you want to know everything you need to about Santorum and the election that put him in the Senate, rent the old Tim Robbins movie "Bob Roberts." Rick Santorum is Bob Roberts, minus the fake paralysis. The really interesting part is that Robbins made the movie over a year before the election, but predicted it almost perfectly. Whatever you think about Robbins' politics, appreciate this little flash of brilliance for what it was at the time...it was a phophecy, and it came true.

[nmfire]

Originally posted by Resq14


AccuWeather's operation is housed in its Global Headquarters, a 52,000 square foot facility built on 6.5 acres of land near State College, PA.
http://sirocco.accuweather.com/wx/company/images/building.jpg
AccuWeather Mission
To save lives, protect property, and help people to prosper, while expanding AccuWeather as a healthy and profitable business.

AccuWeather Vision
To be the world's best and most-used source of weather information.

AccuWeather Strategy
To create and grow a portfolio of profitable lines of weather and selected other businesses using techniques proven throughout our decades of success:
Recognize customer needs, and exceed their expectations.
Study our own product set and the marketplace and deliver solutions that improve on the best.
Maintain flexibility in product features and pricing to provide maximum value to customers.
Develop customer solutions and relationships that deliver recurring revenue and profit.
Enhance AccuWeather's brand strengths.
Seek significant new opportunities in accessible markets.
Leverage alliances and acquisitions to gain new customers, markets and technology.
Work with the Commercial Weather Industry and government to achieve our mission.
Employ our proprietary intellectual property to maximum advantage.
Be innovative and diligent in maximizing our efficiency and cost-effectiveness.
Follow established processes and strategies while working in an orderly way to improve them.

AccuWeather Values
To achieve AccuWeather's mission, we require great people with great values. AccuWeather seeks to recruit, develop and retain people who are intelligent, innovative, and entrepreneurial, who take pride in their work, and who passionately share AccuWeather's values:
Respect, honesty and trust
Commitment and responsibility
Collaboration and communication
Quality and accuracy
Service to internal and external customers
Efficiency, productivity and achievement

Congradulations. You can copy & paste from their PR website. What's your point?

[Resq14]

Congradulations [sic]. You can copy & paste from their PR website. What's your point?

Not only can I copy and paste, I can spell words correctly in the rare event I wish to share a thought of my own.

The point was to reiterate that Accuweather is a business in Pennsylvania, with typical business goals and aspirations. I figured the subject of "just to reiterate" might've given it away... SHEESH!

'Congradulations.' You're the man.

[bobsnyder]

Originally posted by Resq14
I figured the subject of "just to reiterate" might've given it away.

Too many syllables, big guy. Too many syllables.

[DennisTheMenace]

Originally posted by Resq14


Not only can I copy and paste, I can spell words correctly in the rare event I wish to share a thought of my own.

The point was to reiterate that Accuweather is a business in Pennsylvania, with typical business goals and aspirations. I figured the subject of "just to reiterate" might've given it away... SHEESH!

'Congradulations.' You're the man. So an ELECTED representative is applying his well known political philosophy in a way that also benefits his state, those that he represents. There is nothing greedy or hypocritical about that. It is his job to do that. Just as it is your Congressional representatives’ job to do the same for you, your state and district.

Why shouldn't we have debates over issues like this? It would be un-American to just accept that the way that things are currently done is the way that they should remain.

[coldfront]

Why shouldn't we have debates over issues like this? It would be un-American to just accept that the way that things are currently done is the way that they should remain.


Dennis

If they debate this issue I hope the vote is NO!

What a bunch of BS.The NWS travels annually to all counties in Eastern Kentucky and holds free weather related training.Weather spotter courses,Low water crossing awareness and winter storm survival.
You can bet you bottom dollar.Those private companies will be charging for any training.The fire service ,rescue and EMS depend on the NWS for more than just weather information.The buck stops with the NWS.They are the eyes and ears of companies like Accuweather.

Some debates waste the taxpayers time.
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[bobsnyder]

Critics Question Accuweather Donation To Santorum

POSTED: 6:46 am EDT May 27, 2005

WASHINGTON -- Republican Sen. Rick Santorum has introduced a bill that critics say would restrict the National Weather Service. It would prevent the weather service from competing for certain services offered by the private sector.

Two days before that, Santorum's political action committee received a two-thousand dollar political donation -- from Joel Myers, the chief executive of AccuWeather Inc., a leading provider of weather data. The disclosure has renewed criticism of the measure.

Santorum says the bill would allow the weather service to better focus on its core mission of getting threatening weather info out in a ``timely and speedy basis.''

Opponents say the bill would endanger the public by preventing the dissemination of certain weather data. They say it would also force taxpayers to pay for the data twice.

AccuWeather, which is based in State College, Pa., provides weather data to a variety of outlets, including media organizations such as The Associated Press.

Santorum says the $2,000 contribution from Myers came during a fundraiser in State College that happened to be two days before Santorum's bill was filed.

The donation was disclosed in the April filing to the FEC by Santorum's PAC, America's Foundation.

Copyright 2005 by The Associated Press.

[ameryfd]

Originally posted by CaptainGonzo
The "private weather companies" are using the information gathered by the NOAA and NWS to make their forecasts! All they do is analyze the data they get from the NOAA and NWS, put their take on it and then sell advertsing time on their cable network or charge the radio and TV stations for their "information services", who in turn charge for the advertising time for their respective stations based on their Arbitron and Neilsen ratings.

Why not ask the stockholders of the Weather Channel, Accuweather and the like if they are willing to plunk down the billions of dollars to pay for the costs of launching the satellites and to pay for all of the Nexrad and Doppler radars and ground instrumentation that the taxpayers have already paid for?

This is a bad bill motivated by greed, period. As a student pilot, it directly affects me and all pilots.

As a firefighter, it affects all of us. Can your FD afford a line item in the budget for weather forecasting to do storm preparations?

Gonz....I gotta disagree with you on this one. As a person who employs a team of meteorologists in my paying vocation, I can assure you that the mets don't just take noaa and nws info and rehash it. Yes, they do use NWS info because in the end it's the government that owns the satellites with radar ect...but in most cases that's where it stops. While the feds basically own the satellites in the sky, the "ground instrumentation" for other services such as accuweather is bought and paid for by private companies. (trust me, look at my P&L's some month). While I am a believer that if something is being broadcast via public airwaves, then everyone should have the right to hear it, I also believe it's a sticky-wicket when the government provides services that the private sector can and does provide as well or better than the govt.

You are right when you say that broadcast owners take the information and sell advertising based on ratings....what's wrong with that? It's how I make my living. Don't you think that the folks at Home Depot would cry foul if the govt opened up a "free hardware store payed for by taxpayor funds? (I know I'm exagerating there, but it makes my point).

Regarding the person who said "why should I pay for it twice?". Last I checked your local TV and Radio stations were free:rolleyes:

I don't wanna make a big issue here, but this one hits close to home. I'm sure that there can be some sort of balance struck here, but the govt. giving away something that I try and sell (to my advertisers) is a bit touchy with me.:cool:

One more thing...this debate isn't about the NWS. Anybody should agree that NWS is needed for the military, aviation, local emergency govt.....BUT the argument is with NOAA weather radio....In my business known as THE PBS OF WEATHER.

[ElChup175]

I don't want to russle any feathers but the NWS broadcast system, needs to say. I understand that people make money off of radio and tv broadcasts, thats understandable...but let me ask you, name for me 3 radio and or 3 tv stations (minus the weather channel of course) in which I can tune in and only have to wait a few moments to get a forcast? Also when I used to be big into backpacking, where did our weather forcast come from, the weather radio. I am getting a voiced forcast for free, I am not paying for animations, radar layouts, agricultural forcasts, and the like. All I want is a simple weather forcast, nothing more, nothing less...plus commercials bug the heck out of me. I do understand that people need to make a living, I have nothing against that, but I don't want my weather radio to be spilling over commercials. Now I can understand if some of the 'new features' the NWS have put out in the past few years might cause some issues...but the private sector has had to deal with the NWS forcast system for most if not all of its existance. Why take away something thats been around for years?

[CaptainGonzo]

From Billy Goldfeder's site www.firefighterclosecalls.com

"FIRE CONDITIONS FORECASTER" EARNS PRESTIGIOUS NOAA AWARD!
Saturday, January 1, 2005
"If those meteorologists hadnt been on the ball, and if Trina hadnt received that call and made an immediate radio transmission, none of us would be here today. None of us could have escaped the awesome power of that fire."

Charles M. Baker, a lead forecaster at the NOAA National Weather Service forecast office in Riverton, Wyo., has been selected as a 2003 recipient of the U.S. Department of Commerce Gold Medal for actions during the Daley Wildfire Complex in June 2002. Scheduled for presentation at a Sept. 18th awards ceremony in Washington, D.C., the Gold Medal is the most distinguished employee award presented annually by the Commerce Department. NOAA is part of the Department of Commerce.

Baker teamed with fellow forecasters Andrew J. Bailey and Eric Helgeson at the Rapid City, S.D., forecast office in providing forecast information that directly saved the lives of some 40 firefighters the evening of June 29, 2002.

Diligently watching developments of wild fires and weather conditions in an area of northeast Wyoming covered by the two NOAA Weather Service offices, Baker and the Rapid City forecasters simultaneously realized the perils posed by an approaching cold front. The weather forecasters realized thunderstorms along the cold front had produced an outflow boundary that extended well ahead of the front. Surface observations from the area indicated the front would arrive earlier and with much stronger winds than previously anticipated, with a drastic shift in wind direction.

Baker and the Rapid City crew contacted dispatcher Trina Reid at the Casper Dispatch Center with the new information, providing her with crucial information about the earlier arrival and higher winds and wind shift accompanying the cold front. Reid immediately radioed incident commanders in the area to send their firefighting crews to safety zones because a dramatic change in wind speed and direction would occur within 10 minutes. All the incident commanders heeded the warning, disengaged firefighting crews and moved them to safety zones.

Within minutes of 40 firefighters reaching the safety zones, winds increased from 20 mph to 70 mph and switched direction 180 degrees. According to U.S. Forest Service reports, flames ran through three miles of tinder-dry ponderosa pine, juniper, sagebrush and grass in less than two hours.

Campbell County Fire Department Incident Commander Rich Hauber said, If those meteorologists hadnt been on the ball, and if Trina hadnt received that call and made an immediate radio transmission, none of us would be here today. None of us could have escaped the awesome power of that fire.

Charles, Eric and Andy exhibited great situational awareness in a vital National Weather Service program, Joe Sullivan, meteorologist in charge of the Riverton forecast office said. Their experience and attention to detail was directly responsible for saving 40 lives. You cant do better than that.

NOAAs National Weather Service is the primary source of weather data, forecasts and warnings for the United States and its territories. The National Weather Service operates the most advanced weather and flood warning and forecast system in the world, helping to protect lives and property and enhance the national economy.


FFCC.COM NOTES: Averting a CLOSE CALL involves EVERYONE in EVERY position, role or sector. In this case, the outstanding work of WEATHER FORECASTERS and them getting their info to COMMAND, made a MAJOR difference! Heroism takes on many forms!

[coldfront]

I also believe it's a sticky-wicket when the government provides services that the private sector can and does provide as well or better than the govt.

You are right when you say that broadcast owners take the information and sell advertising based on ratings....what's wrong with that? It's how I make my living. Don't you think that the folks at Home Depot would cry foul if the govt opened up a "free hardware store payed for by taxpayor funds? (I know I'm exagerating there, but it makes my point).

Hey ameryfd

Exagerating is a under statement.

If I dont get the word about a sale on plywood at home depot my life will not be endangered.

Get real!Limiting the NWS so some fat cat can get rich is BS.

[DennisTheMenace]

coldfront,
The legislation specifically states that the whole purpose of the weather service should be to only warn you of dangerous weather conditions. Should it really be there for you to get a free forecast to see if your trip to the beach will be cloudy or a little rainy? Or should they spend the resources that they currently use to get that usually imprecise info to you on improving storm predictions? If you want to use your line of reasoning for opposition to the bill, then you really need to look again, it is attempting to do exactly what you want, concentrate and improve on storm prediction and warning, while leaving regular forecasts to the commercial sector.

[coldfront]

No **** sherlock most average working americans only tune in during severe weather.Do you tune in 24 /7.If you need weather (NOW) the NWS is the best game in town for fire weather and severe storm updates.Who will decide the limits of the NWS boardcast.On **** I just give the public to much weather information!It just a little rainy and windy.Sounds like BS to me!


Plus

I hate the BEACH.

[DennisTheMenace]

Originally posted by coldfront
No **** sherlock most average working americans only tune in during severe weather.Do you tune in 24 /7.If you need weather NOW the NWS is the best game in town for fire weather and severe storm updates.Who will decide the limits of the NWS boardcast.On **** I just give the public to much weather information!It just a little rainy and windy.Sounds like BS to me!


Plus

I hate the BEACH. So what is your beef? The legislation insures that severe weather information remains the one true function of the NWS.


What heck type of an American hates the beach?!?!?!?!?!?!

[coldfront]

The Beef!!!!!!!!!

The phrase limiting the NWS.

Who is going to police the forcasts for a regular forecast vs severe.

If something not broke don't fix it.The NWS is working for all us.

The beach is great however,the sun screws with my hick tan line from wearing my sexy white t-shirt,also the ocean water sucks for making moonshine and the sand won't grow a nary thing.

The National Weather Service should not be limiting period.

If there is a severe weather warning should the NWS withhold that information from private outlets.

NOT! I have no beef about the NWS being the primary severe weather agency.

Lets not limit the forcasting to warning only.Get real!Pickle

[NJFFSA16]

By KIMBERLY HEFLING
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Two days before Sen. Rick Santorum introduced
a bill that critics say would restrict the National Weather
Service, his political action committee received a $2,000 donation
from the chief executive of AccuWeather Inc., a leading provider of
weather data.
The disclosure has renewed criticism of the measure, which
Santorum, R-Pa., maintains would allow the weather service to
better focus on its core mission of getting threatening weather
info out in a "timely and speedy basis."
Opponents say the bill would endanger the public by preventing
the dissemination of certain weather data, and force taxpayers to
pay for the data twice. The bill would prevent the weather service
from competing for certain services offered by the private sector.
AccuWeather, based in State College, Pa., provides weather data
to a variety of outlets, including media organizations such as The
Associated Press.
"I think the timing of it is what makes it so suspect," said
Melanie Sloan, executive director of the Citizens for
Responsibility and Ethics in Government, a Democratic-leaning
watchdog group. "It's like here's the money and you're going to do
what I want."
Santorum said the $2,000 contribution, received from AccuWeather
CEO Joel Myers on April 12, came during a fundraiser in State
College that happened to be two days before the bill was filed. He
said he has worked on the issue for three years.
The donation was disclosed in the April filing to the FEC by
Santorum's PAC, America's Foundation.
"I don't think there's any coincidence between the two,"
Santorum said. "It's just that I happened to have a fundraiser in
the town he was in."
Combined, Joel Myers and his brother, Barry Myers, AccuWeather's
executive vice president, have donated more than $11,000 to
Santorum and the Republican Party since 2003, according to FEC
filings compiled by PoliticalMoneyLine, a campaign finance tracking
group.
Barry Myers said it was ridiculous to think there was a
correlation between the "modest" donations and the filing of the
bill.
Santorum said his campaign could likely raise and spend $25
million for the 2006 election.
"We have no connection to how bills are filed, or how they are
drafted or dropped at any given point in time," Myers said.
Dan McLaughlin, press secretary for Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson
of Florida, which is home to the weather service's National
Hurricane Center, said the April 12 donation is suspect. Nelson has
written to President Bush in opposition to the bill.
"It certainly raises questions about motivation as to why
someone would push a policy that is so obviously crummy,"
McLaughlin said.
Under the proposed legislation, the weather service would be
allowed to offer particular types of services only if the private
sector does not offer them, a provision similar to rules the agency
was guided by for 14 years until last year.
When the rule changed, the weather service and National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration expanded into areas already served
by the commercial weather industry, according to Santorum's office.
In his letter, Nelson said Santorum's bill would bar weather
service forecasters from giving one-on-one interviews to media. He
also said it could inhibit pilots' access to data the weather
service provides to the Federal Aviation Administration online.
When four hurricanes struck Florida last year, the weather service
Web site received 9 billion hits, Nelson said.
He urged Bush to "publicly oppose this legislative attempt to
push the weather service back to a pre-Internet era and restrict
the public's right to access government information."
Trent Duffy, deputy White House spokesman, said the
administration typically does not comment on legislation that has
not reached the floor of the House or Senate. The bill has been
referred to the Senate Commerce Committee, but no hearing has been
scheduled.
Santorum said critics have misinterpreted the bill's purpose. He
said severe weather information would still be released, and it
would restore the old rules that were changed last year.
"The National Weather Service is not focused on its core
mission of protecting the nation's lives and property," Myers
said. "There have been numerous examples in the last year,
situations where they have not devoted the resources to that."
---
On the Net:
AccuWeather: http://wwwa.accuweather.com
Sen. Rick Santorum: http://santorum.senate.gov/public/
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Government:
http://www.citizensforethics.org/
National Weather Service: http://www.nws.noaa.gov/

(Copyright 2005 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

[fao110]

if the private weather broadcasters want to limit the info put out by noaa, let them take over the whole deal.

after they write the check to pay for all the satilites and other equipment that is being used now and what has been used in the past. pony up the money and they can have it all. but the level of service cannot drop a single percenatage point.

plus they will be held accountable for any deaths or injuries.
lets put the dollars/profits vs life out front for the world to see.

if they want the cream they have to feed the cow.

[NJFFSA16]

National Weather Service Mission Statement


" The National Weather Service (NWS) provides weather, hydrologic, and climate forecasts and warnings for the United States, its territories, adjacent waters and ocean areas, for the protection of life and property and the enhancement of the national economy. NWS data and products form a national information database and infrastructure which can be used by other governmental agencies, the private sector, the public, and the global community. "


Six NWS Guiding Principles for Assessing Public/Private Sector Roles
From the NWS’ perspective, the government has a particular obligation always to act in a fair and evenhanded manner to all of its constituencies. Our relationship with the private sector is an important one. NWS can’t meet America’s needs without the private sector and the private sector can’t meet America’s needs without us. As the value of information increases, the need to clearly define government’s role becomes more urgent. In order to maximize fairness and openness, the NWS Strategic Planning and Policy Office developed the six principles outlined below in 2001. In the following years, these principles have been embodied in NOAA and NWS policies which now take precedence over these informal principles. However, the six principles can still be helpful in interpreting these policies or addressing issues not specifically addressed in formal policy:


1. Describe the Mission Connection
In sustaining a particular product or service or developing a new product/service, NWS should describe the connection of that product or service to its mission. It is an NWS goal to be able to provide clear documentation that describes this mission connection in terms of answers to basic What, Why, How, Who, When, Where questions. Having a description such as this will ensure that the product concept is well thought out and will ultimately help determine if a particular new product is appropriate for NWS to provide to its customers.

2. Life and Property First
Public protection is a fundamental government function and “protection of life and property” is key to the NWS mission. We will put life and property protection first in the allocation of resources and the development and dissemination of NWS products and services. Any time lives are at stake in the immediate time frame, NWS will send out the information first by any effective means, leaving for later any concerns about whether a product or service is appropriate.

3. Be Predictable
Be predictable by providing all users, including those in the private sector, adequate notice and opportunity for input into decisions regarding the development and dissemination of products and services. For example, every experimental product should go through a public comment period before being made operational. This serves to maximize the overall utility of the product, provides an opportunity to engage both critics and supporters, and creates a NO SURPRISE Weather Service.

4. The Taxpayers Own the Data
Remember always that the taxpayers own the data, and that open and unrestricted dissemination of publicly funded information is good policy and is the law. The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and the Electronic Freedom of Information Act Amendments of 1996 support the proposition that taxpayer-funded government information is a national resource, and economic and other benefits to society are maximized when this information is made available in a timely and equitable manner to all.

5. Equity, Equity, Equity
Always strive for equity in dealings between various classes of the user community, and do not show favoritism to particular classes of partners, particularly those in the academic and commercial sectors. Do not provide a service to a segment of the user community that cannot be provided to all users. For example, providing a marine forecast product tailored to the needs of a particular shipping company would be inappropriate.

6. Maintain and Explain the Routine
When faced with a special request for services, make sure the customer fully understands the products which NWS “routinely” (event and clock-driven) provides. These products, when understood, may fully meet the customer’s needs. Refer requests for specifically tailored products/services to the private sector. A case example of this principle is seen in the provision of weather services supporting the Winter 2002 Olympics. Close cooperation between NWS and private sector assured consistent tailored and timely weather information was available to meet public safety and Olympic Committee needs. A clear boundary existed between planned public and private sector support–-specific forecasts for venues were provided by the private sector, while routine services were provided by NWS (with special attention to transportation infrastructure and public safety concerns).