Touble in Paradise?!?

Thanks Mike for drawing our attention to that QRZ.com thread. I just added to the disgussion.
----------

Responding to N7YS posting, yes, as someone aware of how hearings work on Capitol Hill, I can say lawmakers would have placed no restrictions on the requested Congressional appearance by that executive who was representing the group in Newington. It made sense that his testimony about emergency communications should have included a reference to deed-based restrictions on HF antennas that could enhance such communciations.

Such a reference could have been presented to members of Congress orally during the hearing, or could have been submitted in writing under a status known as "for the record." Under such status, a more elaborate, detailed disertation would compile and explain related issues that time constraints may not have allowed during the hearing itself.

I suspect the lawyer for the League and other executives at this volunteer, non-profit group simply failed to fully prepare the witness for his appearance.

The failure to do so is a serious error, not only for the missed opportunity, but for the vulnerability it creates when League people approach lawmakers on the covenant matter in the future. As Lee pointed out in a subsequent posting, members of Congress may ask why, if it's so important, didn't it come up during this hearing. These lawmakers are generally not members of the League, yet they have the same questions we have out here.

Don't let a refusal to subscribe to the ARRL keep you from questioning their methods and policies. It's the only way those people will feel motivated to change and improve themselves.

As for alternatives to representation that the League, a group that also trades by the name National Association for Amateur Radio, we already are seeing people stepping around this moribund little association and making positive, effective pitches on their own. The series of petitions for rulemaking by the FCC are evidence of how under-served these constituents feel toward the ARRL.

Someday we may see lawmakers instead requesting testimony from actual ham radio participants who led an emergency response, such as Julio from the National Hurricane Center station, or Mike Pilgrim, or the head of the Salvation Army's SATERN ham radio net. These folks are unfettered by a defective system of protecting the institution of the ARRL at the expense of their claimed mission of representing the hobby and its individual operators.

People look foolish when they blindly defend the ARRL against all criticism. The group needs work, yet it should be allowed to continue representing ham radio in the meantime. Quit trying to distract from valid challenges and negative reaction to their actions, because it doesn't change the problem. Spend that energy instead pressuring Newington to do better. They deserve nothing less from you as a paid subscriber.