Santorum: Natl. Weather Service to give data only to COMPANIES

[Bluebear]

Note: ACCUWEATHER, Inc. is a donor to Santorum's PAC.


======

"It's an unseasonably fluky day when a member of Congress tries to punish a government entity for doing too good of a job. In this case, the National Weather Service apparently has been putting out too much useful information. Its graphics and Web site are more user-friendly and better-organized than ever. Its forecasts are clear and concise. And it's free.

For shame!

Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) argues that the National Weather Service has an unfair competitive advantage against commercial weather businesses. He makes no secret of the fact that more than a dozen of those private companies happen to be based in his state, where he happens to be running for re-election.

Santorum has a bill that would require the National Weather Service to give much of its data only to private companies like AccuWeather and WeatherBank, which repackage the taxpayer-funded information for radio and TV and the like to make their tidy profits. The bill appears to block the Weather Service from providing this information directly to the public. The public would still pay to collect this information. It just wouldn't have access to what it's paying for.

Come again?

The private companies dislike that the National Weather Service has joined the 21st Century. Its Web site allows users to click on a map to get all kinds of local weather information and forecasts--for boaters, airplane pilots, geeky weatherheads, analysts, historians and just plain Joes who wonder whether to slip an umbrella into the briefcase today. The site is at www.nws.noaa.gov....

http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/opinion/11927421.htm

[bullimiami]

1. wtf. its always corporate welfare with these assholes.

just shut it down then and let the private corps do all of the research and pay for it to if they want to make the profit.

it is so sickening that hundreds of billions of tax dollars are continually funneled to support corporations but any direct aid to the taxpayers themselves needs to be destroyed.

i
hate
republicans.

[ClintonTyree]

9. Not true.....

there is plenty of direct aid available to taxpayers. As long as they're RICH taxpayers, that is. The little guy, he's shit out of luck. Now he's going to have to pay to get a weather forecast. Myself? I bought a good barometer and keep an eye on the satellite images. I do my own forecasting! :)

[SammyWinstonJack]

22. Which is the point! n/t

"As long as they're RICH taxpayers, that is."

[demnan]

2. That should have no chance

What a fucking hair-brained idea. Aviation in this country depends on that site.

[Bluebear]

5. Then they need to purchase it.

And forget Maw listening to her NOAA weather radio to see if a twister is approaching. She has to pay Accuweather for what our tax dollar paid for already.

[jedr]

3. Ricky....you better be watching which way the wind is blowing

'cause it ain't in your favor!

[ovidsen]

4. You're joking, right?

No, you're not.

I've read that Santorum is doing poorly in his re-election efforts. And restricting weather information is supposed to improve his standing with his constituents? Maybe this poor GOPher just wants to lose.

[Cooley Hurd]

6. I know plenty of pilots who would NOT be happy...

...to call "Accuweather" and get charged for it instead of a flight service station (NWS/FAA facilities that provide weather and flight data). There are SOME things you just DON'T privatize, and aviation entities, such as ATC and FSS's, are at the top of my list!:thumbsdown:

[ClintonTyree]

7. Will the good people of Pennsylvania....

PLEASE send this carpet bagging son of a bitch back to Virginia where he belongs? I live in New York, but spend a lot of time in Pennsylvania. It's one of the most beautiful states in the nation. But to have this POS represent it is a travesty.
God forbid the NWS supplies people with timely and potentially life-saving information. Above all, we MUST let the private sector weather companies (that stuff money gleefully into Sphinctorum's re-election coffers) warn the people using the technology that, surprise, belongs to the NWS! Greed, that's the only thing Republicans understand. That is their one driving force, their raison, d'etre.

[Zech Marquis]

8. oh god no

don't send him back HERE to Virginia :argh:

[ClintonTyree]

10. Sorry....

but he has to go somewhere. ;) After they kick his ass out of Pennsylvania, the good people of Virginia can kick his ass out of there as well. I'd like to see the SOB living out of a suitcase, going from state to state until he can find someone that will put up with his skanky ass.

[demodonkey]

17. We are trying... we are trying!

If only we can get a VVPB and have a fair election in 2006 we MIGHT even have a chance to succeed!

[DebJ]

11. Imagine this: Accuweather board members also serve on other

companies Boards, for sure, as in a large percentage of American companies.
Up comes the situation where advanced immediate notice of a major storm will cost some other business some money; postponing notification will help them make money.

So, do they send out immediate warnings, or hold off?

[Bluebear]

12. Good catch and you know the answer. n/t

[Mandate My Ass]

19. weather derivatives

Koch industries is making billions from this but so far they have to pay for accurate forecasts. This is corporate welfare, plain and simple.

[Enraged_Ape]

13. We PAID for this information, Shitstainum

I can't believe a bill like this would ever go anywhere, but with the current group of crooks and crazies in the House and Senate, anything's possible.

[SalmonChantedEvening]

14. Does this dunce ever do anything that DOESN'T line his pockets?

Yes yes I know, silly question.

Though I disagree with Casey's pro-life stance, if he gets the nomination in 06 he gets my vote and my support. ANYONE but this clown. Send him back to whichever house he really lives in.


:mad:

[Bluebear]

15. P.S.

I love your user name!

[SalmonChantedEvening]

18. thanks!

All I can say is it's a result of too much time on IRC lol

[dbt]

16. See also Kay Hutchinson's Weather Modification Bill:

S.517, introduced on March 3, 2005. Read the text here. One wonders why these two bills appear at roughly the same time.

[CatholicEdHead]

20. This comes up almost every year

and is shot down.

The premice is extremely poor. If AccuWx et al want to compete, then they can build their own radars, launch their own weather balloons/radiosondes, run their own computer models, get their own surface reports, etc...

Not be a conduit between data that WE paid for and have to pay THEM to get.

[alfredo]

21. I just wrote NOAA. The text below

I see that Rick Santorum wants your service to only go to the private sector.

The way I see it, I paid for this service. If I can't use it, I want a refund. If he is successful in his crusade, please contact me for information on where you can send the refund. We can work out a payment schedule at that time.



http://www.nws.noaa.gov/feedback.php

[sbj405]

23. Why harass NOAA? Do you think they favor this bill?

Write your Congressman and tell him/her to oppose the legislation.

[alfredo]

25. Oh no, I just wanted to give them a good laugh. I got a reply

almost immediately. They sent me the text of the bill and encouraged me to fight it.

They seem to have understood the tongue in cheek tone.

Here's (in)sanitorum's bill S. 786, "National Weather Service Duties Act of 2005"

[sbj405]

24. It's been over 2 months and no co-sponsor

FYI. The Weather Channel has opposed the bill as well. There is a role and market for the private sector weather services. Accuweather just sucks at it and this is their sad attempt to get ahead.