Palm Beach Post Slams Santorum Bill

[donsutherland1]

The full editorial can be found at: http://www.palmbeachpost.com/opinion/co ... _0624.html

Excerpts:

The National Weather Service runs on public money, but Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., still wants to keep the public from getting much of the information the service provides...

He wants the weather service to surrender much of its data only to private industry, not the public. To get seven-day forecasts, temperature predictions and rain probabilities, taxpayers would have to pay a second time, to companies such as AccuWeather...

If Sen. Santorum's idea became law, the government would be propping up private enterprise with public assets. That's hardly new. This time, though, it could compromise public safety in the process. Congress should let this bad idea twist in the wind.

Meanwhile, CWSA has still failed to remove its unsubstantiated charge that the NWS has sometimes "refused" to provide data. Hopefully, the public will not be swayed by such harsh but unsubstantiated charges for which CWSA refuses to provide credible and specific supporting evidence.

What does CWSA have to hide?

Clearly, the pattern of omissions--its describing the legislation without disclosing a material provision that would restrict data, its claim that NWS is not required to provide data to the public when it fact it is mandated to do so per NOAA policy that affirms existing law, and its failure to offer credible and specific documentation to back its charges--is troubling, to say the least.

[patsmsg]

I find the whole idea of paying for NWS weather information ludicrous. It's OUR service . We finance the National Weather Service. It's amazing anyone could stomach the idea of paying for information we OWN.

[donsutherland1]

Patsmsg,

Your point is on the mark. It is unreasonable to ask that taxpayers underwrite the data acqusition costs of the large commercial sector and then be asked to pay these large concerns for the data that they financed through their tax revenue.

[tomboudreau]

My wife made a good point to me on this bill. If this bill goes through, we will be paying for the information THREE times. Yes, that's right. Three times. How you might ask? Well, the first time would be the taxes. The second time would be through either your ISP bill or you cable bill or you satellite TV bill, and then the third time would be through a supplier like AccuWeather. Just thought I would bring that up.