Marty, one thing about your summary. It isn’t necessary for there to be a companion bill in the opposite chamber in order for legislation to move forward. Once a bill is adopted in one chamber it is referred to the other chamber for consideration.

Dave

From: arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of Woll, Marty, N6VI
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 1:55 PM
To: Imlay, Chris, W3KD; Frenaye, Tom, K1KI
Cc: arrl-odv
Subject: [arrl-odv:23607] Re: Status Memo re H.R. 4969 -- CONFIDENTIAL, NOT FOR DISCLOSURE

Now that our effort on HR4969 has run its course, I think it’s important that we inform the membership as to the outcome and do so on a timely basis.  To whomever it falls to complete that task, I offer the following as an outline of what we should tell them:

1) We know that the only way the FCC would act positively on our request would be at the direction of Congress.  (We’re not besmirching anyone here; it’s the truth, and I believe the FCC has said as much.)

2) Our strategy was to muster sufficient support among House members to demonstrate to the FCC that what we ask is, in fact, the intent of Congress, and we believe that amassing over 60 co-sponsors in a relatively short time frame amply demonstrates that intent.  Unfortunately, that was not enough to move the FCC to action.  (There is no other logical explanation we can offer; clearly we did not intend for a bill to be signed into law, as there was no corresponding Senate bill.  Of course, we need not and should not mention the hoped-for influence of Rep. Walden’s involvement on the outcome.)

3) We now have a full two-year Congress before us to take the more arduous route of getting a bill passed by both houses and signed into law, in which case the FCC will have no choice but to act.  The grass-roots work done this year is not wasted; it will allow our upcoming effort to ramp up that much more quickly.

I urge whoever crafts our member advisory to do so as soon as possible. Perhaps that effort is already underway, which would be good to know.  I would also ask that the Board and vice-directors have a chance to see and comment on that communication before it is finalized.

73,

Marty N6VI

From: arrl-odv [mailto:arrl-odv-bounces@reflector.arrl.org] On Behalf Of Christopher Imlay
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 6:48 AM
To: Tom Frenaye
Cc: arrl-odv
Subject: [arrl-odv:23603] Re: Status Memo re H.R. 4969 -- CONFIDENTIAL, NOT FOR DISCLOSURE

Tom, any failure to keep the Board more closely apprised of the status (and the details) of this really falls to me, since I have been on the front line here with the Keelen folks on a daily basis. I am sorry if you or other Board members felt out of the loop; it was certainly not my intention to hold anything back at all. 

But honestly, until Monday, I thought that we had a chance, with Redl and Walden firmly in our corner, to have the heavy hand of Walden push former staffer Roger Sherman (who we had been told was by far the most sensitive FCC staff person to the wishes of Walden's subcommittee) into doing the right thing, despite the subversive efforts of Cross and Stone, whose responses were predictable. It didn't happen, but Redl thought it would as well. 

And also, frankly, there was very little to tell until Monday. I thought the Board was pretty clear about what the strategy was. That strategy has never changed in the year since we started negotiating with Redl. Some of the tactics did (and those changes were reported to the EC), but the strategy didn't. I am disappointed that Redl didn't push this more actively, and sooner, with Sherman. But Sherman offered Redl good and sufficient justification for putting other issues ahead of this and we couldn't very well puppeteer Redl at all. We don't drive his bus and we never will. But he is supportive and so is Walden and we are closer to the goal than we have ever been before. I think we should just stay the course.

73, Chris W3KD