Greetings,
Since my last report
to you just after our March 30 Washington visit, things have been moving waaaay
fast and almost at warp speed. This past weekend I attended the
International DX Convention in Visalia, CA and am currently leaving the NAB
conference in Las Vegas (I'm on the plane as I write this) on my way to speak at
the opening luncheon of the Southeast VHF Society Conference tomorrow, then
on to Newington for the A&F Committee meeting on Saturday. Individual
reports on these trips will be forthcoming.
What I want to
report to you now is some outstanding work on the part of Sumner, Chwat
& Co.and Imlay.
This morning, Dave
sent you an email about the House Telecom Bill, I would like to give you a more
detailed report of the work that went into the result we
achieved.
On each of my trips
to Washington since January, I have reported to you that we had a detailed
plan we were working, objectives for each meeting we arranged and attended
had been met, but I had nothing to "bring home" to you yet. I am ecstatic to
tell you I can no longer say that, we now have something for
you.
Thanks not to me,
but to the extremely diligent and focused effort in working our plan by Sumner,
Chwat & Co., and Imlay we have been successful in getting H.Res.230 language
into the Telecom Bill in Committee.
Now, this is only
one victory and we have by no means won a war here, but this is an extremely
significant victory for amateur radio. I want to personally thank each of you
for your support of this effort, and for your patience while we worked our
plan.
Now, some historical
details for you.
On March 31 at the conclusion of our last D.C. visit reported
to you in ODV 13981, Chwat reported that that the House Telecom Subcommittee had
scheduled opening remarks on a telecom bill for 5pm Tuesday, April
4th, and consideration of the Bill all day on Wednesday, April
5th. Chwat saw an opportunity for us to possibly get H.Res.230
language into the bill. Dave and I discussed the matter and told Chwat to
GO. Our position was based on the fact that if we were not successful it would
not kill H.Res.230, however if we were successful in getting the language into
the bill, then our purpose with H.Res.230 would be accomplished. Further, if we
were able to get language into the bill and it somehow did not survive a
full Congressional vote, we still had H.Res.230 active. Frankly, a no-lose
scenario.
Chris and
Eric scheduled a critical meeting with Chairman Barton's staff
contact at which time they requested that portions of the H.Res.230 be
included in the Title II, Broadband section.
Eric arranged a very
important visit with one of the key Counsel's to Chairman Joe Barton(R-TX),House
Energy and Commerce Committee, on the BPL issue. Eric was accompanied by
Chris Imlay. This was during the Congressional Recess-in time for impacting
perhaps, the full Committee's consideration of the telecom
bill.
Chwat & Co. had received
over 20 letters via email and fax that had been sent to Congresswoman Eshoo's
(D-CA) office. Eric handed these over to her Chief of Staff during an
in-person meeting. Her Chief of Staff was very interested in a
Minority supported amendment with Mike Ross to Title II of the Telecom Bill
after receiving the letters from
her constituency.
By
April 7, Eric had personally met with 25 of our targeted 88 Representatives that had input to the Telecom
bill. In
Addition to the 88, Chwat & Co. had hand
delivered copies of all of the letters they had received to the
respective Congressional offices. Over 600 letters to 115 House
offices (28 of these offices being part of the 88 targeted) had been handed to the Representative, taken into
a meeting, or delivered to an office with a letter and a quick meeting with the
staffer responsible for telecom issues. (This is why it is extremely
important that Chwat & Co. receive copies of letters sent to
Representatives)
During sub-committee meetings, no affecting
amendments had taken place as of this date, but most of the
offices Chwat & Co. had met with were interested in supporting ARRL when amendments would be allowed in the Full
Committee. We then decided to focus our effort in this direction, but
first awaiting the meeting with Chairman Barton's (R-TX) Committee
office that would be forthcoming in
the next two week period.
Chwat
and Heis followed this doggedly, literally around the clock. On April 12, Chwat
obtained a copy of the newly released Subcommittee markup and Congressional
staffers had advised us the full committee will begin opening statements when
they return from recess.
On April 13,
Eric reported specifically on a meeting with Congresswoman Barbara Cubin's
(R-WY) staff member, who had received many letters. He was very
knowledgeable of Amateur radio and had quite a few intelligent questions Eric
was able to answer. Cubin's staff person was interested in what
the Chairman says, but took little convincing on the BPL issue. We were
then able to discuss ARRL in general with more
detail.
On April 18,
Eric confirmed a meeting with
the full Energy and Commerce committee counsel dealing with telecom issues,
including BPL. This meeting was scheduled for 4pm on Thursday.
Imlay briefed Chwat and Heis for the meeting in addition to providing material
to be presented as well.
On April 20, Chwat & Co.
reported on a very informative
meeting with the top staff for the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
They noted that the committee Chairman would not be supportive of
including H Res 230 wording into his Manager's Amendment. However,
there were rumblings among committee staff, thanks to our Hill visits
and amateur letters, that the interference issue was of concern to
House members on the committee. We provided his staff an alternative
option to have a concerned committee member (most likely Rep. Mike Ross)
introduce a succinct amendment, that would satisfy ham's concerns, to the bill
during next markup of the bill the following week with bipartisan support
from other committee members. This would engage the Chairman in a dialogue on
the issue of a BPL study. Rep. Ross' office was contacted and
they were supportive of submitting a version of H Res 230 wording as
an amendment. We
then provided Ross' office with a draft of the necessary language to
accomplish the goals of
ARRL.
On April 21, we presented our draft
language/amendment to the full committee staff on House Energy and
Commerce. They did not have problems with the language if Rep. Ross were
to introduce it, however, they told us they could not promise
it would be considered 'germane' and remain unopposed. Chwat &
Co. continued to
network with member offices and committee staff to gain support for our
amendment before the next
markup.
On April 22, Eric advised us it was
quite imperative we get a letter from someone in Chairman Barton's
district. Imlay has a client, who just happens to be a radio amateur, who
was attending the NAB conference that lives in Barton's district. Chris had an
upcoming previously scheduled dinner with him and asked if he would prepare a
letter, which he gladly did. This was sent to Eric who was able to personally
deliver it into the hands of Barton's
staff.
On April 24, Eric spoke with Rep. Otter (R-ID) and
Rep. Myricks (R-NC) offices concerning BPL test sites that had been shut down
due to interference. Both offices were open to creating a dialogue
come Wednesday during the telecom bill markup. This was a very good
opportunity. Eric also reported to committee staff
that he had confirmed that Rep. Ross would be more inclined to vote for the
Telecom bill if his amendment was included. Committee staff retorted that they
had experienced some 'push back' from utility companies that this amendment was
"redundant, a delay tactic and a waste of money." We answered this comment
and others with Sumner's fluent help and believed we solved the
problem.
The next day, Eric was on the Hill all day, dropping off
our material with a memo attachment and speaking with staff if they had a
quick second. The
vote was scheduled for Wednesday, and we believed we had great
momentum
building.
On Tuesday, April 25, Rep. Ross office advised us
that he would offer the amendment on Wednesday. The Committee was
preparing for the markup Tuesday evening. Eric was on the hill until
very late that evening to address any questions that arose, and Dave, Chris
and I were on hot standby to immediately assist Eric with any questions or
facilitation as required, and especially to assist Rep Ross' office staff
in case they had questions in the night in preparation for this
markup.
On Wednesday morning, the
committee staff
contacted Rep. Ross' office to ask that the amendment be moved to Title V of the
bill. This section fit our amendment very nicely and we were agreeable.At
this same time, however, the Chairman
was continuing to hear the views of utility companies and we were getting great
pressure from the Chairman's staff. Through our efforts the past few days,
including the letter from Chris Imlay's friend and information from Sumner,
instead of killing our amendment, the committee staff agreed to allow the
amendment be read, then withdrawn for further consideration. This meant
we would have more time to educate committee staff, as we really got their
attention this past week with this amendment and the large amount of bipartisan
support it had (due to the letters and our meetings). The 'delay' would
permit us to network in the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation
Committee and work towards the Conference Committee for final passage of this
bill. This was the Chairman's Committee Staff suggestion and was beginning
to look like all we could
achieve.
We increased our
efforts dramatically on the
Senate side, as the Senate is still working on their version of the telecom
rewrite. There is also another bill by Sen. Liebermann (D-CT), S. 1725,
named the 'Assure Emergency and Interoperable Communications for First
Responders Act of 2005' that we are
lobbying to have our wording added to the bill when it goes to the
floor.
Last evening,
while I was attending the Amateur Radio Reception at the NAB Convention I
received a call from Sumner indicating that C-Span was airing the committee
hearing, and the Ross amendment had been offered, and instead of it being
withdrawn for further consideration (based on the agreement with Chairman
Barton's staff) Chairman Barton "accepted" the amendment and it was voted and
approved by the committee. We waited until this morning to advise you of this
just to make sure what was heard was correct! We can attribute the "change
of position" of Chairman Barton to a number of things, most important
is the letter Chris Imlay was able to solicit as well as the support that
the amendment had from a majority of the committee
members.
Lot's of hard work
still remains, however for a very brief moment we can take a breath and
smile.
Thank you for allowing
us to work our plan and again my personal sincere thanks and recognition for the
effort of Sumner, Chwat & Co. and
Imlay.
73 Joel
W5ZN
if
((parent != null) && (parent.ProcessCommand != null))
parent.ProcessCommand('bodyLoaded', true);