Hi, Coy. Mike's concern is similar to that many hams had when the Morse code test was eliminated; i.e., that "lowering the standards" would result in an influx of poor operators who would show little regard for the rules or for developing their radio knowledge and skills. In my experience as an instructor, examiner and trainer, this fear is largely unfounded. Unlike most of us on this reflector and our contemporaries, who got interested due to the technical aspects or the "gee whiz" factor of talking to Russia in the middle of the night, many new hams are attracted by the use of radio as a tool to support public service or some other focus in their lives. I have found these newcomers to be very concerned about following the rules as well as anxious to learn and to build their radio skills. At least as important, many of them bring new "outside" skills to the clubs and activities they join. New members of our LAX ARES group, for example, include a courtroom visual-display specialist, , an iPod applications programmer, several EMT's, networking and Web specialists, a Red Cross instructor and more. While many new licensees may start out exhibiting poor practices due to lack of guidance or bad examples form the past, they are generally receptive to being shown the right way to operate and respond well to encouragement and instruction. When we "old pros" turned our weekly ARES net control duties over to less experienced hams,we cringed for a while as they struggled on the air. However, with continued training and support, some of them have become reasonably proficient, and some are now downright good at it. In politics, it is often said, "If you didn't vote, don't complain." I would say to Mike, "If you are part of the solution, there won't much of a problem to worry about." The more of us that model good operating practices on the air, mentor newcomers and provide them with instruction, the more quickly they will develop into good operators. Growing our numbers by adding proficient operators is essential to the future viability of Amateur Radio. Getting one's license "the hard way" is no guarantee of being a good operator. Each of you knows some "old-school" hams whose skills or practices are more an embarrassment than an asset. Not every new licensee will become an exemplary ham, but that's nothing new. It is our collective responsibility to guide, teach and lead by example to make sure the numbers work in our favor. 73, Marty Marty Woll N6VI Vice-Director, ARRL Southwestern Division ADEC, ARES-LAX-NW BCUL 15, LAFD ACS CERT ----- Original Message ----- From: "Coy Day" <n5ok@arrl.org> To: "arrl-odv" <arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 9:11 AM Subject: [arrl-odv:17088] Current Licensing Structure I have one Mike, W5UC, that insists that our licensing structure is broken and that the ARRL must fix it. I've relayed to him that their isn't much desire, at this point, to change the licensing structure. He didn't like that answer! He is saying that it is too easy to get a license and that the FCC is licensing those that are totally unqualified to be on the bands. My feelings are that we don't test people into being "fully qualified". We test to see if they are qualified to begin learning amateur radio through experience. Anyone have any good answers for Mike? Coy -- Coy Day, N5OK 20685 SW 29 Union City, OK 73090 405-483-5632