At least one Republican senator wants to get rid of free National Weather Service information so his buddies can make more money.
And here's the self-serving comment of the dayThe bill, introduced last week by Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., would prohibit
federal meteorologists from competing with companies such as AccuWeather and The Weather Channel, which offer their own forecasts through paid services and free ad-supported Web sites.
Supporters say the bill wouldn't hamper the weather service or the National
Hurricane Center from alerting the public to hazards - in fact, it exempts
forecasts meant to protect "life and property."
But critics say the bill's wording is so vague they can't tell exactly
what it would ban.
"I believe I've paid for that data once. ... I don't want to have to pay
for it again," said Scott Bradner, a technical consultant at Harvard
University.
He says that as he reads the bill, a vast amount of federal weather
data would be forced offline. "The National Weather Service Web site would
have to go away," Bradner said. "What would be permitted under this bill is not
clear - it doesn't say. Even including hurricanes."
But Barry Myers, AccuWeather's executive vice president, said the bill
would improve public safety by making the weather service devote its efforts to
hurricanes, tsunamis and other dangers, rather than duplicating products already
available from the private sector.
"The National Weather Service has not focused on what its core mission
should be, which is protecting other people's lives and property," said Myers,
whose company is based in State College, Pa. Instead, he said, "It spends
hundreds of millions of dollars a year, every day, producing forecasts of 'warm
and sunny.'"
I like weather. Always have. I have a ton of weather web sites bookmarked, including the NWS. They don't have to be mutually exclusive. The NWS has lots of archive data that private companies see no profit in. Dammit, does the value EVERYTHING have to be measured by profitability?
This reminds me of something that happened about ten years ago. A member of Congress, swept in during the 1994 Republican Revolution, proposed doing away with the NWS entirely because he could get good weather information from The Weather Channel. He backed off after he was informed The Weather Channel relies on the NWS for much of its information.
Just another example of what happens when you have zealots in charge.
Update: Josh Marshall nails it.
1 comment:
The national weather service is hands down dollar for dollar the best investment that tax dollars can buy.
The hundreds of billions of dollars saved in the agriculture, and transportation industries alone due to timely and accurate weather forecasting far overshadow the paltry amounts spent on the NWS.
Companies that print up pretty maps based upon data collected by the NWS are simply trying to make a profit without concern for, or responsibility to the public good.
We need to see it for what it is, a quid pro quo action taken by a corrupt, on the take, public official who doesn't give a damn about the people, and is simply trying to pay back campaign contributers.
And knowing the corruption of the one party state - having to pluck down a quarter for every weather map, and ten dollars for a timely tornado warning won't be too far off.
All done in the name of the freemarket no doubt.
I for one believe that the U.S. Military should be completely dismantled, and only a private military force should be used - one which is not paid for by tax dollars, but sponsored by insurance companies which act on behalf of corporations wanting to protect their interest at home, and abroad.
And how dare anyone suggest otherwise, when private companies can take care of this in a more efficient manner.
ETK
Post a Comment