Oklahoma Weather Tracking Licensure Legislation

[JamesCaruso]

TBH the financial impact that chasers bring to the state is minimal at best in the grand scheme of things. Sure, to the local mom and pop restaurant or convenience store it helps out on the one or two days a year they get lucky enough to have a convergence in the down time, but with the handful of days and randomness of the locations, revenue isn't something anyone can count on. If it were 365 days a year bringing in thousands of chasers each day, it would be a different story, but it's not.

I agree. I think it’s almost laughable to mention financial considerations when contacting politicians and will undermine the credibility of whatever other arguments are made in the same letter. The randomness of timing and location makes it unpredictable. An individual mom and pop store owner may have a record day, and then not see another chaser for the next five years. On a statewide basis obviously it aggregates to something a bit more substantial and consistent, but probably a fraction of a percent of total statewide income.

 

[Warren Faidley]

https://www.change.org/p/halt-the-implementation-of-sb158-and-hb2426?recruiter=567066842&recruited_by_id=21aed9e0-43a9-11e6-900a-932d60c06b67

Dan, can you and / or I re-post this to social media? Thanks.

Edit... saw it on X and re-posted. How about Facebook and other outlets.

 

[Dan Robinson]

https://www.change.org/p/halt-the-implementation-of-sb158-and-hb2426?recruiter=567066842&recruited_by_id=21aed9e0-43a9-11e6-900a-932d60c06b67

Dan, can you and / or I re-post this to social media? Thanks.

Edit... saw it on X and re-posted. How about Facebook and other outlets.

Yes Warren and all, feel free to repost anywhere and everywhere.

One argument that might be raised here is that TV chasers are sometimes counted as chasers or spotters in that data set. It is true that there is some overlap in how those categories are entered in each instance. I would respond to that by pointing out that this shows that we are all in the same class when it comes to reporting tornadoes in the name of public safety, and as such, should *all* qualify for what is in the bill. In other words, if the goal truly is public safety, make the qualifying criteria simply one that makes a certain number of tornado reports per year, regardless of media affiliation. Isn't the reporting of tornadoes all that matters here? That would reveal whether the bill's motives are indeed in the interest of public safety.

 

[John Farley]

I have signed the petition and linked it on my Facebook page. But like Dan said about his, my FB page does not seem to get much traction on anything like this. But the more of us who post this to social media, the better.

 

[Randy Zipser]

I agree. I think it’s almost laughable to mention financial considerations when contacting politicians and will undermine the credibility of whatever other arguments are made in the same letter. The randomness of timing and location makes it unpredictable. An individual mom and pop store owner may have a record day, and then not see another chaser for the next five years. On a statewide basis obviously it aggregates to something a bit more substantial and consistent, but probably a fraction of a percent of total statewide income.

Your observations above (similar to earlier ones posted by Faidley) certainly have merit, particularly as related to the chaser-contributed percentage of total state annual revenue. However, maybe we're all really missing the most important point here. Until we have hard numbers in front of us (which, let's face it, are impossible to obtain due to a multitude of variables during any given chase season, let alone an entire fiscal year), we are all, myself included (please see my previous posts), just speculating about the financial side of the equation within SB-158.

Nothing grabs the attention of any politician more than...M.O.N.E.Y., especially any loss of it! That's why we, who oppose this legislation, need to play the money "angle" and "dangle" it in front of the pols to see where this leads. Hmm...the "angle of the dangle" (pun not intended, LOL)! Seriously, though, if the pols weren't thinking about money when they drafted this poorly-thought-out bill, why did they even include a requirement to collect these paltry licensure fees? We can only guess at the answer to that question, since the bill conveniently leaves out any details about how this money will be used or who will benefit from it at the state level.

So, actually, it might work to our advantage to exploit the financial (economic) issue as part of an overall package pointing out many other very serious flaws with this bill that many posters on this thread have already brought to light. Since all these flaws supplement, not compete with one another, to use every "lever" we have available would only strengthen our opposition argument, not undermine it, IMHO.

 

[Warren Faidley]

I also wonder if any of the legislators are "in bed" with the TV stations? What a great way to get a lot of future political publicity. In reality, the odds are much greater this bill will result in a fatal accident and they are going to be held responsible. As a legislator, I would want to keep as far away as possible from this bill. You know there are going to be a landslide of clips posted of bad behavior by TV crews as pissed-off chasers won't miss a thing.

 

[William Monfredo]

I suppose some people still believe this...

 

[gdlewen]

I also wonder if any of the legislators are "in bed" with the TV stations? What a great way to get a lot of future political publicity. In reality, the odds are much greater this bill will result in a fatal accident and they are going to be held responsible. As a legislator, I would want to keep as far away as possible from this bill. You know there are going to be a landslide of clips posted of bad behavior by TV crews as pissed-off chasers won't miss a thing.

Send those clips to the members of the committees who passed the bill. And create an online Rogues Gallery. (Not sure the legal ins-and-outs of that last Gallery bit.)

They didn’t take our concerns seriously and I’m sure they were told our concerns are way overblown. The disappointing thing is how poorly the public has been treated through this process. Like we know nothing at all.