Oklahoma Weather Tracking Licensure Legislation

[gdlewen]

I just called my house rep and they confirmed it is not scheduled to be heard today. No word on when, or if, it will be heard. But my rep is opposed to it.

I agree with @Warren Faidley that Fetgatter is probably trying to build support behind the scenes. It's stunning how much effort is being put into passing a special interest bill.

 

[Warren Faidley]

I just called my house rep and they confirmed it is not scheduled to be heard today. No word on when, or if, it will be heard. But my rep is opposed to it.

I agree with @Warren Faidley that Fetgatter is probably trying to build support behind the scenes. It's stunning how much effort is being put into passing a special interest bill.

Maybe he saw your "special bill" argument and he's taking the first flight to Vulgeria.

 

[Dave C]

I just called my house rep and they confirmed it is not scheduled to be heard today. No word on when, or if, it will be heard. But my rep is opposed to it.

I agree with @Warren Faidley that Fetgatter is probably trying to build support behind the scenes. It's stunning how much effort is being put into passing a special interest bill.

Thanks for doing that. I think sometimes we may all overestimate the need for a mass outcry or negative media stories, when just a few people getting in touch with a rep can often be enough to help them make their mind up.

Representatives in my area (moderately high population) have indicated in the past that they seem to usually only get a little bit of public interaction on many bills. I observe that a high number of people are suprisingly apathetic and would rather bitch on social media or go yell at people in public than do something direct like message/speak with lawmakers. Any contact at all helps a rep. get an idea of what the public may be thinking.

As to Fetgatter, I am no OK politics expert or a biographer, but the public record shows many of the bills he supports are for big businesses. Seems to be his bread and butter, and often those types of legislation are rammed through by any means necessary by making deals with other lawmakers, businesses, organizations, etc. or passing under disguise or when no one is paying attention any longer. I really hope enough other OK reps. are convinced to shut this down permanently no matter when it comes for vote, but with the trend of pro profit anti consumer bills and backroom deals all over the nation (right to repair, medical coverage denials, change of terms after sale, easy sign up/impossible cancel, etc) I am skeptical it will not keep coming back around until it succeeds. I am by no means anti corporation or anything like that, but the greed is getting a bit out of hand with no controls. Surprised it took this long to get to the weather community really.

 

[Warren Faidley]

No matter what happens with this bill, we are going to need to watch every single chasing state to make sure they don't try to sneak in a similar bill, law, ordnance, etc. This applies to counties and cities also. The "Genie is out of the bottle," or "We have awoken a sleeping giant" applies here. It's hard to imagine someone will not try and emulate this action, especially with all the road antics and crowds in general.

 

[gdlewen]

Thanks for doing that. I think sometimes we may all overestimate the need for a mass outcry or negative media stories, when just a few people getting in touch with a rep can often be enough to help them make their mind up.

Representatives in my area (moderately high population) have indicated in the past that they seem to usually only get a little bit of public interaction on many bills. I observe that a high number of people are suprisingly apathetic and would rather bitch on social media or go yell at people in public than do something direct like message/speak with lawmakers. Any contact at all helps a rep. get an idea of what the public may be thinking.

I think this is very true. If you think about it--there really 233 items in today's house agenda--if no one contacts them then they have to assume their constituents are okay with those bills. They have no choice.

This reminds me I should contact the two reps who voted against Fetgatter's bill on Thursday and thank them. They don't get enough positive feedback when they do something "right".

 

[Warren Faidley]

Very big news if true.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1899216867606065645

 

[gdlewen]

Very big news if true.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1899216867606065645

Yeah I read the post and it's a whole lotta nonsense. "Soften the blow" blah blah blah-dee blah blah "they're gonna pass it anyway" blah blah.

It keeps getting whittled down to the point of "Why bother?" At this point I think the only reason to press on is for Fetgatter to get his win against us and to justify the lobbyist fees*.

* For a bill so poorly-written that between the House and Senate it has suffered no fewer than, what? 3 re-writes? 4 re-writes? And counting.

 

[gdlewen]

This is interesting, just filed today:

https://www.oklegislature.gov/cf_pdf/2025-26%20SUPPORT%20DOCUMENTS/BILLSUM/House/HB2426%20CS%20BILLSUM.PDF

“SOK estimates that approximately 100-200 media-affiliated weather trackers and 50-100 university-affiliated weather trackers exist in Oklahoma for purposes of eligible applicants. This results in a total estimated pool of approximately 150-300 eligible applicants.”

Yikes. Talk about “chaser convergence”.

 

[Jeff Smith]

This is interesting, just filed today:

https://www.oklegislature.gov/cf_pdf/2025-26%20SUPPORT%20DOCUMENTS/BILLSUM/House/HB2426%20CS%20BILLSUM.PDF

“SOK estimates that approximately 100-200 media-affiliated weather trackers and 50-100 university-affiliated weather trackers exist in Oklahoma for purposes of eligible applicants. This results in a total estimated pool of approximately 150-300 eligible applicants.”

Yikes. Talk about “chaser convergence”.

I think they are overestimating big time in order to justify the bill financially.

My state senator responded unfavorably towards the bill so there is still hope for this bill to fail. I feel that the chasers involved in amending the bill have given in to the fact that there will be a bill-they are just trying to soften the blow...but this bill is only making legal what is already being practiced by these media guys. Even encouraging their reckless behavior. It just needs to go away.

 

[JamesCaruso]

Yeah I read the post and it's a whole lotta nonsense. "Soften the blow" blah blah blah-dee blah blah "they're gonna pass it anyway" blah blah.

I agree, a bunch of nonsense, acquiescing to the concept of any bill at all…

I think they are overestimating big time in order to justify the bill financially.

Isn’t the proposed fee just $500/year? That’s only $150,000 even with their high-end estimated number of applicants. That’s not financially meaningful to the state budget.

I feel that the chasers involved in amending the bill have given in to the fact that there will be a bill-they are just trying to soften the blow...but this bill is only making legal what is already being practiced by these media guys. Even encouraging their reckless behavior. It just needs to go away.

Yep, we need to push for it to go away. Lowering the bar to accepting it with some meaningless minor changes is a loss in my opinion and then the slippery slope continues from there…

 

[Warren Faidley]

"100 to 300" is not realistic. There is a disconnect between the language of the bill and the SOK. Even Fetgatter said he estimated around 60. Having 100-300 vehicles with "chase" priority on big days would create pandemonium on a world class level. This many vehicles would not only delay traffic flow, but traffic would come to a complete halt for many miles.

 

[Jeff Smith]

"100 to 300" is not realistic. There is a disconnect between the language of the bill and the SOK. Even Fetgatter said he estimated around 60. Having 100-300 vehicles with "chase" priority on big days would create pandemonium on a world class level. This many vehicles would not only delay traffic flow, but traffic would come to a complete halt for many miles.

There are not 100-300 TV chasers in the entire state. I know most of them, and maybe the top 5% of them are out there with wrapped trucks and lights and sirens.

OT--Most TV chasers run incognito and get paid peanuts nowadays. This is a result of the advent of free cell phone video and subsequent downfall of the stringer market. In turn, the quality and professionalism that TV chasers bring to the table has tanked. Just watch some coverage over the past several years.

 

[gdlewen]

So far "The Bill" has not come up for a vote.

I suspect that's because they haven't finalized the language for the next incarnation. It's no longer about chasing--in my opinion this is all about flipping us all the bird (the chasing community, the public safety community, and the public at large) and getting a Big Favor for special interests.

And, yes, I have lost all patience and dropped all pretense at tact when to comes to this embarrassingly-horrendous bill.

"Tact is just not saying true stuff. I’ll pass."

 

[Warren Faidley]

I realized this weeks ago. Welcome to the club. They are obviously pulling out all the political stunts possible. The fact there is no revision is scary.

 

[Dan Robinson]

There's no reason for the bill to exist without its core assertion that TV chasers are more important than the rest of spotters and chasers and thus deserve elevated privileges. I'm curious what possible revisions would be even remotely palatable? Maybe the eligibility inclusion of all spotters and chasers who have completed a training course?