[EAS] FCC

[JGabb at aol.com]

Gary, I do not know if you remember but when the FCC took away our ID cards they decided they had no authority to appoint SECC Chairs. If you recall that meant we were chairs for life and there was not procedure to appoint a new one.
 
Richard, Adrienne, Clay, Suzanne
I'm writing to just you SECC members so we can have a frank discussion without fear of it showing up in an online blog or spread beyond our 5 Musketeers.
 
I have emailed Greg probably a half-dozen times on this issue, most recently last week when it was 1 month to the November 6 deadline for EAS Participants to respond to SECCs.  Well, I received an email from him yesterday that he wants to talk, but didn't say about what.  I will call him back today, but as is typical will likely need to leave him a message that he may or may not return.  I'm hoping I can talk some sense into him, but will let you SECC members know what I hear.
 
Two things occur to me as we approach this November 6 deadline and if the FCC doesn't rescind this EAS multilingual rule.  We have always been saying that the FCC has little sway over SECCs, since we are barely even mentioned in the rules, FCC can't really "make" us do anything.  BUT - EAS Participants ARE under the FCC's thumb and COULD be charged with an FCC EAS rules violation if they don't furnish SECCs the information required under the EAS multilingual rule that was adopted.  So while we as SECCs can be defiant with relative impunity, what legal peril are we putting our EAS Participants in if we are not actively soliciting their multilingual submissions, reminding them of this deadline as we normally would with any other coming EAS rule, and making it easy for them to respond to us?  I know there are 3 full weeks yet until the November 6 deadline, but I suppose each of us must have our own mental cutoff point where we stop waiting for FCC to rescind and then decide what we will actually do.  I still have not decided, but I have realized I must take into consideration the very real danger I would put my EAS Participants in by remaining silent on this.  Its one thing to put my own neck in the noose, but what about theirs?
 
My other realization this morning, although the FCC can't make SECCs do anything, the one thing they can do is fire an SECC Chair who openly defies the FCC EAS rules.  While its not something that Greg would likely favor as it would make his life more difficult, knowing the rigid hierarchy of the FCC, I could easily see this coming from on high at the Commission that any SECC who fails to cooperate will have its EAS Chair relieved of their duties.  Clearly we all admit that we serve at the pleasure of the FCC.  My premise at pushing back on this the whole time was the animosity it would create between SECCs and EAS Participants and animosity between the FCC and its SECCs, and firing EAS Chairs would certainly not help things or prove any point, it would just hurt all of our SECCs.  This whole point reminds me of the current battle between the Spanish government and the leaders of Catalonia, with Madrid now threatening to depose the defiant leaders.  I guess you can't blame any leadership for disciplining its wayward colonies.  So could the FCC be any more blamed for ousting EAS Chairs who defy the rules?  And I think all of this is amplified because the FCC is still embroiled in the MMTC lawsuit over multilingual alerting, and the courts have not yet ruled, shining a very bright spotlight on this whole issue, especially from the top floor at FCC HQ.  With things still in court, they may feel they have no other choice than to play hardball with both SECCs and EAS Participants, in order to protect the Commission in the court case.  And our friend Greg may have no say in any of this, but simply be told what to do.
 
So I'll let you know if/what I hear from Greg, but I have realized that I need to start thinking of the peril I'm putting my EAS Participants in if I continue to stall this.
 
Gary
 

From: Richard Rudman <rar01 at mac.com>