[TriLUG] Television & RF interference -- yes computer related -- I think

[R Radford]

On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 11:48 PM, Joseph Mack NA3T <jmack at wm7d.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Mar 2013, R Radford wrote:
>
>> Hmmm, that is not how I interpreted the action, and also does not seem to
>> match up with what I read on the ARRL website.  In fact, the ARRL was one of
>> the big proponents of the bill that basically states that as long as you are
>> doing everything legal in your transmitter (ie: a ham radio operator), it is
>> not your responsibility if it causes interference on another device.
>
> That was an unintended consequence that the ARRL grabbed onto.

I guess I am confused. You stated the bill was to save the consumer
industry money, yet the ARRL's own website stated they lobbied for
this action for almost 10 years (starting in 1973), pushing it out to
the hams to lobby on their behalf to push this through - it certainly
sounds like the ARRL was a driver in this and not just an unintended
consequence.  Can you point me to a source where this was something
pushed upon us by the consumer industry during the Reagan
administration?