2001-08-27 Marcus, You're not serious, are you? Why would any "true-blooded" American do anything as unpatriotic as support metric. Why does the US need to change, especially now, when American firms are able with no resistance to push FFU in to Canada, and more so, in to Mexico, Venezuela, and soon the entire new world. And who knows where else after that? I'll bet the same people working on the "reversal", are the same ones working tirelessly trying to get the FPLA amended in time for the EU deadline of 2009. OH, yes, 14 states allow metric labeling......big whipty-do! How many companies are supplying metric only for those states and dual labels for the rest? A tease, that is all it is. They tease us with some trivial concession and we think victory is around the corner. WAKE UP FOLKS! While we are waiting for change, American business is working its hardest to establish FFU everywhere it can. By 2009 FFU may well be so far established, that it will be impossible to reverse it or limit it. While we are talking, the FFU camp is fighting. By 2010, we will know who the winner is. John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ma Be" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, 2001-08-27 18:08 Subject: [USMA:15013] Re: States reversion to English -Reply > Thanks, Howard, for this "gloom" update. Now, *for the n-th time*..., is A-N-Y-B-O-D-Y working in the backstage to stem the tide of reversals. Is anyone doing anything about that? > > We've been talking and talking about this situation with DOTs, and we've also discussed the necessity of (especially) metric states to "stand united" or something AND to exercise their power/persuasion/whatever to contribute towards the cause, but I'm yet to hear of anything. > > And what about those that were responsible to bring the metrication cause to the front burner (in the first place) of DOTs, who are they and (most importantly) WHERE are they now?... :-S > > Finally, does USMA have any plans to pitch in and do something about it, or will it (as usual...) sit as an observer from the sidelines until the reversion process is complete???... (For crying out loud, if there is no legislation effort put forth or suggested they could at least use their access to influential people within the DOTs to persuade to stop such nonsense...) > > Marcus > > On Mon, 27 Aug 2001 15:28:47 > Howard Ressel wrote: > >According to my list: > > > >Connecticut is in the process of reverting to IP, DOT decision (58.7% metric as of 1999). > > > >Montana does appear to be still SI the "Still SI as of 5/30/01 was in the wrong column and I missed it. > > > >Idaho is in process of reverting to IP, per DOT. > > > >New Mexico decided to revert on July 2000, State dot decision). They were 45.0% metric in 1999. > > > >Utah is the most troubling to me being 100% converted and now going back to IP. > > > >Howard Ressel, Metric Manager > >New York State Department of Transportation, Region 4 > > > >>>> "Hu, Alfred" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 08/27/01 02:06pm >>> > >I thought Connecticut, Montana, Idaho, New Mexico are all SI. > > > >alfred > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Howard Ressel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > >Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 10:45 AM > >To: U.S. Metric Association > >Subject: [USMA:15011] States reversion to English > > > > > >Jut got an update on States reversion (or perversion as the case may be) > >back to English. I'm not sure who produced it. > > > >States Still SI as of 5/30/01: > > > >Alaska, California, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, > >Oregon. > > > >States still dual as of 5/30/01: > > > >Delaware, Louisiana, Vermont, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, > >Washington > > > >Seems to me these dual States are headed back to English even though they > >are not officially SI. > > > >The rest either never converted, have reverted or are in the reversion > >process. > > > >The sad part is I counted 22 States that revered by orders of the State DOT > >or their commissioner. Only three were due to "State Legislature" although > >I'm sure with the others there was significant political pressure which is > >not apparent in this listing. > > > >Four States are 100% metric based on 1999 % construction (maybe its higher > >for other SI states by now.) > > > >New Jersey (dual), Oregon (SI), New York (SI), Utah (SI but recently > >announced reversion). > > > >Sorry the news is so grim. > > > >Howard Ressel, Metric Manager > >New York State Department of Transportation, Region 4 > > > > > > > Get 250 color business cards for FREE! > http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/ >
