2002-07-13

First of all, we need to make something clear.  For the majority of the
states the "reverted" to FFU right away, it is clear they never went metric
in the first place.  Of course, they had plans to do so if the issue was
forced, but most just waited until the last minute expecting a reprieve from
the Feds, which they did get.

So, there was no real reversion.  The others that actually did revert did so
because they never converted their entire states.  All that converted to
metric was the state level construction.  County and local construction
never went metric.  This was difficult for contractors who had to switch
back and forth depending on who they were working for on any particular
project.  And I'd bet there were some projects funded by both state and
local agencies that ended up using both systems at the same time.  Can you
imagine the confusion that must have resulted?

The result is the mess that occurs when there is no co-ordinated effort on
all parts.  The states that did convert, if they had forced all construction
agencies right down to the local level to follow suit, there would never had
been a reversion.  All of those states would be fully metric today.

We shouldn't be upset at states that are reverting, as they are up against a
lot of resistance.  We should be angry at those who didn't plan this
conversion well.  Now, any future attempts will be met with scepticism from
the present fiasco.  And with the American economy in very bad shape,  don't
expect anything to be done about it anytime soon.

John








----- Original Message -----
From: "Nat Hager III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, 2002-07-12 20:34
Subject: [USMA:21007] RE: Highway construction


> No this is definitely NOT true.  The law was amended to *allow* states to
go
> back Imperial, and unfortunately the majority have, but not to require.
>
> California, New York, and several other states continue metric. I watch
> CalTrans lettings regularly, and everything's going normal. I recently
read
> that San Diego is considering adding dual units rather than Imperial
alone,
> so the change is in the right direction.
>
> This is where I hope reversion comes unraveled in a couple years.  With
the
> realization that metric hasn't gone away in key states, as well as federal
> building construction, and sooner or later the construction industry is
> going to have to bite the bullet.
>
> Nat
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> > Behalf Of Bob Price
> > Sent: Friday, 2002 July 12 20.11
> > To: U.S. Metric Association
> > Subject: [USMA:21003] Highway construction
> >
> >
> > I was wondering about the status of metrics and highway construction.
In
> > Yahoo's Metric America site someone mentioned that the FWHA is
> > now requiring
> > all states to go back to US Imperial units in road construction.  Is
this
> > true?  If not, are there any states still using metric in road
> > construction?
> > I have been off the list server for quite awhile, so I have not
> > been in the
> > loop as to what is going on lately here.
> >
> > Any insights into how the Bush administration is treating the
> > metric system?
> > Is he just ignoring it?  I haven't found too much metric news lately.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Reply via email to