I didn't say it was Clinton. I said Clinton-era.
---------- Original Message ----------- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 17:24:59 +0000 Subject: [USMA:28204] Re: New York state department of transportation > It wasn't Clinton. Some Republican congressman from the South > (forget his name) did a little modification zinger to TEA-21 > (Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21st Century, passed in 1998) > that altered the language for mandatory state highway metric design > to make the 2000 deadline optional. > > It was probably buried far too deeply for Bill Clinton or anyone on > his staff to notice it, and, even if he had, given the size and > importance of the bill, it probably would not have been considered a > veto matter even if it had been found. (It would have been a veto > matter had I been president.) Note that you don't have to actually > veto something -- threatening to do so often gets the desired > result. Hiding things like this in major bills is a way to get > something you want without people finding out until it is too late. > > The states immediately interpreted this as "not only don't we have > to do this, we can even go back if we want." > > Without doubt, whining contractors got to this guy and had him do > this. Now they are busy at work picking off the remaining metric > states. With Schwartzenegger in power in California, don't even > feel safe there. > > Carleton > > > The failure here is NOT the states. It was the federal government for > > removing the metric requirements. > > A big Clinton-era failure IMHO. > > > > At 06:58 2004-01-08, Andy Johnson wrote: > > >Any state that goes back to FFU will certainly be > > >delayed for a long long time in going metric. Of > > >course I don't think you really mean it when you say > > >that you fear the state would then NEVER go metric. > > > > > >I feel sure that if all of us who are proponents of > > >metrication were to drop dead...then the U.S. will > > >eventually go metric anyhow. > > > > > >But there is much to be gained by going metric sooner > > >rather than later. > > > > > >Delay in these individual state DOT operations could > > >result in delay altogether of an additional 10 or 20 > > >or 30 years. That will be inefficient and wasteful. > > > > > >But metrication will come someday. > > > > > >Our job here is to boost that date and make it as soon > > >as possible. > > > > > >I see no way that metrication might be something which > > >NEVER happens. > > > > > >It is inevitable. > > > > > > >But metrication in the next few years...or even in the > > >next one or two decades...is not inevitable. > > > > > >The people on this list could do things to make a > > >difference perhaps as dramatic as 10 or 20 or 30 years > > >in when metrication is here. > > > > > >Andy Johnson > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >http://www.downtobusiness.org > > >--- john mercer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I read the posting about the N. Y. s. D.O. T. > > > > thinking of going back to FFU. If this happens i > > > > feel it would be an unfortunate thing. I feel that > > > > any state that has gone back to FFU will probably > > > > never go back to metric. Why have so many states > > > > gone back? I believe all highway construction > > > > contracts in Canada are metric, but i'm not sure. > > > > If someone could let me know i would really > > > > appreciate it. It must of cost Utah quite a bit of > > > > money to switch back to FFU considering they had > > > > sold all their old FFU books. The BWMA would love > > > > > to hear about N.Y. thinking of going back to FFU. I > > > > also believe that all highway construction contracts > > > > in the U K are done in metric, again if someone > > > > could let me know that would be great. Just think > > > > if highway construction contracts in the U K are in > > > > metric the members of the BWMA have to either > > > > walk or drive on them every day. Oh how that must > > > > bug them. Have a great evening John. > > > > > > > > >===== > > >Andy Johnson > > >Host of "Down to Business Andy Johnson" > > >Florida's Best & Most Efficacious Talk Show > > >AM1280 WSVE & http://www.downtobusiness.org > > >weekdays, noon--3 p.m., east coast time. > > >On-air: 904-713-9783 (713-WSVE) Off-air: 904-568-0769 > > >Non-voters are not welcome on Andy's show. > > > > > >__________________________________ > > >Do you Yahoo!? > > >Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes > > >http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus > > ------- End of Original Message -------
