I will. But my point is that if there isn't a provision for proving difficulty then the claim of difficulty should be denied.
Jerry ________________________________ From: James Frysinger <[email protected]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2009 12:45:37 AM Subject: [USMA:43123] Re: Executive Order 12770 Jerry, you can read EO12770 yourself on the USMA website. It's not terribly long. Jim Jeremiah MacGregor wrote: > Is there anything in the Executive order that would have required anyone > claiming difficulties to prove the difficulties exist? > Jerry > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > *To:* U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Monday, February 16, 2009 12:12:43 PM > *Subject:* [USMA:43034] Executive Order 12770 > > > Executive Order 12770 of 1991 was not effective because it permitted heads of > Federal Agencies and Departments to evade metrication by asserting > difficulties. > > Hopefully, a new Executive Order by President Obama will not allow easy > exceptions to metrication such as those practiced, for example, by the Energy > Information Agency. > > But first, a new Secretary of Commerce must be confirmed before we can expect > a new Executive Order directing metrication of Federal programs. > > ---- Original message ---- > >Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2009 21:43:47 -0800 > >From: "Victor Jockin" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>Subject: [USMA:43023] Re: More companies primed to pounce on metric-only >labeling >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected] ><mailto:[email protected]>> > >... > There is certainly precedent for this limited > > approach: G.H.W. Bush's executive order for the > > metrication of federal agencies.. > > That failed > > because (a) the logistics and bureaucracy of > > changing was far more complicated and multi-faceted > > than just changing road signs, (b) opponents of > > metrication hired lobbyists and proponents did > > not, but most importantly his whole plan was flawed > > because (c) they're little rocks. Bush thought the > > government would tip the scales for the country, but > > the department of the interior reporting quake data > > in metric units or states contracting for road work > > in metric units is not going to tip anything, or > > change public language... > > I'd love to see a coordinated, comprehensive > > national initiative for change. It's by far the > > best way for us to prevail, but also one of the > > least likely. > > -- James R. Frysinger 632 Stony Point Mountain Road Doyle, TN 38559-3030 (C) 931.212.0267 (H) 931.657.3107 (F) 931.657.3108
