The response to my expression of need for FPLA 2010 was from <[email protected]> under "consumer protection" as the general topic of my request.
The White House and the House of Representatives have not reacted (as far as I know) to my request to update the FPLA to permit metric-only labeling of consumer commodities. I hope that my draft will at least be studied and help pave the way for the NIST Amendments to the present FPLA. The NIST 2007 draft of Amendments uses the format of Title 15, Chapter 39 of the US Code. My next project is to put my draft of FPLA 2010 in the format of the US Code, and to primary with its distribution. My drafts treat SI metric units as *primary*, and inch-pound units as permitted supplementary indications. Although the NIST draft of 2007 would permit metric-only labeling, the regrettable emphasize continues on regulation of inch-pound labeling. Gene. ---- Original message ---- >Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 04:10:26 -0700 (PDT) >From: "John M. Steele" <[email protected]> >Subject: [USMA:45015] Re: Jerry's comments >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> > >I don't know HOW to execute the strategies, but it would seem that there are >two >possible strategies: > >*Find and support champions of metrication in government > >*Show politicans that either because of demand by the American people or as a >way >to make America more competitive (ie, fix the economy), that they ignore the >need >for metricatation at their peril (vote the anti-metrication forces out). > > > >Both involve getting large numbers of people to support metrication, so that > >politicians can not ignore it or cater to special interest groups that oppose >it. >...
