Mark, You may be right, I do not know, which is why I asked, but there have been many revisions to the FPLA since 1992. There are many changes made by other regulatory agencies every year. If changes to the FPLA have to be approved by Congress, it is probably a regular rubber stamp procedure. I am sure Congress does not individually review every change that every regulatory agency makes, every labelling or ingredients change, every fill rule, every decision on tamper-proof caps and so on, they leave that to the regulatory agency.
I don't think NIST can change any rules, it is advisory, sets standards and so on. It would be nice if someone knows for sure. Al Lawrence ________________________________ From: Mark Henschel <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2020 1:07 PM To: Al Lawrence <[email protected]> Cc: Brian White <[email protected]>; USMA List Server <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [USMA 1606] Re: The SI and the new administration Al: With all due respect, I think you are wrong on the facts. Any federal agency on it's own does not have the power to change a law passed by Congress and signed into law by the President. If changing the FPLA were this easy, NIST would have done this a long time ago. The last time the FPLA was updated was in 1992, as a stand alone law. I am willing to be corrected in this procedure, but my understanding of the Constitution is that an agency which has the responsibility of abiding by legislation does not have the power to alter that legislation. Mark Henschel On Mon, Nov 23, 2020, 2:05 PM Al Lawrence <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: The general feeling of the group is that getting the government to enact the metric only labelling option as a revision or amendment to the FPLA is important. The FLPA can be changed by submitting a petition to them for the change, as has already been done by NIST. Any organization or individual can submit a proposal, the agency looks at it, and, if they feel it is a good idea, must submit it for public comment as a proposed revision, and after public comment, can then decide whether or not to enact it. It is my understanding that if the petition is approved, it becomes law and goes into the Federal Register. I do not believe Congress has to do anything. Can anyone confirm that is correct? It has also been suggested that the NIST proposal be submitted to Congressional committee. That would be another way to make the metric only option law, but it would have to go through committee, be approved, and then be passed by both the Senate and House. Trying to get Congress to pass the metric option as a law would be extremely difficult. Submitting a petition to the FPLA has a better chance to succeed, but will still likely take years. At least NIST submitted their petition some time ago. Another problem is that it is even more difficult to influence a regulatory agency than a Congressman. Even a Congressman would likely have little influence over them. No Congressman will publicly support moving towards SI, even if they do personally, so that would make the possibility of a stand-alone law being passed extremely remote, but if we can find one or two that personally support the idea, it might possible that they could get the FDA to move the NIST proposal along a little quicker. Maybe there are dozens of Congressmen who are in favor of it who could quietly push the FDA. A desperate hope, but I do not see anything else we can do. Maybe the USMA could find out how many privately support the idea. And don't forget about the similar petition submitted to the TTB. If the goal is to get the general public used to SI, selling beer in metric units would be a really good way to do it. Al Lawrence ________________________________ From: USMA <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Mark Henschel <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2020 9:40 AM To: Brian White <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: USMA List Server <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [USMA 1606] Re: The SI and the new administration Guys: Metrication has never been a top priority. There are always other things more important. This was even true back in 1975 when the MEtric Conversion Act went through Congress. I remember when the economy was good, and people said "We can't go metric not, the economy is doing great." Then when the economy was bad, people said "We can't go metric now, the economy is terrible." There will always be other priorities. We CAN do some things, and one of them is the FPLA update. Changing math education is essential, since the kids in school today will be the politicians of tomorrow. And maybe fixing the Post Office could involve metrication. But never give up, simply because other things are also pressing issues at the same time. MArk HEnschel On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 7:48 AM Brian White <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Exxxxactly... On Nov 23, 2020, at 05:11, Ressel, Howard R (DOT) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Sadly with so much disagreement about so many things right now metric is not a top priority. No need to give up just keep pushing on the grass roots level. Howard From: USMA <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of Ezra Steinberg Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2020 11:12 PM To: Brian White <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: USMA List Server <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [USMA 1602] Re: The SI and the new administration ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. Time to just give up, i guess. 🙄 On Sun, Nov 22, 2020, 8:06 PM Brian White <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: If it's that easy, why wasn't it done 10 years ago, or 25, or 40? Won't happen. And if it's brought up, then it's an "us vs them" political fight which actually then sets us back. On Nov 22, 2020, at 19:46, Ezra Steinberg <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: The good news is that Bill Nye (The Science Guy) hosted Senator Chuck Schumer of NY the other day to talk about the need to move aggressively to address the climate crisis, which Schumer wholeheartedly agreed with. At one point during the interview Nye implied how we finally need in the USA to convert to metric by making a slightly snide remark about how archaic Fahrenheit was, which gave me the strong impression he favors metrication. (He may have even been more explicit in other appearances he has made on TV over the years, which would not surprise me.) So, if both Senate races in Georgia go to the Democrats, Schumer becomes Majority Leader. At that point we can contact Nye to see if he can prevail on Schumer to get legislation passed to at least allow metric only labels on products and maybe pass other measures to start easing the USA into metric. Ezra On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 11:06 AM Robert Price <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Sad to say, but I agree. Obama wasn't too warm to metric and I don't see why his former vice president will be any different. On Thursday, November 19, 2020, 9:30:56 PM CST, Brian White <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Not a chance anything will change. Sad to say but true. On Nov 19, 2020, at 19:04, J McClellan <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: So is anyone here at all even a bit more hopeful that there might be some forward metric movement in the US with a new (purportedly more progressive) administration? I've already got a letter ready to send out on the 26th of January :P Hope everybody here does the same!! GO METRIC, AMERICA! Because the kings' foot STINKS. _______________________________________________ USMA mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma _______________________________________________ USMA mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma _______________________________________________ USMA mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma _______________________________________________ USMA mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma _______________________________________________ USMA mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma
_______________________________________________ USMA mailing list [email protected] https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma
