In a message dated 10/6/2005 11:48:20 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
[log in to unmask] writes:

One can, of course say that the long term preservation of these materials
is for the common good, hence a justification for the use
of tax payer money...however...the fact that I can't hear the good
sounding copies of say the Stokowski NBC broadcasts ...which have been
preserved, I believe, with taxpayer money...without going to LC, rubs me
the wrong way, even if it is the law.

As an unrelated but analogeous example a bill has been introduced in congress 
that would prohibit the distribution of weathjer radar information to the 
public if it is also provided by private commercial services:
" b) COMPETITION WITH PRIVATE SECTOR- The Secretary of Commerce shall not 
provide, or assist other entities in providing, a product or service (other than 
a product or service described in subsection (a)(1)) that is or could be 
provided by the private sector unless--
       "(1) the Secretary determines that the private sector is unwilling or 
unable to provide such product or service; or
       "(2) the United States Government is obligated to provide such product 
or service under international aviation agreements to provide meteorological 
services and exchange meteorological information."

As a paliative the national weather service now does not update the onlne 
weather radar maps and animations during prime TV news broadcast times:  7-9AM & 
5-7PM.  This is just the time when violent local storms are likely to develop 
in this area.

Fortunately I am close enough to the Canadian border to be covered by the 
King City, Ontario station. However it is very disturbing that, having 
contributed to the billions of  tax dollars spent on satellites, radar, and 
communications systems, I have to go to a foreign country to get essential weather data.

Commercial interests rule in this country.

Does the average taxpayer know?  Or care?

Mike Csontos