I have made some changes to S. 1625. Once I realized what this bill was fundamentally, which really isn't a 5G bill, but rather a national security bill, I knew there was no way we were going to stop it. Period. I do think we stand a chance of getting it amended. The amendments I have proposed are really quite simple and there aren't that many of them. They broaden the scope of the bill and actually better achieve its national security purpose than the original version of S1625 without promoting 5G.
If Congress is concerned about Chinese and other questionable companies compromising the integrity of communications they don't want to specify only 5G. Other communications systems are at risk too.
Statements of purpose steer the course of policy and this legislation in its original form clearly supports 5G so supporting it in its original form while opposing 5G is clearly counter productive. 5G is inherently a security threat because a technology that weakens our country by harming our residents' health and the environment is necessarily a national security threat. Thus, 5G should not be promoted in a security-oriented piece of legislation.
The bill, amended as I propose, protects the security of U.S. communication networks without endangering public health or the environment, and would, thus, serve far better to protect national security than the unamended bill.
Could you bring the amended version of S. 1625 to the attention of your Senators, along with the rationale for the amendments? While you are at it, ask that they support S. 2012 / H.R. 530 which restore local control over deployment of 5G and abolish the FCC rules.
Thank you,
Catherine
Protecting our health and the environment by using a hardwired computer in a low RF environment. For more information, see www.electricalpollution.
No comments:
Post a Comment