# DTV transition delayed until June 12 **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 27, 2009, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214 "2009-01-27T12:19:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2009, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/21 "2009-01-27T22:17:29Z")
Can we start a pool as to WHEN the “change” is happening? I’m going for late 2010. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2009, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/22 "2009-01-27T22:24:57Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > ? That seems like a contradiction. The funding isn’t coming from the sale of the bands but the sale of the bands exceeds the cost of the subsidies? Umm what? The sale of the band exceeds the cost of the subsidies, but the money from the sale of the band isn’t earmarked for the subsidies. The money from the sale of the band goes into the Treasury General Fund, just like your income taxes, and the sale of treasury securities, and tariffs, and so on. It’s not specifically paying for the subsidy. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2009, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/23 "2009-01-27T22:38:23Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > The sale of the band exceeds the cost of the subsidies, but the money from the sale of the band isn’t earmarked for the subsidies. The money from the sale of the band goes into the Treasury General Fund, just like your income taxes, and the sale of treasury securities, and tariffs, and so on. It’s not specifically paying for the subsidy. Alright, fair enough. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2009, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/24 "2009-01-27T22:47:19Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I’m agnostic on this whole issue. Can someone tell me the substantive objection to delaying the transition? So far, the only arguments I commonly see against the delay is of the “sour grapes” variety: people _should_ have bought the converters already, or the government _shouldn’t_ be subsidizing them at all. > > Neither one of those statements really exposes for me why June is a much worse date than February to finalize the transition. I would submit that those who are arguing for changing the date which has been established have the burden of arguing for the extension, but I will go ahead anyways. First, all of the arguments for the extension will still be the same on June 11th. Some people won’t be ready, the coupons will have run out or some people won’t have received them/applied for them yet. There will be people in rural areas who can get an average analog signal, but no digital signal, etc. What gets me upset about this is that it is typical of modern U.S. society: We must move at the pace of the slowest person. There is a world of technology waiting to be developed once those analog signals are gone. I would ask the naysayers this question: What if I can’t afford a used analog TV set, or an entertainment center to put it in? Should the government buy one/both of those for me? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2009, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/25 "2009-01-27T23:03:18Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > First, all of the arguments for the extension will still be the same on June 11th. Some people won’t be ready, the coupons will have run out or some people won’t have received them/applied for them yet. There will be people in rural areas who can get an average analog signal, but no digital signal, etc. You’re misinterpreting the argument for the extension. It’s not just that “Some people aren’t ready”. It’s that “A large segment of the population isn’t ready, due to mishandling of the transition by the FCC and the underfunding of the coupon program.” The whole idea behind the four months is that the transition problems will be ironed out. ---
**Author:** ![Markxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@Markxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Markxxx)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2009, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/26 "2009-01-28T00:20:39Z")
This was done purely for politics. The problem isn’t so much the boxes but the effect on Obama. Mr Obama doesn’t want a huge disaster so early on in his term. You think abortion and gay marriage are hot topics, try taking away TV. Especially old people and poor people the two groups most likely to be hurt. I can hear the cries “Not even a month into his presidency and Obama has…” I live in Chicago 3 miles NW of Sears Tower, with analog I get 16 over the air (OTA) stations. With a digital TV I get ZERO stations. Not even ONE station. I will lose TV all together. If I put a converter box on an analog station I get ONE TV station continually and two other pixilated that are unwatchable. So I’ll have to get cable. It irks me I now have to pay for something that was free. They should impliment this market by market, start at NYC and then work out the bugs before moving to LA then Chicago then down the line. Each area will have its own problems unique to the terrain, so it makes sense to do it market by market. But that’s too much like sense. So even if everyone had a converter box, many will be out of luck with TV. It makes no sense to say no TV for poor people so that rich people can have wireless Internet and cell phones. Then they pull that “We need frequencies for first responders.” Well if this is true, then take some frequencies from cell phone that are NOW being used. A cell phone isn’t as important as a first responder. Cell phones are a convenient back up to a landline. The real deal with this is money. You don’t make money from giving away TV for free ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2009, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/27 "2009-01-28T00:59:15Z")
> [@Markxxx](#): > > Then they pull that “We need frequencies for first responders.” Well if this is true, then take some frequencies from cell phone that are NOW being used. A cell phone isn’t as important as a first responder. Cell phones are a convenient back up to a landline. Actually, in many cases, cell phones are being used as a complete substitute for a land line. ---
**Author:** ![BrandonR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/779978/32.png) [@BrandonR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrandonR)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2009, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/28 "2009-01-28T01:01:20Z")
> [@Captain\_Carrot](#): > > Actually, in many cases, cell phones are being used as a complete substitute for a land line. This. I know a lot of people (myself included) don’t even have landlines anymore and rely on their cell phone 100%. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2009, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/29 "2009-01-28T01:09:52Z")
> [@Captain\_Carrot](#): > > Actually, in many cases, cell phones are being used as a complete substitute for a land line. I don’t use a land line. ---
**Author:** ![mks57](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b9bd4f/32.png) [@mks57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mks57)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2009, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/30 "2009-01-28T01:15:49Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > I can’t seem to find the date when the government took away the use of the AM band. Can you help me out with that? They did kill the first FM broadcast band (42-50 MHz) after World War II. ---
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2009, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/31 "2009-01-28T01:45:08Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > You’re misinterpreting the argument for the extension. It’s not just that “Some people aren’t ready”. It’s that “A large segment of the population isn’t ready, due to mishandling of the transition by the FCC and the underfunding of the coupon program.” It isn’t a “large segment,” which is what frustrates people. Before anyone got a converter, and a lot of people have, less than 7 million homes were to be affected by the issue of conversion. How many of them have actually gotten converters by now? Over half a million of the 6 point whatever million homes are in LA, so couldn’t they just delay things in areas that are going to be challenged by the voucher delay, and give people who are waiting in less affected areas the first crack at the next round of vouchers? ---
**Author:** ![spifflog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@spifflog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spifflog)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2009, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/32 "2009-01-28T16:47:20Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > You’re misinterpreting the argument for the extension. It’s not just that “Some people aren’t ready”. It’s that “A large segment of the population isn’t ready, due to mishandling of the transition by the FCC and the underfunding of the coupon program.” The whole idea behind the four months is that the transition problems will be ironed out. Ohhhh Stop it!!! That is just tooo funny!!!😛 ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2009, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/33 "2009-01-28T17:16:03Z")
So, for the spectrum that is being cleared out by the transition, when, roughly, would the first responders and others actually start using it? The day after the transition? Two months from then? Several years from then? Has Motorola and other companies actually built the radios to use on the new frequencies, and have police departments actually bought them? ---
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2009, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/34 "2009-01-28T19:06:12Z")
> [@](#): > > **Markxxx** said: > Then they pull that “We need frequencies for first responders.” Well if this is true, then take some frequencies from cell phone that are NOW being used. A cell phone isn’t as important as a first responder. Cell phones are a convenient back up to a landline. The only reason I have a land line at this point is that occasionally (as in 3 or 4 times a year) I work with some customer who wants something faxed. I didn’t have a land line for seven years prior to that, and I never missed it. Cell phones are hardly a ‘backup to a landline’. > [@](#): > > mks57\*\* said: > They did kill the first FM broadcast band (42-50 MHz) after World War II. This must have been what I was thinking about, then. Did the government pay for people who had purchased these 42-50 MHz radios to get new radios that were compliant with the new FM band? > [@](#): > > **Ravenman** said: > So, for the spectrum that is being cleared out by the transition, when, roughly, would the first responders and others actually start using it? The day after the transition? Two months from then? Several years from then? Has Motorola and other companies actually built the radios to use on the new frequencies, and have police departments actually bought them? This is no reason whatsoever to force all of society to move at the pace of its slowest members. This technology is already old, and once again progress is supposed to stop for the benefit of the people who refuse to accept that time marches on. To me, that is an absurd way to behave. ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2009, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/35 "2009-01-28T19:16:26Z")
From the Chicago Tribune: > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON (AP) — Bucking the Obama administration, House Republicans on Wednesday defeated a bill to postpone the upcoming transition from analog to digital television broadcasting to June 12 — leaving the current Feb. 17 deadline intact for now. > > The 258-168 vote failed to clear the two-thirds threshold needed for passage. It’s a victory for the GOP members, who warn that postponing the transition would confuse consumers. Why the need for a supermajority to pass the bill in the House? I’m not familiar with the mechanics of this particular bill aside from the issue surrounding it. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2009, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/36 "2009-01-28T19:23:03Z")
> [@Jophiel](#): > > From the Chicago Tribune:Why the need for a supermajority to pass the bill in the House? I’m not familiar with the mechanics of this particular bill aside from the issue surrounding it. The bill was being considered under the Suspension Calendar, and bills that are being considered under suspended rules need a two-thirds majority to pass. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2009, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/37 "2009-01-28T19:33:52Z")
> [@catsix](#): > > This is no reason whatsoever to force all of society to move at the pace of its slowest members. This technology is already old, and once again progress is supposed to stop for the benefit of the people who refuse to accept that time marches on. I understand your principled objection to delay. However, I am asking what the _practical_ implications are of a delay. (I’m afraid, that for purposes of this discussion, I don’t consider damage to principles as being a practical consideration… no matter how much it may hurt!) ---
**Author:** ![catsix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e19b73/32.png) [@catsix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/catsix)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2009, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/38 "2009-01-28T20:18:57Z")
> [@](#): > > **Ravenman** said: > However, I am asking what the practical implications are of a delay. So how about the millions of dollars that Qualcomm says it will lose due to being unable to use MediaFLO in the spectrum that is supposed to be vacant on Feb. 18 in 25 different markets such as Boston, Houston, Miami and San Francisco, thus preventing them from expanding the service on schedule? They paid 550 million dollars for the spectrum they purchased, and the COO Len Lauer says they’re going to lose tens of millions if the transition is delayed. Is that practical enough for you? ---
**Author:** ![mks57](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b9bd4f/32.png) [@mks57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mks57)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2009, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/39 "2009-01-28T20:56:10Z")
The bill was defeated in the House. Yeah. [http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/01/28/technology/AP-Digital-TV-Transition.html](http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/01/28/technology/AP-Digital-TV-Transition.html) ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2009, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214/40 "2009-01-28T20:59:07Z")
> [@catsix](#): > > Is that practical enough for you? Yes, that is helpful. Do you know anything WRT the question I asked about re-use of the spectrum? I’ve googled for information on this several times and came up with zippy. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dtv-transition-delayed-until-june-12/483214.md?page=3)