I have limited sympathy for the “generalist” private sector in meteorology (as opposed to the outfits that do their best to add value to the forecast). First and foremost, because their forecasts are generally poorer in quality: Bachelors in meteorology will first try to get a better-paid National Weather Service job, or find a niche market to take their chance at the American Dream; the ones not up to that level will end up in the generalist private sector. Then, the private sector in meteorology gets almost all of its raw material for free. Talk about a subsidy. Of course, it wants more….

That being said, every two years or so, we have similar debates in the Canadian scene. Because it is primarily limited to the meetings of the Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society, you never get to hear about it. The issue is hotly debated because the delivery of weather forecasts fall in between the standard criteria used to establish what should be a public good versus what could benefit from the market forces (rivalrousness and excludability). That, plus the fact that the government is still expected to do essentially all the work to fullfill its role of protecting citizens, is at the source of the debate. Efficiency-wise, the system as it is now is probably optimum. The battle over Internet distribution is probably just a first step towards an attempt to move the government out of the distribution of forecasts by all means (Weather Radio, phone services, etc), and is probably an easier battle to win. This is not over.