So where does the process go now?? One message implied that Congress must
   accept and approve this report. Is this true?

   I've always had some serious concerns whenever a committee formulates a
   policy behind closed doors. I thought that public hearings and 'sunshine'
   laws were becoming the more accepted practices. When were the 'public'
   hearings for this report conducted?

   Actually, this couldn't come at a better time. Call the campaign office of
   your Congressional candidates and voice your opinion if you have one. Let
   them know what you think of closed door policy sessions which affect your tax
   dollars and how they are spent.

   Another thought might be to have SigAda stop spending money on a conference
   devoted solely to Ada. It's like preaching to the choir. Maybe, in light of
   this policy, it would be better to increase Ada's visibility in the
   commercial market by sponsoring more booths and perhaps even sponsoring
   authors at other conferences.

   Another thought: Where do simulation and training systems fall in the NRC
   report? Obviously, if the simulator is based on an Ada-based warfighting
   weapon, the greatest reuse would be achieved by using some of the weapon's
   software in the simulator, right? But simulators usually require large
   databases developed using COTS products as well as commercial image
   generators. Thus, the argument can be made that the simulator should be
   programmed in the COTS languages. The contractor may even get some commercial
   video gaming reuse out of doing it this way. Now, the problem is: does the
   simulator software behave in exactly the same way as the weapon's software?
   Are we now doing 'negative training'?

   Just a few of my own thoughts. These opinions are my own and do not represent
   an official opinion or policy.

   Dean Runzel