Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #39837
From: rtitsworth <rtitsworth@mindspring.com>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: GA User Fees
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 20:12:06 -0500
To: <lml>

Fellow LML Aviators,

 

At an Aviation Conference dinner in Michigan last night, Jack Pelton (Chairman of the Board of Cessna), gave an informative presentation on Cessna's lineup of new aircraft (the Mustang, the Light Sport, their new model to compete with Cirrus, etal).  However, the most compelling part of his presentation related to the current state of things in Washington related to FAA User Fees for General Aviation.  Unfortunately, all is not well.

 

As you may be aware based on news and/or AOPA posts, this issue is coming to a head.  Specifically, the FAA/DOT is scheduled to send it's recommendation for the upcoming Fed budget to the congress next week.  That budget and it's funding components will be debated this summer for a vote in Sept.

 

Until last Nov, the prior DOT chief Norman Mineta was generally opposed to user/usage based fees for GA.   However, the new DOT chief Mary Peters and FAA chief Marion Blakely both appear more favorable towards the airlines' lobbing for an added GA User Fees approach.  More will be known when their actual budget recommendation is sent to congress next week, but it currently appears it will include a recommendation for GA User Fees and by then the wheels will already be set in motion.

 

I'd like to urge each of you to think about your personal position on this issue and contact your congressman to help ensure they understand your views.   First impressions count, and media coverage will probably peak, so timing is important.  If you want more background/information on the issue goto: http://www.aopa.org/faafundingdebate/

 

Below are the links to determine you congressmen’s email/sites.  Also below is a copy of the text from my personal emails to each.  Feel free to copy/edit it if you wish.

 

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

http://www.house.gov/writerep/

 

Sorry for any perceived personal/political intrusion – but it seems we have a common interest in this.

 

Rick

 

 

Dear Senator Levin, Senator Stabenow, Representative McCotter

 

I am a pilot located in Novi, MI, and am sending this letter to request your support for myself and others in the state of Michigan that utilize general aviation aircraft for business and pleasure and that earn a living through aviation and related technologies - by opposing any proposal that would impose new, onerous, and inefficient user fees on the General Aviation industry.

 

The FAA national airspace/airway system is largely designed, sized, and operated to serve the peak traffic demands of the large scheduled airlines flying between hub and spoke airports at selected cities and to support our air defense system.  General Aviation aircraft (which includes flight training, private/recreational, business, and police/fire/medical aircraft) primarily operate "between the cracks" in that national system.  As an example, GA aircraft were restricted from operations at Regan National following 911.  However, FAA staffing and spending needs there remained unchanged.

 

The general aviation community currently contributes to the FAA Airport/Airways Trust Fund through a fuel tax.  The general aviation fuel taxes are directly and efficiently remitted to the federal government, eliminating the need for a complex mechanism to collect the taxes from hundreds of thousands of individual pilots and aircraft owners/operators and without the administrative costs required to support a large and expensive bureaucracy of collectors, administrators, auditors and accountants.  Thus, fuel taxes are the best way for the general aviation community to pay for its shared use of the national airspace/airways system.

 

However, there are efforts afoot by the FAA and large airlines to propagate a change to the FAA funding mechanisms by creating an additional user/usage based fee/taxation approach for General Aviation.

 

The experience our industry has had with similar user/usage fee bureaucracies in other countries (such as in Europe, Canada, etc) demonstrates that there are serious drawbacks to those systems.  User fees are a disincentive for efficiency and safety at all levels.

 

In the US, our historic safety, efficiency, and freedom based approach to aviation has helped make us the global leader across nearly all aspects of aviation and flight training.  Furthermore, other industries and the general public have benefited from the many advancements derived from aviation related research and development.

 

Others in the world would love to take that leadership position and those industries from us.

 

By allowing the creation of an inefficient and ineffective "user/usage based" tax bureaucracy for general aviation we are undermining and inhibiting our ability to compete - not only in aviation related industries, but also for all businesses and industries that rely on aviation to efficiently operate within our geographically broad country (sea to shinning sea).

 

Spin the clock forward just a few years after an added GA user fee approach is adopted:  needless bureaucratic and administrative costs will rise, usage of air traffic safety services will drop, costs and suffering associated with accidents will increase, costs of business travel and operations will increase, businesses that support general aviation and related activities will struggle, dissolve, and fail, competition from abroad will increase, followed by calls for government incentives and protectionism, etc - a death spiral.

 

We have already lost leadership in several significant industries to foreign interests/leadership, such as textiles, steel, consumer electronics, autos, etc.  What's next, aviation and high tech?  Then, what's left?

 

The general aviation community is committed to working with government and industry to develop our future air transportation system.  But user fee based taxation for general aviation is a terrible idea which undermines safety, efficiency, and our ability to compete globally.  I urge you to preserve the general aviation fuel tax as the sole mechanism for collecting Aviation Trust Fund revenue from the general aviation community and to help protect us and our economic livelihood all from any shortsighted, self-serving, special interest efforts to create unnecessary and inefficient general aviation user fees.

 

Thank you for your consideration of this matter, and for your service to our state.

 

Sincerely,

 

Mr. Rick Titsworth

313-506-5604

 

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster