I would be enthusiastic about the accumulating cosponsorships of the Pilots Bill of Rights 2 except for what was revealed in the Manchin-Boozman amendment and from a conversation I had with an advocacy staffer at EAA. From both of those sources I came away with the understanding that the text of PBOR2 that these co-sponsors are supporting behind the scenes has only a slight resemblance of the text we are being shown publicly. I don't have the Manchin Boozman text handy, but it said, for example, that a third class medical would still be required within the past ten years, though with allowances for it to expire. i.e. it helped old pilots but not new ones.
If I am being asked to contact my legislators in support of a bill when I don't know what is actually in that bill as currently negotiated, I find that misleading.
Can someone be forthcoming to the public as to what PBOR2 currently looks like in the same form that these legislators see it when they decide to co-sponsor it? It would be more fair if we were not left to fly blind here.
Thank you.