Hal, Are You Guys There?

[Bill Greenwood]

Are you guys at EAA headquarters and who run this forum there?

The reason that I am asking is I don't see anything on this forum about the pilots rights bill and being able to fly without needing a 3rd class medical.

Is this an important issue? Or just something like non smoking which doesn't seem to matter to many at EAA?

Well, judging by the editorial in the April EAA PILOT magazine, it it pretty important.

But I don't see any reference to it on this forum.

Hal, or someone, how about posting the reference which I believe is EAA.org and then the Rally Congress section so that members, hopefully all of them, can take less than 2 minutes to send the electronic letter to their Congress person asking support for this bill.

Thanks, Bill Greenwood

[Hal Bryan]

Hi Bill -

Yes, we're here, and, yes, this is and has been the number one priority of our government advocacy group.

We've had some great discussions on these forums about medical reform as well as the specific PBoR2:

http://eaaforums.org/showthread.php?5522-Drivers-license-medical (http://eaaforums.org/showthread.php?5522-Drivers-license-medical)

http://eaaforums.org/showthread.php?5764-Pilot-s-Bill-of-Rights-2 (http://eaaforums.org/showthread.php?5764-Pilot-s-Bill-of-Rights-2)

In addition, here's the direct link to our Rally Congress page where you can add your voice to the 18,000+ letters already sent:

http://govt.eaa.org/17422/support-pilots-bill-rights-2/

Cheers -

Hal

[Bill Greenwood]

Thanks, Hal, many of us did this last summer, but as per the recent election which changed some Congress people, and the slow progress with the DOT obstacle, as per Jack Pelton's editorial we need to write/call again. What we are specifically asking support for is the Pilot Rights Bill Number 2 which includes the medical reform, along with the rights from the version one.

By the way, if you don't believe in miracles, like the govt doing something good for private gen aviation, take heart.

It is a long shot, but how likely is it that U of Wisconsin, would be reaching the final four, not is football or ice fishing or brat eating or curling, BUT IN BASKETBALL!!!!!!!!

Not only that, but some people think they might actually upset Kentucky.

[Floatsflyer]

Hal, I greatly admire your ability to demonstrate constraint. That's why you're the moderator and not a prison guard.

To Bill, UW is a number 1 seed and has been a dominating team all year. Pretty good for a bunch of white guys! :-) Anybody can beat anybody in a one-off tournament but I think Kentucky is destined to go undefeated. UW's Frank Kaminsky is projected to go in the top 4 in the NBA draft.

[rwanttaja]

It really boils down to what the EAA Forums *are*. I see them as discussion areas for EAA members, with Hal here to make us keep everybody neat and pretty (like the Mickey Mouse Club, but with less rodentia).

I'm happy when Hal, Charlie, or Tom make announcements as to major occurrences or clarify points being discussed...but I, personally, have no interest in seeing routine press releases posted here. "Medical reform approved" is a great reason to post, "EAA continues to discuss medical reform" really isn't. EAA has a whole web page (http://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/eaa-news-and-aviation-news) dedicated to that sort of thing.

Keep in mind, too, that Hal isn't really involved in these events, so complaining to him isn't much help. A better approach might be to PM or email Charlie or Tom for the current status. I've gotten pretty good response when I've done that...then again, I know where the bodies are buried. :-)

Ron Wanttaja

[Bill Greenwood]

Ron, "a better approach might be to pm Charlie or Tom" . None of that is going to get Congress to approve this bill. Maybe you didn't read the editorial in this months Pilot magazine, or maybe this is an issue that you just don't care about, but it affects a lot of pilots and if you won't take 2 minutes to send the electronic letter for yourself, maybe you will do it for your fellow pilots or private gen av. I don't know who "Charlie" is either, don't see a Charlie on upper level EAA managers.

I wasn't looking for just a news update or release and that is not going to get us to the goal, Just saying that I put the wrong thing on the forum or shouldn't complain to Hal may be satisfying for you, but again what we need is action, AS PER JACK PELTON'S EDITORIAL, and not critisizing each other.

How about taking the action to send the letter and then you can start another topic about how bad my post was?

This forum is certainly for discussion, major issues and a ton of minutia, but when there is a major effort by EAA, not just my major effort, and it calls for some action by members, then it should be a highlight of this foroum.

I am not surprised that someone took it upon themselves to nit pick and nay say what I wrote. I have read your opinion and I think this issue is bigger and more important.

And, I bet Hal and I are still friends, at least I hope so. And most of all, note that Hal quickly posted exactly the reference that we need to send this mail, just as I had hoped.

[Hal Bryan]

And, I bet Hal and I are still friends, at least I hope so. And most of all, note that Hal quickly posted exactly the reference that we need to send this mail, just as I had hoped.

We're all still friends as far as I'm concerned.

Now how about all of us redirect our energy toward contacting our Representatives in Washington and encouraging them to act. If you haven't used our Rally Congress tool yet, please do. If you have, tell your friends to do it, and consider sending a more personal email or letter or making a phone call to the appropriate politicians.

The passion is there; let's focus it on the mission at hand!

End of sermon.

- Hal

[rwanttaja]

Ron, "a better approach might be to pm Charlie or Tom" . None of that is going to get Congress to approve this bill.
Nor are pointed complaints towards Hal or anyone else at EAA. I understand your need to know what's happening, but if things aren't happening, then things aren't happening. Repeating "Are we there yet?" over and over again generally doesn't get you to your destination any faster, especially when you say it to someone who doesn't have any control over the process.

As has been reported by EAA (and, for that matter, me), the issue is hung up at the Department of Transportation. One would hope that EAA is on them like a bad rash, but the kind of lobbying being done is probably something most of us would find pretty boring. It probably consists of phone calls along this line:

"This is XXXXX from the Experimental Aviation Association. We were wondering what was the status of the Third-Class medical reform?"

"The issue is currently under study."

"When do you anticipate the next step will be taken?"

"It's hard to say."

Lather, rinse, repeat.

This would also probably be pretty close to the transcript for when EAA's Government Contact Specialist physically goes to DOT headquarters to push for action.

The problem is, there is no formal process defining what the DOT is doing at this stage. Every party with a dog in this hunt is pushing the same way. As EAA's lobbyist is leaving an office, the AMA's lobbyist is going in, urging delay and, hopefully, complete rejection of the program. Again, there's nothing formal right now...no one is on the record. The AMA's lobbyist can say WHATEVER he likes about the program, invent all sorts of dire consequences if it goes through. Want to bet they've mentioned the Germanwings crash?

And who has more money for lobbying...the EAA or the AMA?

The problem is, either the EAA actions are boring (e.g., repeated contacts) OR they're sensitive enough that they don't want to bandy things about. If a staffer at the DOT gives the EAA's lobbyist a hint on how to speed things up, we certainly shouldn't expect or want an EAA press release blabbing what the guy said.

It's understandable being upset about this, but it's far more complex than most people realize. "If you like laws and sausages, you should never watch either one being made," said von Bismarck, and the old Junker was right.

Ron Wanttaja

[Don January]

The wife and I sent our letters, x-our fingers. Don and Vickie

[Frank Giger]

It's times like this that makes one almost nostalgic for the day when effective lobbying could be concluded with hookers and booze.

(Which is how Atlanta became an airmail route hub and Birmingham didn't...note the difference in airport size and traffic today)

[TedK]

It's times like this that makes one almost nostalgic for the day when effective lobbying could be concluded with hookers and booze.

(Which is how Atlanta became an airmail route hub and Birmingham didn't...note the difference in airport size and traffic today)

That seems to be a better solution because it is only a momentary transgression limited to the parties at hand, whereas giving congress critters money to line their pockets is like giving someone their first crack or heroin. That can lead to a lifetime addiction that is corrosive to society.

I think we we would get a much more representative House if we selected Congresspersons by lottery from sitting Juries for one term only. If you are qualified to sit a jury on a capital case then IMO you are qualified to spend two years at the Capitol.

I have much more faith that my interests align with the common man or woman than someone who is forced by the system to become a professional vote panderer.

It would reduce lobbying to presenting the merits of the case vice the current system of influence by campaign contribution. Frankly, I wonder why our current system of contribution for influence can't be prosecuted as conspiracy.

[Frank Giger]

The problem with your thesis is that the sorts of people who wind up on jury duty are the types of people not smart enough to know how to get out of it.

;)

Swapping Congressmen out every two years regardless of quality would be a train wreck....by the time one educates the legislator on the topic they're out of office. It's actually easier to sway the ignorant than it is the corrupt, and not always for the better end.

[Bill Greenwood]

Ted and Frank, please if you want to slam Congress, which is a bit like kicking a stray dog, please do it on your own topic on another site.

This topic is my effort to get our folks to take some action to help private gen aviation. as suggested by our EAA chairman.

Maybe you could write a letter to the magazine about how bad Congress is if you think that is productive.

Thanks

And have you guys sent the letter this time in support of the 2nd Pilot Rights Bill?

[TedK]

Bill- I am not slamming Congress, I am commenting and suggesting constructive criticism on the situation our congress folks are placed into. it is difficult for our lobbying to be effective when the reality of the situation is that money talks.

To your other point, I have written letters to my Senators and Rep and engaged others to do the same, but it is hard to reinforce our lobbying when they do so (or at least I think they are doing so) but without informing us. I suspect they leave a publication behind at each contact. If they shared that publication with us, and let us know what concerned that Member, we the people of the EAA in that district or State could respond to our Member. As it is now, EAA (and AOPA) lobby stealthily without the discrete reinforcement of their membership.

It appears to me they are saying "trust us to deliver the goods...but we don't want your help other than to say there are many of us."

Personal Aviation does not have the deep pockets and clout to buy the Influence we need, therefore we need a lobbying strategy that recognizes that and brings other tools, such as the personal engagement of our membership to bear in a manner that overcomes the monied influence.

Ted

ps hyperbole and humor got you to engage. ;)

[rwanttaja]

It appears to me they are saying "trust us to deliver the goods...but we don't want your help other than to say there are many of us."
Yes, but... I suspect lobbying is something that is done better behind the scenes, with as little publicity as possible. Come election time, you don't want your opponent to be claiming you're in "XXXX's" pocket, or claiming you're knuckling under to a high-visibility pressure group.

Got a good friend who's been a DC lobbyist for 20+ years. Almost never talks about it, other than mentioning that he was at such-and-such hearing. The only "insider" stories he's told have been good ones (where he's been impressed by a person's sincerity, smarts, and integrity).


Personal Aviation does not have the deep pockets and clout to buy the Influence we need, therefore we need a lobbying strategy that recognizes that and brings other tools, such as the personal engagement of our membership to bear in a manner that overcomes the monied influence.

Our problem is we DO have deep pockets, just not enough pockets. The element of GA with truly deep pockets (business aviation) doesn't get involved with our grassroots issues. Medical and aircraft certification reform doesn't affect them, so they don't put their political and financial clout behind those issues.

Ron Wanttaja

[Frank Giger]

Relax, Bill, we're just having some Internet with our message board. Since the question was answered by the source I figured the heat was off.

Yep, letters sent, and I met with our candidates for Congress before the primary (when they were campaigning), figuring I'd best get my pitch in to whomever won when they were most likely to listen to a five minute talk. I even played the Alabama patriot card, reminding them that the Wright brothers set up their flight school not up North, but down in Montgomery, and that aviation and Alabama runs from them right up through Outer Space, and keeping it alive is a duty for them.

I don't knock Congress; it does what it's built to do, and in the main the membership is there to do their jobs as representatives. The whole thing was intentionally designed to be inefficient and slow to keep from making hasty laws. The beaurocracy, naturally, does what it does because of its nature. I view it kind of like a dancing bear when things happen in systems like that - it's not how well the bear dances that's the thing, but that it can dance at all.

[TedK]

Yes, but... I suspect lobbying is something that is done better behind the scenes, with as little publicity as possible. Come election time, you don't want your opponent to be claiming you're in "XXXX's" pocket, or claiming you're knuckling under to a high-visibility pressure group.

Got a good friend who's been a DC lobbyist for 20+ years. Almost never talks about it, other than mentioning that he was at such-and-such hearing. The only "insider" stories he's told have been good ones (where he's been impressed by a person's sincerity, smarts, and integrity).



Our problem is we DO have deep pockets, just not enough pockets. The element of GA with truly deep pockets (business aviation) doesn't get involved with our grassroots issues. Medical and aircraft certification reform doesn't affect them, so they don't put their political and financial clout behind those issues.

Ron Wanttaja

Which is why I use the term Personal Aviation to describe us. Business Aviation doesn't give a hoot about us. They have deep pockets and clout. We, the part of GA that cares about Third Class Med and Part 23 reform, don't.

And to your comment about your Lobbyist Friend operating in the shadows, Yep, that the way the Influence Buyers do it. We can't buy what we want, and because we don't have a bankroll that we are trying discretely to wave, have no reason to stay in the shadows.

I do have a little experience and success walking the halls of Congress as a David among the Goliaths. I was able to be successful by shining lights in corners, speaking in the open and on the record, not bringing a nickel of money, being persuasive on the merits of the arguments. If we think we are going to out-PAC the AMA, we need to be grounded for being as crazy a certain notorious Airbus copilot.

[Byron J. Covey]

It's times like this that makes one almost nostalgic for the day when effective lobbying could be concluded with hookers and booze.

(Which is how Atlanta became an airmail route hub and Birmingham didn't...note the difference in airport size and traffic today)

Are you conceding the fact that Georgia has better hookers and booze than Alabama?


BJC

[Frank Giger]

:D

No, I'm saying that Atlanta's officials who were in charge of showing the "best of the city" to the post office selection committee knew where to find both for them.

Can't say I blame them. The committee went to Birmingham first (because it actually was a better rail hub) and were treated to a tour of churches, the theater, and all manner of wholesome highlights to show off how decent the city was. They were invited to stay in the homes of the City Elders.

Then they went to Atlanta where they were given a tour of whatever the proto Gold Club was called back then and then given suites in the finest hotels with "personal maid service."

Atlanta got the air mail hub, which meant the air carriers based there to carry said mail.

I write this not to derail the thread, but to highlight the fact that whatever we think is new in politics isn't. There was no Golden Age of legislation in this country. And yes, it's been waaayyy more polarized and unfriendly between parties. Just look at the Lincoln administration - now that's obstruction of an executive agenda.

[rwanttaja]

Then they went to Atlanta where they were given a tour of whatever the proto Gold Club was called back then and then given suites in the finest hotels with "personal maid service."
That kind of reminds me of the Congressional hearings against Howard Hughes after WWII. He was accused of providing food, liquor, and Ladies of Negotiable Virtue to the various military officers involved in source selection and production contracts. He admitted it freely, stated it was standard industry practice, and that there was (at that time) no laws against it.

Those of us working Government contracts know how things have changed... we can't supply coffee and doughnuts anymore without notifying the Government folks what the cost is and how to pay.

Ron Wanttaja

[TedK]

And back to topic...

So, since we don't have the Inluence, deep pockets and clout of some of our opposition, and we have the morals that Howard Hughes lacked, how do we get EAA to lobby in the most effective way it possibly can?

i don't doubt that EAA is trying hard, however, I am skeptical that it is going to be as effective as WE need it to be. There are no points for second place on this issue.

ted

[Gunslinger37]

I check the govtrack.us web site daily to see the status of each bill and write a letter plus call each of my House and Senate members weekly to urge them to support these legislative actions. I wish the EAA would post updates on the actions that Sean Elliott's people are doing in Washington, and any feedback they are getting, even rumors, about the progress of this issue.

Here is the latest status:
HR 1062 has 36 co-sponsors, the last one signed on March 26.
HR 1086 has 23 co-sponsors, the last one signed on March 24.
S 571 has 18 co-sponsors, the last one signed on March 26.
S 573 has 5 co-sponsors, the last one signed on Feb. 25.

We need to keep the pressure on your House representatives and Senators to co-sponsor and move these bills to the floor for a vote. Or they will die in the subcommittee like they did last session.

The FAA NPRM is still sitting in the dark hole of DOT with a new projected date of April 13 for movement to the OMB for approval and a publication date of July 20. Don't expect much to happen with the NPRM unless Congress puts on the pressure in response to our letters and phone calls.