FAA Wants EAA To Pay Them To Staff Oshkosh l

[Frank Giger]

What's wrong with Ron? At least it's not an adjective.

The unseemly part of the whole mess is the "gotcha" factor. Sequestration was telegraphed over a year ago, and effects on Airventure should have been worked out a long time ago. For this year the FAA should bite the bullet - and yes, they can do so, as the funds were committed (and in Federal Budget ways of thinking, already spent) already.

The rules of sequestration, even before Congress amended the FAA's constraints, allowed for the flexibility of travel expenditures for individual events even if it did constrain the whole pot.

For the future, though, there can be a middle ground. For example, the EAA could agree to provide local housing and transportation for the ATC personnel (leaving the FAA on the hook for per diem, salary, and transportation to Oshkosh). Is it unreasonable? Not for an event of the size of Airventure, IMHO.

OTOH, if I were running the political show I'd take the other tact - showing how government services are meaningful and worthy to the average Joe (and why across-the-board cuts aren't always the best answer).

[rwanttaja]

What's wrong with Ron? At least it's not an adjective.

My dear Mr. Giger...you share a first name with one of the most famous and noble characters in aviation fiction. Me, I share a first name with one of the most famous porn stars.

(a first name, and nothing else, let me hasten to add.)

The unseemly part of the whole mess is the "gotcha" factor. Sequestration was telegraphed over a year ago, and effects on Airventure should have been worked out a long time ago.

The impression I got from Dick Knapinski's write-up last week was that the FAA wasn't being too forthcoming about sequestration-related impacts. "EAA had heard some rumblings about some numbers being gathered. It took a trip to DC to ask the FAA's top officials directly whether this was taking place before we got the honest answer. That was about two weeks ago." Probably until that trip, no one was willing to make any sort of statement, and I suspect that was just building EAA's unease. Sometimes, getting answers out of the government is like trying to nail jello to the wall.

For this year the FAA should bite the bullet - and yes, they can do so, as the funds were committed (and in Federal Budget ways of thinking, already spent) already.

The rules of sequestration, even before Congress amended the FAA's constraints, allowed for the flexibility of travel expenditures for individual events even if it did constrain the whole pot.

That's the kind of thing that makes you blink a bit, about this. Yes, sequestration cut ~6% from the FAA's budget. There probably wouldn't have been as much of a controversy if the FAA had cut that percent from the AirVenture support allocation vs. making EAA pay for the whole wad. It'd have been easier for EAA to come up with a last-minute $60,000 vs. $1,000,000.

It could have turned into a positive PR thing for both sides if EAA had then stepped up to make up the shortfall. "EAA and FAA cooperate to ensure the safety of AirVenture" could have been the theme. As you mention, EAA could even have provided partial payment in kind, with lodging and transportation and even meal vouchers for the FAA staff.

But no. The FAA had to try stick EAA with the whole thing.

Makes one wonder if someone at the FAA had it out for EAA, but I tend to go with, "Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity." The sequester has triggered a whole new round of stupidity in the Government... budgets used to be predictable things, where you fought through the spring and summer and eventually knew how much you'd have for the next fiscal year. But the sequester was going to happen then wasn't going to happen, then was going to happen next week then wasn't going to happen for a couple of months. I wonder if people who normally don't get involved in budget issues were dragged in to help, which meant the solutions weren't bounded by traditional practice.

Ron Wanttaja

[Hal Bryan]

FYI, if you disagree with the FAA's actions, we're asking members to ask their Senators to lend their support as well:

http://govt.eaa.org/10203/tell-faa-n...iation-events/

[RV8505]

Even a Day at Disney is going up! Disney now $92; Disney World tops $100

Read more: http://www.myfoxny.com/story/2248849...#ixzz2VByULv8z

[Mayhemxpc]

Outstanding Hal, I will be right on it.

[rwanttaja]

FYI, if you disagree with the FAA's actions, we're asking members to ask their Senators to lend their support as well:

http://govt.eaa.org/10203/tell-faa-n...iation-events/

Hal, it might be useful if EAA could give us a list of talking points, too. Just being *mad* when we call the Senator's office isn't enough... what are the specific points that best help our cause? Obviously, we don't want a script, but a bullet list of points why the Senator should support us might help some those of us who hem and haw a lot. I'm pretty inarticulate, you know.

Ron Wanttaja

[Hal Bryan]

Hi Ron -

I was pressed for time to at least get the basic link posted while very much on the go this afternoon, hence the quick "drive by" posting. Time is a factor as the letter "closes" tomorrow afternoon.

I believe Tom Charpentier will chime in with more, but you can check out our news story here:

http://eaa.org/news/2013/2013-06-03_...rs-act-now.asp

For more, and if you choose to use the Rally Congress tool, we've generated a boilerplate letter that you can sign as is or edit as you see fit.

Update: See also Jonathan Harger's post here:

http://www.eaaforums.org/showthread.php?t=3898

[Ylinen]

Here is an idea I have not seen discussed. If the FAA wants to charge the EAA for Air Traffic Control services, I recommend EAA go to the DOD and ask for some Air Force ATC teams to support. They would probably do a better job and need the training anyway. If we are forced to pay for ATC services that we have already been taxed by fuel taxes to fund, I would rather pay to have some Air Force Personal support us and give them a chance to enjoy the event. Some Combat Air Control teams would do an outstanding job.

[rwanttaja]

I believe Tom Charpentier will chime in with more, but you can check out our news story here:

http://eaa.org/news/2013/2013-06-03_...rs-act-now.asp

For more, and if you choose to use the Rally Congress tool, we've generated a boilerplate letter that you can sign as is or edit as you see fit.

Outstanding, Hal, and my apologies for pushing you at what has to be a very busy time.

One thing I'll suggest to folks is to at least add something personal to the START of the boilerplate letter. This makes it look a bit different from a group mailing. I've attached my own letter to show what I mean.

Ron Wanttaja

[Tom Charpentier]

Thanks Ron, you're absolutely right that a personalized letter almost always goes farther than the boilerplate, and there's a way to edit the email on the Rally Congress page (or members are welcome to call or email their Senators directly). At this point, however, our strategy is "strength in numbers" so any message is better than no message.

As I'm writing this we just surpassed 10,000 emails sent since we went live about eight hours ago (each email is counted separately so that's 5,000 unique petitioners so far). You guys are awesome, keep the emails coming!

Ylinen, thanks for the thought - we're certainly looking at every option and chasing down every lead.

Fingers crossed folks, and we'll keep you updated throughout this process. But no matter what happens, ​see you in Oshkosh!