Someone posted this on the CPA web site - fire off a quick email to your representatives in congress to help prevent user fees for GA and more bureaucracy that none of us want to deal with.
It is quick and easy.
http://web.nbaa.org/public/govt/action/?ISSUE=nbaa0005
Thomas
-8 wings
GA user fees
-
Lorin Dueck
- Class D
- Posts: 252
- Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2005 2:12 pm
- Location: San Jose, CA
- Contact:
-
aparchment
- Class C
- Posts: 522
- Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:43 pm
suggestions for improvement
At the risk of looking like an idiot, I was hoping that you guys could make suggestions to enhance the form email that NBAA is sending to Congress. I didn't think it was particularly well written, so I modified my message.
Here is what I posted. I am hoping that some of you in the audience who write well and are more in touch with the issues/facts than I am would take the time to further tweak what I have written and offer it to others for submission to their Senators and Congressmen.
Thanks guys/gals.
Antony
--------- BEGIN QUOTE ---------
"I work as a consultant at ICS Consulting, located in Scarborough, ME. I am sending this letter to request your support in opposition to any proposal that would impose user fees on the general aviation community. I, and many others in the state use general aviation aircraft to make business travel more efficient. Many of my clients are located far from my office in Scarborough. Some are out of state. By flying myself to meet these clients I am able to spend less time traveling and thus reduce costs and wasted time. Furthermore, in the cases where I choose to fly myself, my clients are located significantly closer to general aviation airports than to major airports.
The general aviation community already contributes toward its use of the federal airway and air traffic control system by paying taxes on fuel used. These taxes go into the Airport/Airways Trust Fund. The general aviation community holds that fuel taxes are the best way for general aviation to pay for its use of the national airspace system.
Funding the national airspace system through payment of fuel taxes very closely correlates to requiring that those who use the system more should pay more. In fact, there is a strong argument that general aviation pays more than its share toward its use of the system since many general aviation flights do not utilize either the federal airway system or air traffic control. There is no simpler and more accurate way to distinguish between heavy and light users of the system than to gauge usage by the amount of fuel burned. Simply put, heavier users should pay more. The existing fuel tax assures this relationship.
Experience with user fees in other countries demonstrates that there are serious drawbacks to a system funded by user fees. In Europe the cost of aviation operations has ballooned as a result of allowing uncontrolled system costs to drive funding demands and correspondingly require tapping into the seemingly bottomless well of user fees.
Furthermore user fees will significantly stunt the rebirth that we have seen in the general aviation industry. If in fact the federal government is serious about its initiative to develop an advanced air transport system, it makes no sense to handicap those best able to help it accomplish this goal -- the general aviation manufacturers and the industry partners who support them.
In addition, user fees may negatively impact air safety. If user fees are imposed, many users may elect not to use the services for which there are charges. Having less informed, less communicative pilots is a poor idea in a system in which safety is enhanced by knowledge of weather and other aircraft traffic.
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.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter."
--------- END QUOTE ---------
Here is what I posted. I am hoping that some of you in the audience who write well and are more in touch with the issues/facts than I am would take the time to further tweak what I have written and offer it to others for submission to their Senators and Congressmen.
Thanks guys/gals.
Antony
--------- BEGIN QUOTE ---------
"I work as a consultant at ICS Consulting, located in Scarborough, ME. I am sending this letter to request your support in opposition to any proposal that would impose user fees on the general aviation community. I, and many others in the state use general aviation aircraft to make business travel more efficient. Many of my clients are located far from my office in Scarborough. Some are out of state. By flying myself to meet these clients I am able to spend less time traveling and thus reduce costs and wasted time. Furthermore, in the cases where I choose to fly myself, my clients are located significantly closer to general aviation airports than to major airports.
The general aviation community already contributes toward its use of the federal airway and air traffic control system by paying taxes on fuel used. These taxes go into the Airport/Airways Trust Fund. The general aviation community holds that fuel taxes are the best way for general aviation to pay for its use of the national airspace system.
Funding the national airspace system through payment of fuel taxes very closely correlates to requiring that those who use the system more should pay more. In fact, there is a strong argument that general aviation pays more than its share toward its use of the system since many general aviation flights do not utilize either the federal airway system or air traffic control. There is no simpler and more accurate way to distinguish between heavy and light users of the system than to gauge usage by the amount of fuel burned. Simply put, heavier users should pay more. The existing fuel tax assures this relationship.
Experience with user fees in other countries demonstrates that there are serious drawbacks to a system funded by user fees. In Europe the cost of aviation operations has ballooned as a result of allowing uncontrolled system costs to drive funding demands and correspondingly require tapping into the seemingly bottomless well of user fees.
Furthermore user fees will significantly stunt the rebirth that we have seen in the general aviation industry. If in fact the federal government is serious about its initiative to develop an advanced air transport system, it makes no sense to handicap those best able to help it accomplish this goal -- the general aviation manufacturers and the industry partners who support them.
In addition, user fees may negatively impact air safety. If user fees are imposed, many users may elect not to use the services for which there are charges. Having less informed, less communicative pilots is a poor idea in a system in which safety is enhanced by knowledge of weather and other aircraft traffic.
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.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter."
--------- END QUOTE ---------
I modified mine too.
I think it is unlikely that all these emails are actually read in any detail by staffers in the politicians' office; I mainly edit mine so it looks different and looks like someone actually took time to think and write (i.e. maybe like I care more) rather than cutting a pasting a form letter.
Thomas
-8 wings
I think it is unlikely that all these emails are actually read in any detail by staffers in the politicians' office; I mainly edit mine so it looks different and looks like someone actually took time to think and write (i.e. maybe like I care more) rather than cutting a pasting a form letter.
Thomas
-8 wings
If we're lucky! 