For What It's Worth: A couple days ago I had the opportunity to question Bob Poole in person. He is the founder of Reason Foundation's Public Policy Institute -- probably the main foundation advocating privatization & modernization of air traffic control. I don't think it would be an exaggeration to say that Phil Boyer of AOPA would likely consider Bob Poole to be G.A. Public Enemy #1 on the current FAA funding controversy (due to come up for a vote by September '07, I think).
I raised with him the concerns I have read on our Board and elsewhere about the U.S. following the European model, in imposing user fees on G.A. His answer was that there is currently ZERO likelihood of the U.S. following the European model of user fees for G.A., that user fees *for G.A. PISTON aircraft* are not and have not been part of either the FAA proposal (or Reason's tougher one). His explanation of why was that (1) Congress perceives AOPA as very politically powerful, (2) G.A./AOPA said they preferred funding stayed via fuel tax for G.A., and the FAA took them at their word, (3) it would be very costly to monitor and bill user fees to huge ##s of G.A. private plane flights. On the latter point, airlines (and corporate jets?) require a much smaller record-keeping burden because their flights are scheduled, and billing those can happen from their schedule, which is what that segment of aviation said it preferred. Similarly, we G.A. piston pilots would not pay any charges for talking to So Cal Approach, Departure, or en route controllers like L.A. Center -- under either proposal. The only exception for G.A. are landing fees at "the nation's 30 most congested airports." I have not yet been able to locate a list of those, but did read somewhere else that it is the Class B airspace airports. I'm planning to ask AOPA for confirmation of that, or for that list of 30, unless someone here can direct us to the link. Very important to me was that under either their plan or the FAA's, existing *safety* functions, such as FSS, flight plans, etc., would continue to be financed from general tax revenues, just like other non-aviation safety functions are paid from general fund. [The 3 functional areas of the FAA are 1- safety, 2- ATC, 3- airport grants.] So it does not appear that we are at risk of U.S. pilots foregoing safety briefings because of having to pay individual user fees for those services -- I'm told these are not currently part of any proposal on the table. So I felt somewhat clearer on the specifics and reassured after this conversation. If you don't, please don't kill the messenger: I am reporting, not advocating. Linda
