HR 3708

N5922S

N5922S

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
514
Display Name
Display name:
N5922S
Have you contacted your US Rep. yet to urge him/her to support HR 3708 (General Aviation Pilot Protection Act)? If not, shame on you. :mad:

Please, let's keep this ball rolling. :yes:
 
N5922S said:
Have you contacted your US Rep. yet to urge him/her to support HR 3708 (General Aviation Pilot Protection Act)? If not, shame on you. :mad:

Please, let's keep this ball rolling. :yes:
Click to expand...

Unless your representative is on the subcommittee for aviation, they'll just shoebox your request. This bill is stuck in committee and destined to die there.

Here is the list of subcommittee members:


Rick Larsen, Washington, Ranking Member
Frank A. LoBiondo, New Jersey, Chairman
Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon
Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin
Eddie Bernice Johnson, Texas
Howard Coble, North Carolina
Michael E. Capuano, Massachusetts
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee
Daniel Lipinski, Illinois
Sam Graves, Missouri
Steve Cohen, Tennessee
Blake Farenthold, Texas
André Carson, Indiana
Larry Bucshon, Indiana
Richard M. Nolan, Minnesota
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania
Dina Titus, Nevada
Daniel Webster, Florida
Sean Patrick Maloney, New York
Jeff Denham, California
Cheri Bustos, Illinois
Reid J. Ribble, Wisconsin
Corrine Brown, Florida
Thomas Massie, Kentucky
Elizabeth Esty, Connecticut
Steven Daines, Montana
Nick J. Rahall, II, West Virginia, ex officio
Roger Williams, Texas
Trey Radel, Florida
Mark Meadows, North Carolina
Rodney L. Davis, Illinois, Vice Chair
Bill Shuster, Pennsylvania, ex officio
 
One way to push this forward is check the congressional districts for each one, get a list of all the airports located in them (at least the significant ones), and make flyers/posters to distribute.
 
flyingron said:
Unless your representative is on the subcommittee for aviation, they'll just shoebox your request.
Click to expand...
Not true. I contacted my rep, who is NOT on the aviation subcommittee, and he signed on as a co-sponsor.

Will it die in committee? Maybe, maybe not. I hope not, but am not counting on it.
 
Jim Logajan said:
He's my rep. I asked for suggestions on this board a month ago (http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1338586&post1338586) on what I should say if I sent any message (other than a simple request to support the bill) to help persuade him. I didn't get any serious responses.

I didn't vote for him and I don't share his political philosophy, so I don't know what arguments would persuade him.
Click to expand...

Call either the local or DC office, ask to speak to the transportation and aviation staffer. When they get on the phone, give them your name, address, and let them know you are a registered voter. Then tell the staffer what support you seek.

If you want to get face time, that involves either a trip to DC, or asking your congressman's staffer when they possibly will visit their local office. It really depends on the congressman, some go home and stay in private. Others go home and hang out in their district, doing events and meeting constituents.

Don't send a regular letter. By the time DHS is done with the chemical screening, it looks like crap and will not be read. If you don't want to call or personally visit the office, send an email and make sure you ask that it be forwarded to the Transportation and Aviation staffer.

Good luck, it can be frustrating but Mr. DeFazio has been a champion of Aviation, ATC, and GA for years. I'm sure you will find a staffer well versed in the concerns you have.
 
Jim Logajan said:
He's my rep. I asked for suggestions on this board a month ago (http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1338586&post1338586) on what I should say if I sent any message (other than a simple request to support the bill) to help persuade him. I didn't get any serious responses.

I didn't vote for him and I don't share his political philosophy, so I don't know what arguments would persuade him.
Click to expand...

Medicals are expensive -- both for the pilot and for the FAA - particularly when you fall into special issue territory. Got budget problems? Here is a win win solution.

The FAA can't handle what they have on their plate right now - they are over 100 days behind in processing SI. In order to keep up, they would would require an increase in their budget.

There is no data that shows that eliminating the third class medical requirement made a statistically significant increase in the accident rate in light sport aircraft. Why would we expect anything different for other recreational day VFR aircraft use?

Is the medical process for the average private pilot really a cost effective means for improving safety?

Remind said representative that we have the flight reviews every two years which should help with the problem of pilots not hanging up the keys when they need to (one of the often spouted reasons for needing medicals).
 
The problem is that it's limited to VFR below 14K. That's an odd set of additional requirements.
 
N5922S said:
Have you contacted your US Rep. yet to urge him/her to support HR 3708 (General Aviation Pilot Protection Act)? If not, shame on you. :mad:

Please, let's keep this ball rolling. :yes:
Click to expand...
Just e-mailed my Congressman (Steve Daines, MT/at large) and urged him to support HR3708. I see he's on the House Aviation sub-committee :)
 
flyingron said:
The problem is that it's limited to VFR below 14K. That's an odd set of additional requirements.
Click to expand...
IFR not included is a problem for me but OTOH it'd be a foot in the doorway. Assuming the drivers license medical proved successful the way it's stated in the current bill it's hard to believe that down the road the case couldn't be made to include part 91 IFR also. Certainly IFR is safer and less physically stressful than scud running.
 
flyingron said:
The problem is that it's limited to VFR below 14K. That's an odd set of additional requirements.
Click to expand...
It beats the hell out of the daytime-only VFR below 10K in the other proposal.
 
Saying this is destined to die in committee is a bit of a reach. I used to work on the hill and still communicate with people there regularly. From what I am hearing this has a real shot of slipping through the House withoit any real opposition. Seems they are hearing very little about it, what they do hear is positive, and it is a money saver. Save money without people being up in arms? That's a winner far more often than not.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I527 using Tapatalk
 
WornOutShooter said:
Seems they are hearing very little about it, what they do hear is positive, and it is a money saver. Save money without people being up in arms? That's a winner far more often than not.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I527 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I think you don't hear much because it's just not that controversial as written. Now tack a few billion in transportation funding on to it, and you've got something that may be grossly overweight on take-off.
 
hook_dupin said:
I think you don't hear much because it's just not that controversial as written. Now tack a few billion in transportation funding on to it, and you've got something that may be grossly overweight on take-off.
Click to expand...
What's there in the bill to fund?
 
flyingron said:
Unless your representative is on the subcommittee for aviation, they'll just shoebox your request. This bill is stuck in committee and destined to die there.
Click to expand...

You seem fairly well-versed. Do you have insider information or is this just your opinion?
 
My understanding is that it has to get through the transportation and infrastructure subcommittee in the House before it goes anywhere. I tried to send an email to the cmte reps from my state of MD, Andy Harris, Elijah Cummings and Donna Edwards, but here's the fly in that ointment. The member's sites ask for your zip. If you live outside the member's district, you will politely be told that when they want your opinion, they'll give it to you.
 
Last edited:
steingar said:
You seem fairly well-versed. Do you have insider information or is this just your opinion?
Click to expand...

He's right. If the bill is stonewalled in committee it stays there unless the speaker allows for a call to discontinue normal order (2/3 majority) to bring the stonewalled bill to vote.

You are best served by calling the chairperson. My experience has been that when they start asking for your zip code they won't want to hear from you, but it still is worth a try.
 
MarkZ said:
My experience has been that when they start asking for your zip code they won't want to hear from you, but it still is worth a try.
Click to expand...

Which I find particularly annoying when it's a national and not a state issue at hand. But my guess is that AOPA knows where the offices are.
 
Last edited:
Chip Sylverne said:
Which I find particularly annoying when it's a national and not a state issue at hand. But my guess is that AOPA knows where the offices are.
Click to expand...

AOPA's problem with this will be that they can't take credit for it, so there's no payback for them actively pushing it.

Their more modest proposal was Dead-on-Arrival, so for them to push this would be an admission that their big-fanfare recreational proposal was a mistake.
 
JeffDG said:
AOPA's problem with this will be that they can't take credit for it, so there's no payback for them actively pushing it.

Their more modest proposal was Dead-on-Arrival, so for them to push this would be an admission that their big-fanfare recreational proposal was a mistake.
Click to expand...

The payback is removes a silly, expensive impediment to private aviation. If what you say is truely how AOPA sees the bill, that would be a sad state of affairs indeed. The link below is their public position.

https://www.popvox.com/orgs/aopa
 
Last edited:
Sent an E-Mail to my Congressman today. It might not help but it can't hurt.

Ron DeSantis is a Freshman full of spit and vinegar that is all about cutting waste and supporting the Constitution. He is an Iraq veteran that was an adviser to a U.S. Naval Seal Commander and he was awarded the Bronze Star for meritorious service.
 
JOhnH said:
Sent an E-Mail to my Congressman today. It might not help but it can't hurt.

Ron DeSantis is a Freshman full of spit and vinegar that is all about cutting waste and supporting the Constitution. He is an Iraq veteran that was an adviser to a U.S. Naval Seal Commander and he was awarded the Bronze Star for meritorious service.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately he is in the freshman class and does not serve on the committee. He won't carry any clout.

Here's the silver lining. If you get DeSantis's support, you have a Yea vote when the issue comes up. Now we need 400 of our buddies across the country to do the same with their reps. Then we need a few of these (namely all) buddies to send a letter to Mr. Boehner and Ms. Pelosi, and let them know this thing has support and needs to be pushed thru right away. Then we wait for the motion to discontinue and hope all those "Yea" votes don't magically vote the wrong way.
 
This is actually a big win for Mike Capuano (D-MA) who is on the committee since Terafugia is in his state if not his district. They want to market a roadable aircraft and getting rid of the 3rd class medical gets rid of 1 of the 3 qualification steps for potential customers.
 
airheadpenguin said:
This is actually a big win for Mike Capuano (D-MA) who is on the committee since Terafugia is in his state if not his district. They want to market a roadable aircraft and getting rid of the 3rd class medical gets rid of 1 of the 3 qualification steps for potential customers.
Click to expand...

The Transition is an LSA. Getting rid of the third class will actually hurt them. All the work they did to qualify it as an LSA, their later competitors can do with far fewer restrictions on weight.
 
JeffDG said:
The Transition is an LSA. Getting rid of the third class will actually hurt them. All the work they did to qualify it as an LSA, their later competitors can do with far fewer restrictions on weight.
Click to expand...

Half the value of a LSA an industry-governed path to aircraft certification vice Part 23.
 
airheadpenguin said:
This is actually a big win for Mike Capuano (D-MA) who is on the committee since Terafugia is in his state if not his district. They want to market a roadable aircraft and getting rid of the 3rd class medical gets rid of 1 of the 3 qualification steps for potential customers.
Click to expand...

The opposite actually, Terafugia and others would NOT want this to happen at all. Nobody wants to fly an LSA unless they can't get a medical. LSA manufacturers operate in a government created market, removing 3rd class medical requirements kills that market instantly. And ESPECIALLY Terafugia, they went to great lengths to get exemptions to go over the LSA limit but still be considered an LSA.
 
bartmc said:
The opposite actually, Terafugia and others would NOT want this to happen at all. Nobody wants to fly an LSA unless they can't get a medical. LSA manufacturers operate in a government created market, removing 3rd class medical requirements kills that market instantly. And ESPECIALLY Terafugia, they went to great lengths to get exemptions to go over the LSA limit but still be considered an LSA.
Click to expand...

That is most of it, but as has been pointed out, the SLSA standards (as opposed to the Part 23 standards) do give the LSA some advantages.
 
hook_dupin said:
Right now...nothing. However, riders get tacked on all the time. I could see a few runway resurfacing jobs getting stapled on to the end of this before it's over.
Click to expand...
Yes sadly that's the way they do business down there. Sweeten it up with amendments to get enuf' votes to pass the bill. That's how they pass the Farm Bill, attach Food Stamps to the USDA to get the urban congressmen's votes.
 
bartmc said:
The opposite actually, Terafugia and others would NOT want this to happen at all. Nobody wants to fly an LSA unless they can't get a medical. LSA manufacturers operate in a government created market, removing 3rd class medical requirements kills that market instantly. And ESPECIALLY Terafugia, they went to great lengths to get exemptions to go over the LSA limit but still be considered an LSA.
Click to expand...

I doubt Terafugia's core market--to the extent it has any--is really people who can't get medicals. I suspect that Terafugia went the LSA route because (1) they thought certification would be easier for a product that would be rather complicated (or impossible) to certify under both Part 23 and the laws that govern road vehicles and (2) they thought that simpler training allowed under Sport Pilot rules would increase their appeal to customers who were not the traditional pilot types.

I suspect that Terafugia would actually be quite happy if the driver's license medical were expanded and the Part 23 re-write let them make a heavier vehicle without cumbersome exemptions. I can only imagine what a pain the 1320 lbs limit must be to them.
 
My response from Rep Luke Messer Indiana 6th District:

Thank you for contacting me to share your support for H.R. 3708, the General Aviation Pilot Protection Act. I appreciate hearing from you.

As you know, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires that pilots of small aircraft hold a Third Class Medical Certificate in order to operate as the commanding pilot of an aircraft. H.R. 3708 would direct the Administrator of the FAA to loosen medical restrictions required to operate a small aircraft. This legislation would reduce the regulatory-burden on certified private pilots of small aircraft and allow their physicians, family and insurers to determine if they are medically fit to fly.

Although I am not a member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure to which this bill has been referred, you may be certain that I will remember your support for the General Aviation Pilot Protection Act should the House consider this legislation in the future.

Again, thank you for the benefit of your views.
 
aventhu said:
My response from Rep Luke Messer Indiana 6th District:

Thank you for contacting me to share your support for H.R. 3708, the General Aviation Pilot Protection Act. I appreciate hearing from you.

As you know, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires that pilots of small aircraft hold a Third Class Medical Certificate in order to operate as the commanding pilot of an aircraft. H.R. 3708 would direct the Administrator of the FAA to loosen medical restrictions required to operate a small aircraft. This legislation would reduce the regulatory-burden on certified private pilots of small aircraft and allow their physicians, family and insurers to determine if they are medically fit to fly.

Although I am not a member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure to which this bill has been referred, you may be certain that I will remember your support for the General Aviation Pilot Protection Act should the House consider this legislation in the future.

Again, thank you for the benefit of your views.
Click to expand...

Exactly as it should be. This is a form letter response from Mr. Messer's Transportation staffer. I would follow up with a phone call to his office, as well as an offer for his staffer (and hopefully Mr. Messer) to visit your home airfield.

Legislative relationships can - and do - take years and a ton of dedication to form. But it can be invaluable when attempting to garner support for our "hobby."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top