Just How Far Will This Gov't Go To Hurt The Aviation Industry?

A wise man told me that before you got into a fight, a real fight, that you had to be utterly certain that your opponent wished you no good... and it seems that there is little one can say in opposition to the idea that the current administration is the most anti-aviation we've ever encountered.

In short, this administration means to do aviation 'no good.'

On Friday the 13th (the irony of which is not lost on us), an Obama Administration flunkie, (Dana Hyde, Associate Director for General Government Programs, Office of Management and Budget), responded to the thousands of person who used the White House petition site to protest the concept of aviation user fees and it's now pretty clear that the President is looking at the aviation business as one more group that's obviously not paying its fair share... even if paying that so-called fair share will put the final nail in the coffin on an embattled industry.

ANN has been told that its been a bit hysterical in stating that aviation is facing tough times and even tougher foes... but if this isn't proof of the battles and hazards ahead, we simply don't know what is. We'll have more input shortly... but for the moment, please read (below) the Obama Administration's published position on aviation user fees.

Why We Need Aviation User Fees

Thank you for signing the petition "Take Aviation User Fees Off the Table." We appreciate your participation in the We the People platform on WhiteHouse.gov and your concerns about user fees in a challenging economy.
In a challenging budget environment, the Obama Administration believes it’s essential that those who benefit from our world-class aviation system help pay for its ongoing operation. And we want to ensure that everyone is paying their fair share. For example, under current law, a large commercial aircraft flying from Los Angeles to San Francisco pays between twenty-one and thirty-three times the fuel taxes paid by a corporate jet flying the same route and using the same FAA air traffic services. This is why the Administration proposed to establish a new surcharge for air traffic services.

The proposed $100 per flight fee would generate an estimated $11 billion over 10 years, reducing the deficit and more equitably sharing the cost of air traffic services across the aviation user community. All piston aircraft, military aircraft, public aircraft, air ambulances, aircraft operating outside of controlled airspace, and Canada-to-Canada flights would be exempted.

We appreciate your petition's acknowledgment that there needs to be an increased user contribution to aviation system funding in the current fiscal climate, and we recognize that some would prefer to raise the tax rate on aviation fuel. At the same time, we have concluded that a $100 per flight user fee is an equitable way for those who benefit to bear the cost of this essential service.

As we work to get our Nation back on a sustainable fiscal path, the Administration is making tough choices across the Federal budget and asking everyone to do their fair share. We recognize these shared sacrifices are not easy, but together with investments in our economic growth and job creation, they will make us stronger and more competitive for the future. We look forward to working collaboratively with the Congress and the aviation stakeholder community on this issue, and thank you again for your constructive input.

OK... there's the Administration's position... What do YOU think? Please let us know via the link below.

FMI:  Hey Aero-News -- I Wish To Comment On The White House Proposal To Impose User Fees On Aviation