That gives me a warm fuzzy. Knowing the separation of aircraft in IFR
weather is done by low bidder's and profit based.


wrote in message ...


Paul Tomblin wrote:

In a previous article, said:
Who stands to gain from ATC privatization?
Aren't all of you aware that the Republican Party is philosophically
in favor of the marketplace--i.e., free enterprise-- as the means of
providing for society's needs?

So why are seafood inspectors "inherently governmental", but air traffic
control isn't?


Because seafood inspectors are like FAA inspectors; inherently
governmental.

ATC, on the other hand, provides a non-regulatory aircraft separation
service, with some secondary, also, non-regulatory, services.

The air traffic service takes such a giant bite out of the FAA budget that
the agency's regulatory duties (pilot and aircraft certification, design
and
issuance of instrument flight procedures, etc) are seriously hurting.
This
has been aggravated by the mandated security functions the FAA must now
provide, post 911.

The time might be overdue for the controller workforce to negotiate with a
private employer rather than the FAA Administrator.