![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Mark Kolber" wrote in message
... And can be expanded to new airports and a group of airports that are being examined. As far as I know, nothing in the contract tower program previously prohibited such expansion. How does this bill make things *worse*? And the prohibition automatically expires in 4 years. Not an uncommon clause in any variety of lawmaking. Recall that the agreements intended to protect Meigs Field had similar clauses. No one was going around claiming that, because of those clauses, the agreements were actually intended to shut the airport down. Pete |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Peter Duniho" wrote in message ... [snipped] And the prohibition automatically expires in 4 years. Not an uncommon clause in any variety of lawmaking. But not something that was in either the House bill or the Senate bill that was being reconciled. Recall that the agreements intended to protect Meigs Field had similar clauses. No one was going around claiming that, because of those clauses, the agreements were actually intended to shut the airport down. What an interesting point to bring up. Let's see, and KCGX is what now, other than permanently *closed*? Chip, ZTL |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Chip Jones" wrote in message
link.net... But not something that was in either the House bill or the Senate bill that was being reconciled. So? What's that got to do with the price of tea in China? What an interesting point to bring up. Let's see, and KCGX is what now, other than permanently *closed*? For reasons completely unrelated to the original agreements. The "sunset" language in the original agreements had NOTHING to do with the closure of Meigs. In fact, everyone agrees that the closure of Meigs was *CONTRARY TO* the agreements that included the sunset language. Surely you can see the difference. Surely you're not trying to say that the existence of sunset language in the Meigs agreement, along with the subsequent closure of the field support your assertions regarding this bill. Right? If not, then I suppose I'm starting to get an idea of why you're so upset about this bill. Pete |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|