Weight-based User Fee Might Incentivize Smaller Planes

User fees are set by the agency, services that are required
for the convenience of the government are priced by the
government so that all costs are covered. When the number
of users drops, the cost for the agency does not go down
because the equipment and GSA employees are there, so the
cost per user goes up.

User fees will kill aviation. When tax is based on fuel
consumption, the government is forced to live with the
available money, user fees will increase, just bas stamps
will soon cost $0.42.


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
|
|
| Those advocating Air Traffic Control user fees are
revealed in this
| document:
|
|
| http://www.gao.gov/htext/d05333sp.html
|
| National Airspace System:
|
| Experts' Views on Improving the U.S. Air Traffic
Control
| Modernization Program
|
| April 13, 2005.
|
|
| The suggested initiatives included replacing taxes with
user fees
| based on the cost of air traffic services, allowing the
ATO to
| manage those fees, and giving the ATO borrowing and
leasing
| authority. The panelists advocating these kinds of
initiatives
| said the initiatives would help the ATO address the
predicted
| funding shortfall and free it from the constraints of
the federal
| budget process, as well as enable the ATO to pay for
the technical
| expertise and the technologies it needs to deliver
efficient,
| cost-effective service. In addition, these panelists
said,
| removing the ATO's funding from the appropriations
process would
| establish a direct relationship between the ATO and its
customers
| that could promote efficiencies and improve service.
According to
| these panelists, customers would monitor the ATO's
spending to
| ensure that the ATO addressed their priorities, and the
ATO would
| provide better service because it would try to please
the
| customers rather than the appropriators who now fund
its
| activities. Restructuring the financing of the
modernization
| program could streamline and strengthen the ATO's
management, they
| said. According to these panelists, this kind of
financing
| arrangement would allow program managers to make
decisions
| quickly, on the basis of business rather than political
| considerations, and could provide the ATO with the
management
| tools needed to fully execute its mission. While not
disagreeing
| with the potential benefits of the proposed structural
changes,
| other panelists cautioned against investing too much
effort in
| them, since, in the view of these other panelists, the
changes
| were, for the most part, politically infeasible.
Moreover, as one
| panelist noted, even if the structural changes were
implemented,
| it would be important to consider what problems they
were creating
| as well as what problems they were addressing. He
suggested,
| for example, that a weight-based user fee might
incentivize
| smaller planes and more planes, thereby having the
unintended
| effect of increasing demands on the ATC system's
capacity.
| Finally, one panelist said, restructuring could resolve
the
| conflict of interest inherent in FAA's dual
responsibility as the
| regulator and the operator of air traffic services.

On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 21:04:14 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
wrote in
BKUyg.84612$ZW3.13139@dukeread04::

User fees will kill aviation.

According to the document, they will provide the FAA with the fiscal
autonomy necessary to prevent implementing "the world's most perfect
system from 1956."

What do you suggest be done to prepare for the coming deluge of ATC
operations in the face of 50% of the ATC workforce retiring by 2011?

Free flight, use GPS and allow IFR over most areas without
ATC. Keep the public happy with ATC from then ground up
around air carriers [class B and C] and above FL 250. Use
electronic CAS in aircraft.

We did better during the 1981 controllers strike with a
bigger reduction than that and we didn't have modern
electronics. The FAA and controllers union are trying to
cover their jobs.



"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
| On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 21:04:14 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
| wrote in
| BKUyg.84612$ZW3.13139@dukeread04::
|
| User fees will kill aviation.
|
| According to the document, they will provide the FAA with
the fiscal
| autonomy necessary to prevent implementing "the world's
most perfect
| system from 1956."
|
| What do you suggest be done to prepare for the coming
deluge of ATC
| operations in the face of 50% of the ATC workforce
retiring by 2011?
|
|

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
[...]
What do you suggest be done to prepare for the coming deluge of ATC
operations in the face of 50% of the ATC workforce retiring by 2011?

In what way does the projected ATC demand relate to the funding model? Or,
put another way, in answer to your question: whatever you think might be
done to prepare for projected demand under the user fees funding model, you
do the same thing, only you pay for it through the existing funding model.

On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 21:48:22 -0700, "Peter Duniho"
wrote in
::

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
.. .
[...]
What do you suggest be done to prepare for the coming deluge of ATC
operations in the face of 50% of the ATC workforce retiring by 2011?

In what way does the projected ATC demand relate to the funding model?

That's a good question. I'll bet you won't find the answer he
http://www.gao.gov/htext/d05333sp.html

Or, put another way, in answer to your question: whatever you think might be
done to prepare for projected demand under the user fees funding model, you
do the same thing, only you pay for it through the existing funding model.

Well, that's the point. The FAA has a history of inability to
innovate ATC, so the panel is advocating privatization to inject
innovative technical solutions into the system.

Please at least skim the document. It's worth the insight it provides
into the airlines' user fee argument.

In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote:

User fees will kill aviation.

According to the document, they will provide the FAA with the fiscal
autonomy necessary to prevent implementing "the world's most perfect
system from 1956."

according to the document, decisions will not be made based
on politics. If anyone believes that, I've got some land for them....

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 06:41:17 -0400, Bob Noel
wrote in
::

In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote:

User fees will kill aviation.

According to the document, they will provide the FAA with the fiscal
autonomy necessary to prevent implementing "the world's most perfect
system from 1956."

according to the document, decisions will not be made based
on politics.

I believe the document suggests, that wresting fiscal control from
Congress will result in FAA funding encountering less impact from
political considerations. Of course, internal FAA politics are
another matter....

Congress is our only tool to keep the FAA from spending too
much. We get to elect new Congressmen every two years and
we know who they are. The fact that we don't is just an
example of how foolish the voters are, after being
brainwashed in government run public schools.

But who at the FAA at you know who control the purse?



"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
| On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 06:41:17 -0400, Bob Noel
| wrote in
|
::
|
| In article ,
| Larry Dighera wrote:
|
| User fees will kill aviation.
|
| According to the document, they will provide the FAA
with the fiscal
| autonomy necessary to prevent implementing "the world's
most perfect
| system from 1956."
|
| according to the document, decisions will not be made
based
| on politics.
|
| I believe the document suggests, that wresting fiscal
control from
| Congress will result in FAA funding encountering less
impact from
| political considerations. Of course, internal FAA
politics are
| another matter....

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 08:38:02 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
wrote in
2Z2zg.84639$ZW3.82853@dukeread04::

But who at the FAA at you know who control the purse?

Say again? I don't "know who."