Here's the latest AOPA information on this issue:


AOPA DEFENDS MEMBERS' INTERESTS AT FAA FUNDING FORUM

There should be no doubt in the aviation community about where
AOPA members stand on user fees—no, no, and NO! That was the
clear message that AOPA leaders delivered at the high-level FAA
funding forum in Washington, D.C., Monday and Tuesday. Because tax
revenues are declining while the FAA's costs are increasing,
transportation officials have called for an overhaul of the FAA's
funding mechanisms when Congress reauthorizes the aviation trust
fund in 2007. And while the prevailing opinion at the forum seemed
to be that user fees were the "solution" to the FAA's
budget woes, AOPA President Phil Boyer said, "The FAA must
get its costs under control first." AOPA called on the FAA to
request recommendations from the industry on cost reductions,
noting that the association had stepped up to the plate by
supporting the FAA's efforts to find more efficient ways to
provide flight service information and its plans to decommission
underused NDB approaches. See
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...26funding.html


USER FEES GET COLD SHOULDER IN HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE HEARING

Some of the first salvos in the latest user-fee battle were fired
last week in a House aviation subcommittee hearing room. The
committee called officials from the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) and the privatized air traffic control systems of
Canada and Germany. But so far there seems to be little support on
this committee for going down the same path in the United States.
On a cost-per-operation basis, most of the supposedly more
"efficient" privatized systems cost a lot more than the
FAA's government-run, tax-supported air traffic control system. As
it turns out, the average controller in the United States handles
about 3,500 IFR operations each year at a cost of $172 each. By
comparison, in Germany the average controller handles only 490
operations at a cost of $390 each. See
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...50426fees.html