EAA AOPA medical proposal

[drseti]

I'm sorry to see you go, FFF. I've enjoyed your participation, and learned from your posts. Good luck to you.
Safe Skies,
Paul

[FastEddieB]

Ditto.

Welcome at Copperhill anytime!

[FrankR]

http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All- ... ition.aspx
"Administrator Michael Huerta has formally responded to an AOPA request for an update on the status of the association’s third-class medical petition, but it remains unclear when the agency will make a final decision."

"In the Dec. 26 letter, Huerta apologized for the delay in taking action on the petition, saying it was important to 'ensure that such an unprecedented change will not result in any adverse impact that could lead to degradation in safety.' "

I believe that the FAA sees the bill in the House usurping their power on this issue.

[Merlinspop]

I still think that they will pull out the "in the interest of public safety" card and that will be that. If that bill ever makes it to the President's desk, he'll veto it for the same reason. The Senate will not have the guts (or the votes) to overrule the veto. I hope the aviation PACs are educating Senators now.

[MovingOn]

Delete...

[Merlinspop]

There is no reason Obama would veto the law if it passes both houses of Congress.

It's not a law until he signs it. While he hasn't vetoed nearly as many bills as some of his predecessors, he had vetoed 2 so far. I hope he signs it; I'm just not optimistic. Just my personal opinion.

[MovingOn]

Delete...

[Merlinspop]

There is no reason Obama would veto the law if it passes both houses of Congress.

It's not a law until he signs it. While he hasn't vetoed nearly as many bills as some of his predecessors, he had vetoed 2 so far. I hope he signs it; I'm just not optimistic. Just my personal opinion.

Again, there is no reason he would. It does not cost the taxpayers anything and it does not discriminate against anyone. If there is a significant safety concern, the FAA will convince Congress and they won't pass it. Obama is not an obstructionist.

You're defending him, but I'm not attacking him! I'm just expressing my belief that IF it got that far, he wouldn't sign it. That's all. This bill flies against (pun intended) the direction the FAA is trying to move.

Now, casting aside my pessimism, what airplane would be most attractive to you if it did become law? My first aviation love is the lowly Tomahawk. I'd be sorely tempted to get one. Big downer is the finite airframe life on them. Most are long in the tooth. A PA28 is a close second.

[drseti]

I don't see anyone's comments so far as either attacking or defending the Commander in Chief. This is mere speculation, until Congress presents him with a bill.

As for the recent question, it depends on what shape the bill takes if it does get passed. If passed in the version proposed in congress, and I were looking for a personal aircraft, I would probably buy another Beechcraft. I had a 30 year love affair with my previous one. If what passes is the EAA/AOPA proposal, the two obvious choices would be the ubiquitous 172, and the equally ubiquitous PA-28. In both cases, maintenance support and parts availability are non-issues, and their long, safe history has insurance advantages.

[MovingOn]

Delete...

[designrs]

Let's veto mentioning the name of any particular political figure on this board, as well as whether we support and/or approve of such figure or not. It's just too hot of an issue that will just polarize our membership and contaminate our aviation discussions with all kinds of political and personal flaming. You see it starting here. Some small political reference and members are ready to start clawing at each other. ENOUGH!

[MovingOn]

Delete...

[Merlinspop]

If that bill ever makes it to the President's desk, he'll veto it

I'm reacting to this. I get tired of these type comments for no reason.

I think you were reading too much into this, then. Not an attack on the person holding the office at all. The president is the one who signs or vetoes. Period. I believe, based on the long inaction on the proposal and recent actions of the flight surgeon, that the administration would oppose this. That's all.

If it passes, I'll lease 50 percent of my friend's Mooney M20C. We did that before and it's all the benefits of ownership with none of the risk or headaches.

Every time I walked to my trainer, I passed a Mooney M20C. It never moved. Slowly the tires got flat, the glass yellowed, and the birds took over. I felt for that plane and asked about it. Seems the owner had a fatal heart attack while preflighting it one morning a year or so earlier, and there it sat. I wrote a letter to the family offering to purchase it and keep it flying. No response. Several years later, it was finally hauled off and parted off.

And yes, I am a huge Obama supporter. Not so huge financially, but I do what I can.

I can tell, and that's cool. I'm not, but I hope you're okay with that. This is a flying forum, not a political one, and I haven't a single partisan comment on this board and don't intend to. Again, based on the FAA's actions, I don't believe this will have the administration's support. And the reality is, for the Senate to override a veto, there would need to be at least a handful of Senators from the President's party to vote for it. That's hard to get for a bill that won't have huge support from the population at large because only a small percentage of the populous are pilots. It just wouldn't be worth it to them. I hope I'm wrong!

[MovingOn]

Delete...

[designrs]

This is a flying forum, not a political one.

+1,000