What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Follow the money

First off, IMO, Milt's comments are on target.

Second, do your own research on CAMA. You can start by looking at their website. Look at the corporate support members listed there and what they do.

Pilot medical exams are a big business. Do the math. 600,000 pilots. Assuming 50%(probably actually a higher number) are active flyers and they generate an average of one exam per pilot per year, and assuming an office visit of $100(again I don't know the actual number), its minimum a 30 million dollar/yr business.

That doesn't even count any testing/referral/scripts or follow up that is generated. The actual amount is probably much more. I don't have the figures but I suspect insurance companies will usually cover the costs.

Plus it is usually easy money for a doc. His/her staff do most of the work and his time input is minimal. Most pilots are, by default, healthy. As long as he closely follows the guidelines set out by the FAA and his failure rate is within norms, he won't lose his AME status. 3rd class medical income is significant.
 
Breaking News FAA Announcement

Saw this on aopa.com

Breaking News: Huerta announces update in third class medical reform process

The FAA has signed off on rulemaking to reform the third class medical certification process, and it is now under administrative review, FAA Administrator Michael Huerta announced July 31 at EAA AirVenture. AOPA will be releasing more details as they unfold from the show.
 
FYI, here's the full text of Michael Huerta's talk.

http://www.faa.gov/news/speeches/news_story.cfm?newsId=16797

One of the important issues on everyone?s mind is the third class medical certificate. I have heard you loud and clear on this.

As everyone here knows, EAA and AOPA submitted a petition to exempt recreational pilots from needing a third class medical certificate. We asked for public comment on this and we?ve received more than 16,000 comments. An exemption like this could impact approximately 39,000 pilots according to AOPA and EAA?s own estimates.

Fundamentally what you?re trying to achieve is a long lasting policy change. A change that effects this many people is typically not done using the exemption route.

Exemptions are usually for very limited circumstances or for limited durations. We do major policy changes through rulemaking. Now, the downside of the rulemaking process is that it does take time. But that is how we get to the fundamental change you all are looking for. We haven?t ruled out the exemption as an interim step, but we don?t want to have it get in the way of expeditiously completing the rulemaking process. My leadership team at the FAA has worked very hard to draft a notice of proposed rulemaking. I have reviewed it and signed it last week. This notice will go through executive review, but our goal is to issue the notice of proposed rulemaking before the end of this year.
The proposed rule will lay out the parameters that define how a person could fly without a third class medical certificate. As you know, if you fly a glider or balloon today, you aren?t required to have a medical certificate at all. We are trying to take a reasonable approach to ensure we maintain the highest levels of safety in recreational flying.
 
Don't believe a word that they say. They heard "loud and clear" several years ago when the petitions were filed by the letter groups. What did they do? They said "not a priority." Suddenly now, with congress up their rear end there's a change in heart. They don't want us telling them how to run their agency.

The proposed legislation needs to be enacted regardless of what FAA says, and that is the 3rd class medical needs to be buried by law.
 
Why leave us in suspense - release the draft!

Sounds like another delay tactic. They are trying to get the organizations to slow their pressure by announcing this which actually is a non-announcement. They said earlier this year they would release by May. Now they say by the end of the year.
We need to push for the legislation.
 
Sounds like another delay tactic. They are trying to get the organizations to slow their pressure by announcing this which actually is a non-announcement. They said earlier this year they would release by May. Now they say by the end of the year.
We need to push for the legislation.

I agree. I suspected it was a delay tactic when they first announced "their" process. We need to hit the FAA and those government officials that work for us with another round of calls, letters, and emails. We are so close - we need to force this legislation through and keep the rules out of the FAA's hands. They can not be trusted to do the right thing.

Please take the few minutes it takes to contact your representatives - both state and federal. If you don't worry about your medical now, you will someday. If you want safer flying, do something that really works like get more training or look at a weather report before you go for a flight!
 
There have been some amendments to the US Consitution done in less than a years time. The FAA has to be stalling, how long does it take to write and review a rule change?
 
There have been some amendments to the US Consitution done in less than a years time. The FAA has to be stalling, how long does it take to write and review a rule change?
Depends on how badly you really don't want to change the rules.
 
Apparently the acting NSTB chairman testified in front of Congress the other day that he has no data or evidence to show that the Class 3 medical is doing anything, but still doesn't want to get rid of it, if for no other reason than pilots then won't pay attention to the prohibited medications list :mad:
 
Apparently the acting NSTB chairman testified in front of Congress the other day that he has no data or evidence to show that the Class 3 medical is doing anything, but still doesn't want to get rid of it, if for no other reason than pilots then won't pay attention to the prohibited medications list :mad:

Yea, but the prohibited medication list is for the 3rd class medical. Is there a prohibated medication list for a driver's license? Not that I know of in my state except for your doctor indicating not to drive when on certain medication.
 
And Democrat Gerald E. Connolly of VA said he didn't see how the bill to change the current system "could come to any good".

Does anyone in this guys district know him or can do anything with him?
 
Yea, but the prohibited medication list is for the 3rd class medical. Is there a prohibated medication list for a driver's license? Not that I know of in my state except for your doctor indicating not to drive when on certain medication.

Exactly.

The fact is, there is no evidence to show that the third-class medical has any impact on accident rates. Accidents (car or airplane) caused by underlying medical conditions, whether they are detectable or not by a third-class medical exam, hardly register in the statistics. To the extent that health and physiological factors have anything to do with those accidents at all, those factors almost always come down to either fatigue or intoxication well beyond trace levels with substances like alcohol (and not allergy medication); a medical certificate, no matter the type, will do nothing to prevent them.

Loss of control, distraction, and poor decision-making cause orders of magnitude more accidents than sudden incapacitation from medical causes, both on the ground and in the air. Look at gliders and LSA's; we don't see medical problems resulting in accidents in those, there's nothing inherently different about flying them compared to other light airplanes, and absolutely nothing to suggest that there would be. Seems to me the NTSB and FAA are ignoring the forest fire raging in their back yard because they're worried about a smoldering log in the fireplace.

I'd bet my next paycheck that the requirements for the medical were not developed by looking at accident statistics and figuring out which things would do the most to prevent them, but rather by some guy behind a desk thinking "golly, pilots ought to be prime physical specimens!" and calling his non-pilot doctor up asking "how would you evaluate a pilot's health?" The doc, lacking any knowledge of what's involved, simply suggests his standard physical exam; the desk driver takes that at full face value and assumes doc means the pilot should have to pass all those tests. And voila, third class medical.

It's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, which puts intense scrutiny on things that have no impact ("turn your head and cough", anyone?) but completely ignores the things that do.
 
Good article Mike. I hope the FAA pays as much attention to it as they do to the AMA. It is good to read that the physicians that are actually PILOTS believe the 3rd class medical doesn't increase safety.

In the end, we all self certify every time we get in the plane - or drivers seat in your car.
 
I'd much rather have the legislation pass than take whatever meager bone the FAA would give us. I haven't emailed my congresscritters on this topic but that will change tomorrow.
 
The last I saw, the FAA had this staged for rulemaking ( http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201404&RIN=2120-AK45 - note the interesting action date!) and while I can't put my hands on the link, I think the schedule (published in December) was that it go to OMB by 11/30 (had not been done as of mid-December), get OMB clearance by 2/27/15, publish NPRM at 3/5/15, and end of comment period as of 5/5/15. I also saw something recently that indicated EAA had inquired and been told that it's nearly complete at OMB / DOT (no concrete indication what that means in terms of timing - but it's possible it's within one or two weeks of the schedule above).

Dan
 
DOT

This rule was scheduled to be out of the DOT 1/26/15 and sent to the OMB for more review. Does anyone know the current status? I can't find anything online about it clearing the DOT.
 
DOT rulemaking tracker for Jan 2015 http://www.dot.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/January 2015 Internet Report.docx

Shows that it's now delayed yet an additional couple months. See #18 in the document.
Publication date is now 5/5/2015 with end of comments in July 2015.

These delays are simply killing the industry - which might be exactly what the FAA wants to do! I have lost track of the number of people who have told me "I am ready to pull the trigger on an 'XXXXX' (insert E-AB kit name here), but I am waiting to hear if I can fly it without a medical."

We can't wait for FAA action - aint' going to happen. Need to take the congressional route!
 
We can't wait for FAA action - aint' going to happen. Need to take the congressional route!

Totally agree---------and if by some strange chance the FAA does act, I doubt that it will serve the interests of a lot of pilots.
 
We can't wait for FAA action - aint' going to happen. Need to take the congressional route!

I have to agree. As much as the FAA makes noise and tries to look like they are trying to get something done, we all know how this stuff works. Create something in secret, don't let anyone see what's in it, pass it around to various agencies... with a wink and a nod. "Yeah, no hurry on this", which really means "Please bury this in red tape and delays for eternity".

If and when we ever get to actually see what they are proposing, my bet it will be a very poor subset of what we would consider to be an improvement - and years before it actually goes into effect. Need proof of this? How many years has this been simmering already?

Now for the worse part. As much as Congress wants us to think they are doing something, I fear the GAPPA bill won't see the light of day during our lifetimes, since there aren't enough major campaign contributors who want it passed. I really, really hope I'm wrong.

OK, I'm done venting now.
 
I wonder where AOPA and EAA are on this - you'd think that they'd be coordinating a program to contact elected officials.

Why aren't they doing that?

Dan
 
Totally agree---------and if by some strange chance the FAA does act, I doubt that it will serve the interests of a lot of pilots.

Somehow we need to get government to be reminded who they work for.

I wonder where AOPA and EAA are on this - you'd think that they'd be coordinating a program to contact elected officials.

Why aren't they doing that?

Dan

I had faith in AOPA and EAA but it is starting to wear thin. I am starting to wonder if they are just using the 3rd class medical issue to continuously ask for more money to be given to their legislative affairs PAC. I keep getting asked for "just a little more support" so they can keep working the issue with FAA and congress. Not sure they ever want it solved as it keeps the membership up as long as they look like they are doing something on a hot issue that has a lot of interest.
 
I just wrote three more letters to my Congress-critters, sent to their local offices since apparently mail to DC gets delayed and molested indefinitely. Two of them (one Senator and the Rep) are new. I explained that the House and Senate bills, to which apparently virtually no one objects, seem stuck in committee while the FAA tries to forestall Congressional action by faking a rulemaking proposal.

Think faking is a little harsh? Well, consider that apparently no one has seen the actual proposal... no one will talk about it... and it's months and months past the original timeline they gave us, with no end in sight. I'd call that a ruse.
 
Somehow we need to get government to be reminded who they work for.

I think you are thinking of the "OLD" government. You know, the one based on the Constitution!

The "NEW" government has turned things around!
 
Seriously

I have not been on here in months & months... My 2 year old has brought my building to a slight hault for a bit. I honestly cant believe we have heard absolutely nothing new on this topic except delay, delay, delay. unbelievable!:mad:
 
If you haven't been hearing AOPA encourage members repeatedly to contact Congress about GAPPA, you haven't been listening. They have been urging two kinds of action:
1. If your House Rep is not a member of the GA Caucus, educate and coach them on why they should be. Surely, most of us know enough about aviation to exceed whatever's known inside a congressional office.
2. Urge (as in 'lobby') them to support GAPPA. Why would your Congressman care? A majority of members on the subcommittee with authority for the Bill has already voiced support of it, that support is bipartisan, and its supported by both the 'consumer' and industry sides of aviation. So the real question is why wouldn't your Rep support it.

But don't write a letter, which due to terrorism threats takes 7 weeks to reach your House Rep. About the only options that potentially provide influence are to call or visit. If you politely explain you want to speak to the Rep's staff member responsible for transportation issues (and are persistent), I think I can guarantee that you will end up with a staffer who a) knows less about GA and GAPPA than you do, and b) is coaching his/her Rep to take a position (or perhaps not take a position) based on incomplete or even false information. And that's where the work begins.

Example from my experience: A staffer told me that 'The Congresswoman prefers to have the FAA set pilot medical standards, not the local driver's license office.' Response: Did you know the FAA has allowed multiple categories of pilots to fly without FAA medicals for many years, including one class of pilots with no medical requirement beyond self-certification? Or another example: 'The Chair and Ranking Member of the subcommittee both do not support GAPPA.' [Notice how that sounds like they oppose it]. Response: Surely you know that a) those two members have just not yet taken a position on the Bill yet, which is quite common, and b) a majority of the members (19 or 20) already support it.

Our problem is that most of us aren't willing to do the work. We find 'politics' distasteful and act like we are too pure to deal with the political scene as it is. I found my Rep's staffer to be both ignorant about GAPPA's rationale and also GA generally, yet very influential to my Congresswoman's actions. Unless you are a big contributor, about the only way in most cases to influence a non-aviation literate Rep is to first influence their staffer. That takes some personal investment. There's constant encouragement here to turn off the computer and build the project. Same's true here.

Who's been to their Rep's district office and asked to speak to someone about GAPPA? Bet not too many hands were raised...

Jack
 
Last edited:
Get on the stick

For those of you concerned about the situation of third class medical reform, be advised.

The reason that there is no fire under the FAA to get anything done is that there is no fire under the FAA to get anything done. House Bill HR3708 and Senate bill S2103 died in committee last year and to-date no bill has been introduced in the 114th Congress to replace it. So there is no pressure to do anything.

It is my understanding that Congressman Todd Rokita is working to re-introduce the same or similar bill but this has not been accomplished yet. He is an active pilot and a real gentleman (I am told), and is concerned about this issue. Currently his office is working on determining the amount of support there is in the current membership for the bill. Last session there were something in the neighborhood of 130 cosponsors of the bill.

If the bill is reintroduced, it will likely be assigned again to the Aviation Subcommitte of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee of the House. Rep. Frank LoBiondo and Rep. Bill Shuster(PA) are the chairmen of the two committees respectively. Ultimately, the House leadership, i.e. Speaker of the House, Rep. John Boehner, will decide which bills get acted on. So if you want to blame anybody for dragging their feet once the bill is reintroduced, start with these individuals.

If you are reading this forum and you have not communicated with your representative and strongly urged him/her to AGAIN be a co-sponsor of any new bill, shame on you. Nothing will happen unless you do.

If you are reading this forum and are from Texas, double shame on you. Texas is an aviation-friendly state and general aviation is vital to commerce here because of the industries located here and the distances involved. Texas has 36 congressional districts and that potentially means 36 voices in Congress.

You can easily find out your representative's phone number and much more about the workings of Congress from this website:
http://www.contactingthecongress.org/

Do not write a letter to their DC office; it will take weeks to get through. Send an email or a fax directly to their office. Better yet, call their office and talk to a staffer. Toward the end of the week is better for getting through. How you interact with the staffer is important because they are the eyes and ears of the Representative. Make some notes before calling so you can yet your message across in a timely manner. Identify yourself as a pilot (and whatever).

Again, here are some talking points if you don't have your own:

- 600,000 GA pilots in this country and they are a positive influence on their communities. Many have prior military or commercial aviation experience. They are watching closely how Congress is dealing with this legislation.

-This effort is to reform the medical certificate process and NOT exempting pilots from responsibility.

-The current system used by the FAA is cumbersome, irrational in its approach, and in some cases, discriminates against pilots.

-Supporting these bills will be a big stimulus for general aviation in the congressman's state.

-The creation of the Light Sport Pilot program has been an outstanding success with a good safety record and some of the aircraft flying under the light sport rules have greater performance than many aircraft that pilots currently must have a third class medical for.

-To-date the FAA has not made any real effort for meaningful reform and Congressional action is essential to get something done.
 
koda2, great info to help get this FINALLY passed. Even if you can pass your physical now, this helps ALL aviators.
 
Thanks for adding your comments, koda2. FYI Rep. Sam Graves again co-chairs the House GA Caucus and believes the Bill will be reintroduced shortly.

If you think pilots are able to and should self-certify, I'd encourage you NOT to email your Rep. Yes, it's very easy...but it's equally ineffective. The two best ways to actually influence a staffer (and so, his/her Rep) is through an office visit or a phone *conversation*. I stress *conversation* because many Reps set up their office phone lines to allow constituents to voice support/opposition to a Bill via recording. This gets tallied in the same way emails get tallied. The content itself isn't captured. Sums show up in reports but that's a long way from discovering the staffer's areas of ignorance and offering factual, convincing detail. Just treat the staffer like the Uncle you respect but who is clueless about GA.

I work on occasion with an aviation lobbyist in the Southeast. He recently explained one of the typical questions a Rep asks of his/her staffers is 'who asked about what this week?' When a Rep hears there were X calls & visits on a given topic that week, the next step is often a directive to 'brief me up on that'. So our goal is to help him/her get that brief.

435 Reps. ~180,000 EAA members, ~380,000 AOPA members, ~600,000 licensed pilots. Their phones could be ringing off the hook...

Jack
 
Pilot's Bill of Rights 2

I just received an e-mail from a gentleman at my local airport (KXSA) that a new Bill has been introduced in the House and Senate. Hopefully this one makes it into law. Here's what the email said in part. The whole thing is too long to post and I have not found a link yet...but I know someone here will post one. I am particularly intrigued with the provision that pilots will be allowed to follow the requirements of the law even if the FAA fails to act within 180 days - and failing to act is something I'm certain the FAA is able to accomplish.


The Pilot?s Bill of Rights 2 would allow pilots flying recreationally in a wide range of aircraft to no longer obtain a third class medical certificate. The new bill would allow private pilots to make noncommercial VFR and IFR flights in aircraft weighing up to 6,000 pounds with up to six seats.

A group of powerful senators and representatives has introduced new legislation in both houses of Congress that would allow thousands of pilots to fly without going through the costly and time-consuming third class medical process and would offer new protections for general aviation pilots.

Under the Pilot?s Bill of Rights 2, pilots flying recreationally in a wide range of aircraft would no longer need to obtain a third class medical certificate. The new bill would allow private pilots to make noncommercial VFR and IFR flights in aircraft weighing up to 6,000 pounds with up to six seats. Pilots also would be allowed to carry up to five passengers, fly at altitudes below 14,000 feet msl, and fly no faster than 250 knots. Pilot?s Bill of Rights 2 also includes a provision to ensure that pilots can fly under the new rules even if the FAA fails to comply with the bill?s provisions 180 days after enactment.

?The introduction of the Pilot?s Bill of Rights 2 is great news for the general aviation community and we are grateful to Sens. Jim Inhofe and Joe Manchin, and Reps. Sam Graves and Dan Lipinski, and all their bipartisan colleagues for putting forward this legislation that would do so much to help grow and support GA activity,? said AOPA President Mark Baker. ?Pilots have already waited too long for medical reform, so we?re particularly pleased to see it included in this important measure. Third class medical reform is our top legislative priority, and we will actively work with Congress to build support for this legislation that is so vital to the future of general aviation.?

In addition to third class medical reform, the Pilot's Bill of Rights 2, which was introduced in the House (H.R. 1062) and the Senate (S.571) late on Feb. 25, would protect GA pilots from liability on charitable flights, extend legal protections to FAA representatives, and require FAA contractors to provide information under Freedom of Information Act requests.
 
Sounds like a big improvement over the verbiage in last years bill.

Still not seeing any addressing of the issue of pilots who currently fly under special issuance.

Here is the AOPA pres link, email address is linked there. http://www.aopa.org/About-AOPA/Presidents-Page

This is the message I sent to Mark Baker.

I see talk of the PPBOR being reintroduced as a newer version, with much better verbiage in it. I love the 180 day clause-------but why not make it 60 days instead??

But, there is no mention of those of us who currently fly with a special issuance for our 3rd class medical.

Knowing the FAA, I suspect that if there is not specific language to allow ALL current 3rd class medical holders to fly via the PPBOR, then they will grasp at any straw they can----------and SI is a ripe one for them.

Please be sure to ask that SI is also included in the PPBOR

Thank you,
Mike Starkey
AOPA 5914731

I will be sending the same to EAA folks. [email protected] I believe is the address. Someone please correct me if I am wrong-------the EAA does a very good job of hiding their email addresses for individuals.
 
Last edited:
...even if the FAA fails to act within 180 days..

I think your quote may be misleading. I think it leaves them an out? See this wording from EAA today:

"...unless the FAA has issued regulations within 180 days of the enactment of this legislation."

Seems to vary with each recounting....!
 
Last edited:
The faa will fight anything that helps general aviation as much as they can. They will not give in and lose their self appointed power. The changes we want MUST be done by law - not some ***** in a building who thinks they know what is best. Elected officials need to assure we are protected as pilots. This looks good - but just as flyingriki days - watch out for any trick including semantics they will try to use. Contact your representatives and remind them they are the people that make the laws and not give that power to faa lackys.
 
nothing personal

It's nothing personal to the FAA or any other government agency. The core problem is that govt agencies exist to provide oversight, enact new rules with more oversight, and brainstorm neat and new ways to generate revenue (taxes). It's not in their structure to get smaller ................ (Deleted the rest of my old age rant...)

Nevertheless, lets encourage our elected officials to support this legislation.

The legislative route is, in my humble opinion, the best way to go on this one and I for one am glad to finally see both parties working together on this.

Thanks for sharing!


The faa will fight anything that helps general aviation as much as they can. They will not give in and lose their self appointed power. The changes we want MUST be done by law - not some ***** in a building who thinks they know what is best. Elected officials need to assure we are protected as pilots. This looks good - but just as flyingriki days - watch out for any trick including semantics they will try to use. Contact your representatives and remind them they are the people that make the laws and not give that power to faa lackys.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top