The Toolman

Liberals in Kalif, what is this world coming to?

KidEpoxy

hmmm
If the problem with the government is that special interests use lobbyists to do end runs around the system,
what do we call it
when a special interest group uses a lobbyist
to do an end run around having to use OMBa119 for standards bodies like everyone else,
and gets an bill amendment that winkwink excludes the special interest group from having to obey the laws regulating that interest

If it was a big oil special interest, that would be a wrong and evil thing to do,
but if it is a toy airplane special interest, that would be a great way to save ourselves

The Toolman

If we didn't allow lobbyists, the laws would be a lot different than it is now. I think all lobbyists should be took out an shot, and the same thing goes for the ones that apply for their jobs.
Then we probably wouldn't hafta worry about this model/toy plane stuff

iron eagel

Years ago it was said the lobbyist should be removed from the political arena, and nothing was done.
The problem is that the politicians today have become a new aristocracy, and they (the ruling class) have, as other have said, nothing but contempt for the common citizen.
Now add to that an out of control government bureaucracy, and we have the FAA rule by decree.

The Toolman

In a round about way, the lobbyists are actually the ones making the decisions an laws we have now.

jacob2000

Actually, most of thiswas probablystarted in the FAA and Dept of Homeland Security, which is your long term, professional government workers. Its been spinning through thebureurocracy for a decade. Even the most openminded polls have shown that over 70% of Govt workers "LEAN"toward the liberal agenda. Its just now hitting the top political scene, but since the Liberals are in the top offices, they have a history of not caring if there is another layer of laws to "protect" someone. So yes, I am not misinformed! My facts are fairly straight forward on this issue.

As for the lobbyists, I am sure that there is some lobbyists doing their talking to the politicians, but quite frankly, Its been a false talking point by both the left and the right that the lobbists somehow can wave their "mighty wad of cash" and suddenly that politician is going to change their minds on their politcal view. The liberal will always beleaning on the left,and the conservative will always lean to the right. BTW, in 2008, the lobbiests gave the liberal, democratic party more money than they did to the Republican party. So going by their own talking points, (which for years was slamming the right as being "in bed with the lobbiests"), the Liberals have actually gone to the DARKSIDE so to speak.

jacob2000

A bankrupted state of Cali, begging the Feds for a bailout?... Yep they are doing just that!

TexasAirBoss

My Feedback: (22)

You haven't seen nothing yet !

Now that the Supreme court has ruled that corporations have the same rights as people and can "donate", (aka bribe), as much as they like, the government will be representing corporations almost exclusively. If you boys want something to gripe about, you are in luck. Its coming.

KidEpoxy

isnt one set of those FAA decrees
deciding solely on their whim
just which of their(FAA) laws the Senate is allowed to exempt CBOs from
and which of their laws the Senate is not allowed to exempt CBOs from

By just denying CBOStandards that they just dont like
they decide who is within that senate exemption, without any Regulatory/NPRM procedure and oversight

iron eagel

I fear that is all to true...

And KE

You said "By just dednying CBO standards that they just don't like, they decided who is within the senate exemption, without any regulatory?NPRM procedure and oversight" just reinforces my my rule by decree statement.

So here we are back at the original issue of what to do...

My thought is this.

The voters in this country now have to make their voices heard for the first time in many years. We can start by writing as many letters to our representatives as we can. And I am not talking about just what any organization ask us to do.
But rather, letters that point out our own concerns and thoughts about the issue.
Then if we do not get the results that we want from these individuals work at removing them from office as they are no longer representing us. Problem is that we should have done this long ago before we got to the point that it is today. One of the main problems in this country is people are not willing to make the effort to vote as it is. Typically voter turnout is on the order of 20% for most elections and because of this we have the dilemma we are currently dealing with.

I fear we are approaching the point that moved someone years ago to say...
"When the government no longer represents the view of the people, it is the duty of the people to change the government."

he also said "Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people."

corch

My Feedback: (1)

Here's some new fat to chew on:

H.AMDT.220 (A011)
Amends: H.R.658
Sponsor: Rep Miller, Candice S. [MI-10](offered 3/31/2011)

AMENDMENT DESCRIPTION:
Amendment to direct the FAA to work with various federal agencies to integrate Unmanned Aerial Systems into the National Airspace System more expeditiously.

AMENDMENT PURPOSE:
An amendment numbered 12 printed in House Report 112-46 to direct the FAA to work with various federal agencies to integrate Unmanned Aerial Systems into the National Airspace System more expeditiously.

STATUS:

<dl><dt>3/31/2011 5:39pm:</dt><dd>Amendment (A011) offered by Mrs. Miller (MI). (consideration: CR H2187; text: CR H2187)</dd><dt>3/31/2011 5:46pm:</dt><dd>On agreeing to the Miller (MI) amendment (A011) Agreed to by voice vote.</dd></dl>[/list]Looks like more chefs have been invited into the kitchen.....maybe.

KidEpoxy

Page: H2187

I feel safer already

nanovision

I have some suggestions to actively assert your rights. That is, to maintain freedom, as in, a basic right to fly your airplanes be they bots or human control.
1. Start a petition, there are about one half million members here and the FAA will meet in Washington, D.C. in about a week in an effort to extend control over you and your interests. Let them know you want their hands off your personal activities. Contact all political parties and express you views, mention the number of people involved.
2. Why does divide and conquer have to break up and diminish your interests? How about JOINING the diydrones.com interest group to double the size of individuals who have a say in this? We want freedom, not more socialization like TSA. That's right, TSA is in the business of conditioning you to accept warrantless searches, criminal acts against you, depriving your rights, and "detaining (read arrest) you without charges. Any special forces team would not see TSA as a deterrent in the least.
3. Local government is already feeling people's anger in hearings to audit, financially and otherwise, their activities. Look at slashing the FAA budget, really. Without resources, they are powerless. Why should you enable them to cripple your activities without cause?
4. Start a campaign with rcuniverse.com to critically email all members to act now before they can do harm.
5. Do not give up, be on them every day. Put them under a constant vigilant watch.
6. Call members in Congress and find out their position and which members are on the FAA committee, call them and find out their position. Publish what you find.

7. At the rate the Federal Reserve Bank is taking money from the US taxpayers by monetarizing debt, the US dollar currency may fall from its current watch on Standard & Poors and C, that's right, C, rating from the new standards. The Fed is taking money from the US and moving it elsewhere. If this keeps up, not only will the dollar fall but the political process may also.
End the Fed!

Hossfly

Well, Mr. Nanovision, you are brand new to this forum, so I say welcome. I do like the way you think.

Sport_Pilot

There has been no such ruling. There are no laws that allow bribes, and there are still limits to how much corporations can donate to campaigns. I think you are confusing the issue of paid political ads. These go into the pockets of only the media that publish's or broadcasts the ads.

WRXpilot

To be perfectly blunt: 90% of the issue here is the emergence of FPV. The fact is that there are those irresponsible enough to put unmanned, FPV flown planes into situations they shouldn't be in, as the incident in NYC demonstrates. The bottom line is that such incidents were bound to attract the attention of the FAA. And the FAA is tasked with keeping our airspace safe for MANNED flight. not with keeping hobbyists happy. If hobbyists can't or won't police ourselves, the FAA is going to come down on the side of safety for manned flight and the general public; period (as they should, frankly).

At every AMA club field I've ever flown at, there were strict flight rules about not overflying people/property. No modern pilot, RC, FS, or otherwise has ever been allowed to fly every- & any-where their heart desires. Why should the emergence of the technical ability to fly BLOS FPV suddenly throw those rules out the window? Are the general public not worthy of the same protection from potential danger that we afford ourselves and our club-mates? I understand the appeal of FPV, but there is a real safety concern, and the attitude of, "we can do whatever we want until someone gets hurt" just ensures that some external force is going to come in with restrictions that ignore the desires of hobbyists.

And who do you have to thank for the DHS, and all its associated mandatory extra "layers of protection"? What "liberals" are responsible for that, exactly? Your "facts" are amazingly bereft of truth, because you're more focused on blaming "liberal" boogeymen for everything you don't like than actually analyzing the situation. Both parties are all in favor of increased government interference in our lives, they just disagree on where & how it should interfere.

Silent-AV8R

Sorry, but the motivation is not model airplanes, it is the proliferation of commercial and public agency sUAS that moved the FAA towards the New Rules. We are the collateral damage. In addition, the FAA folks have repeatedly made clear that there are no national defense or Homeland Security motives in their rule making process.

WRXpilot

Sorry if I wasn't clear; but I agree with you. It's the FPV guys' interests/models that most overlap with non-hobby sUAS though, so they're the ones generating scrutiny of the hobby, IMO. If the senate amended rules pass as they stand now, the vast majority of the hobby would be unaffected, since almost everyone is either under the restriction limits, or following CBO (AMA) rules.

The homeland security stuff was just in response to an egregiously partisan post above, and I do not believe at all that it has much, if anything, to do with these rules. Nor do I believe there is any ideologically-motivated conspiracy to wipe out model airplanes, from either side of the aisle; but some of the posts in here sure are "amusing" to read, Tail-Gunner Joe would be proud I'm sure.

cannonball200

My Feedback: (36)

May 9, 2011



Dear Mr. Cannon,

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns on the model airplane provisions of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization bill with me. Hearing your feedback and knowing your concerns is important to me because it keeps me in touch with the issues facing the Fifth District while I'm home in Oklahoma and away in Washington.

As you may know, the Senate recently passed S. 223, the FAA Reauthorization Act, which establishes guidelines and regulations for the FAA and its subsidiaries. Included in the Senate-passed legislation was Amendment #86, proposed by Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), which enables the open operation of commercial- and public-use unmanned aircraft, including model airplanes, in the National Airspace System. S. 223 along with Amendment #86 passed the Senate in an 87-8 vote and was sent to the House for further consideration.

The House companion bill to S. 223, H. R. 658, was introduced by the Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Rep. John Mica (R-FL), on February 11, 2011. I supported this bill as it moved through the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and when it passed the House in a recorded vote of 223-196. Just before the debate of H.R. 658 in the House, I learned about Sen. Inhofe's Amendment #86 and found that similar legislation had not been offered in the House version.

As H. R. 658 was considered in the House, I spoke with House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee members and staff to determine whether I could immediately offer a similar amendment in the House version of this legislation. We had several conversations about the proposal and the most effective way to achieve its inclusion in the final passage of the bill. After conferring with the Committee about the best way to handle this issue, I am optimistic that as this bill is considered in a joint conference committee, which includes Members of the House and Senate, an agreement can be reached about minimally regulating recreationally used model airplanes. I will continue to talk with other committee members and staff to ensure that the issue is addressed.

In order for the United States to properly utilize our airspace and maintain the highest level of safety for passengers and those on the ground, it must be appropriately monitored, regulated, and defended. On the other hand, I want to make sure that recreational use of model airplanes, including line-of-sight air vehicles that are never out of the visual range of the user, are not overregulated by the FAA under the definition of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). As I said, I am optimistic that this issue will be resolved in the joint conference committee and that users will continue to be able to enjoy their hobbies without overregulation. I have made note of your comments and will continue to monitor the issue, as the legislation moves forward.

Thank you again for taking the time to share your thoughts on H. R. 658. As the 112th Congress addresses the many challenges facing our nation, I hope you will continue to share your thoughts with me; however, due to increased security measures, mail delivery may be delayed. Accordingly, I encourage you to visit my website at www.lankford.house.gov to continue to contact me via email in the future.

In God We Trust,

James Lankford
MEMBER OF CONGRESS

KidEpoxy

uh, not quite

the FPV guys didnt make the FAA get uppity about turbines,
and they didnt get the FAA riled over 400' Everywhere,
and they certainly idndt get the FAA to give the 55lb limit the hairy eyeball
... no, it seems like it is the guys you claim are the victims that are the ones that are doing that stuff the FAA is not fond of.

"the vast majority of the hobby would be unaffected,
since almost everyone is either under the restriction limits, or following CBO (AMA / USAmA / DIYDrones) rules. "
There, I fixed your flawed statement.
It seems you had forgotten to consider the other groups that clearly are CBOs
since they are within the same FAA cbo regulation we have now
(btw, you get a cookie if you can find the current FAA regulation for CBO status requirements)

As such, obviously the multiple CBOs will have different rules,
such as the AMA by far exceeding the USAmA weight limits,
or DIYD by far exceeding the AMA fpv limits
... and not one of the cbos will have to make its members bend knee to ANY new regulation from the FAA
(per that sweet sweet senate amendment s223a86)

Heres an example:
According the the CBO, the maximum weight for a model is 12lb.
You of course may choose to join a different CBO than the 12lb USAmA cbo,
with a less restrictive weight limit like the AMA cbo 125lb limit or the Clem&Cletus cbo 400lb limit

Red Scholefield

My Feedback: (9)

Deleleted.

On the other hand the world did not end as predicted and spare us of more this babbling.[:'(]

hook57

My Feedback: (21)

TexasAirBoss

My Feedback: (22)

The Supreme Court did rule that corporations can make unlimited contributions to Super PACs as part of the corporations freedom of speech.

These Super PACs do have great political influence. Nobody is fooled by the "media gets its" claim either. Advertising dollars are the currency of politics and are the currency of influence. The net result of Super Pacs is that coporations will have more and more say in the crafting of legislation and regulation and individual citizens will have less and less influence. If you think that is a good thing, then say so. Many people seem to agree with you. I do not.

Sport_Pilot

Contributing to a Super Pac is hardly a bribe as there is no Quid Pro Quo. But I guess you would dissallow this but let Unions directly contribute to politicians without this or any othercounter weight.

TexasAirBoss

My Feedback: (22)

I think it is bad if either a union or a corporation is allowed to make unlimited contributions to a campaign directly or through a Super-PAC. The forefathers did not intend for influence and access to be limited to only the very rich and powerful. Access is generally reserved for large contributors. Therefore large contributors generally have some ability to voice concerns with legislation. So, yes, there is very definitely something akin to quid pro quo happening. Access for cash does happen. I have seen it.