erased due to bad information

I doubt the vote had anything to do with model airplanes. I don't know enough about the rest of the bill to have a clue why it would or would not pass.

I just read a short story in the local news last night that said the president has already promised a veto if it passed to him, so I wasn't too hopeful. Maybe it will be re-written and pushed through again?

While amendment 86 was about toy airplanes,
have you seen what amendment 21 was about?
Before you throw your hat in with a bill because it has some pork/SpecialInterest lobbyed in it for you,
you should look at what the rest of the bill says, and realize you are more concerned with THAT part than your special interest.

THOMAS dont have the details yet,
did Congress vote NO cause a21 wasnt un-tabled?
Cause while the Senate could care less about putting the budget cutting a21 on the bill,
the Congress is kinda uppity these days about doing the budget cutting that a21 imparts.
The senate vote to table the amendment was pretty much down party lines,
"Motion to table amendment SA 21 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 51 - 47"
and we know its the other party that runs the Congress ... of course this was going to get ugly




The AMA decided to involve itself in US politics.
Rather than have our lobbyist get a clean Toy Airplane Protection bill passed
(ya'll did notice the amendment was pass UNANIMOUSLY by the senate... NONE of them have a problem with toy airplanes)
instead we have our hopes stapled to the back of an ugly political fight
over spending cuts and stuff taking up over 400 pages plus 100 amendments

AMA had you guys say you support senate bill s223,
did you guys even know what you were begging the legislature to do?

Looking at the record, what it indicates is that HR 658 was before the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, and the committee rose (adjourned) leaving HR 658 as unfinished business. Note that HR 658 has not been amended similar to the Senate bill. The language in the bills is significantly different. In otherwords, the bill isn't dead yet.

Brad

What BK said:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:h.r.00658:

Capt. Sullenberger was on the news urging viewers to contact thier reps. to vote No. The bill squashed some regulation that pilots wanted which limiting work hours and required rest periods. If this is the bill Sullenberger spoke of then its a good thing it didn't pass. But I'm not certain this is the same bill.

It is time for the second round. Keep moving forward. We have a chance to correct the amendment which was very poorly worded in my opinion. Now we can write a better amendment that clearly states that the AMA is an appoved CBO and is excluded from the FAA regulation and is not subject to FAA approval to become a recognized CBO. Frankly the last submitted amendment did little if anything at all.

Don't give up. There will be another bill and another chance.

ahhh, ok, it wasnt the Senate bill with the a86 toy airplane amendment,
and it wasnt voted on...

ok then,
the ugly s223 has yet to crash and burn

Well, it appears to me that S223 w. A86 has crashed and burned. News of the demise of HR 658 was premature. It has passed (without the toy airplane CBO crud).

Sorry to burst your bubble but the House vote passed the FAA Funding Bill .............
now it goes into reconciliation with the Senate and we will see what happens regarding the very worthwhile CBO toy airplane amendment.

geez kpmacaz was there any other online forums that you went to post your disinformation on the bill failing???????????????


Brad

Hello all,

Sorry for the confusion and I must admit I am still confused. I saw the vote fail on March 31st, but I now understand that it is not that simple. I also do not understand the process that is presently going on in congress. The Senate version was much easier to follow.

It was not my intention to give bad information or cause trouble.

My apologies and I will now bow out of commenting at all ever again and congressional issues as it is way to convoluted and I do not have the time to weave through it all.

Again sorry to cause problems. When I saw the vote failed yesterday night I go pissed, and did not understand that that was just about some other amendment process?

I am done take it away others.

Rgds.,[&:]

Not quite. They passed H.Res. 189

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:HE00189:

This basically determined the rules for how to proceed on the HR 658, which is sitting now as "unfinished business" (limbo):
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:h.r.00658:

I don't think so this says HR 658 passed by a vote of 223 Y 196 N 13 A

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h658/actions_votes

Brad

Date is today, the link I have is through last night. Your looks more up to date.

Now it looks like they go to the conference committee. But in the end, even if the Senate Amendment survives and the act is signed into law it will change very little. The FAA has been clear in saying that they plan to exempt hobby models from the rule. So they will be in compliance. The pending legislation says nothing about prohibiting the FAA from defining what a model is in order to exempt it from the rule, which is what there were doing anyhow.

Bingo. And the FAA can define/qualify a CBO. I'm not certain why the AMA lobbied to give the FAA what the FAA wanted. Whose side are we on anyway.

It does have the one benefit that it essentially stops the fAA at this point. So if they decide down the road they are interested in actually regulating us, well, they can't.

Stay calm folks. Everything will work out in the end.

If the thread start could edit his post to say "Congress Votes Yes" That way people know what is really going on? That would be greatly appreciated.

well, YES they can

s223 a86 does NOTHING to stop the FAA from regulating toy airplanes,
its very core is that it fully expect there to be FAA regulations on toy airplanes.

What it does is say some groups are allowed out of those regulations,
but it does nothing to protect those groups existence at the leisure of the FAA in the first place.

We have been over this ad nauseum:
The FAA could ban Turbine in models.
The AMA will then attempt to claim a senate provided CBO exemption from that regulation,
but the FAA can simply say they accept no CBO Standards that allow Turbines
... ergo AMA is NOT 'senate cbo exempted' from the regulation

What's the point of having an amendment in the first place, if the FAA has already said models are going to be exempt from the new regulations? Sure, they'll define what a model airplane is. Most likely, it'll be anything under 55 pounds that's not being used for commercial purposes. I'm afraid some chicken little's are gonna be mighty embarrassed when the new NPRM comes out.

NorfolkSouthern

you are forgetting it was the FAA that came up with models flying 400'EverywhereAlways,
yet you left that part out of your 'most likely' scenario of what the FAA will require.
Do you have some special insight as to why the FAA will REVERSE ITSELF
on the 400' Everywhere Always it currently has as an AC?

You also seemed to leave the 15000 DIYDrones autonomous recreational aeromodeling guys
as part of our hobby,
is that what you figure the FAA will do... just accept any NonComercial <55lb toy airplane
including the 15k DIYDrones guys?

I agree with NS in the core sentiment I read in to what he said, it's much ado about nothing. When the dust settles little will have changed, and as to the few specifics in FAA's position re toy airplanes ala the 30-something AC, we'll nod obediently and continue to ignore them with alacrity when they cramp our style, as we always have.

True
the federal regulations will only affect people that intend to obey them.
For the rest of the population, the regs wont cramp their style.

well I am confused.I also read the house passed an FAA bill and it apparently goes back to senate for reconcillation.It seems as always when somebody sponsors a bill alot of IOU's get piled on and soon the original intent is lost and the bill become a real terd!for once I am going to say screw you government I'll fly and you will have to catch me.now that is the mad side of me and I still hope that at some point everything works out.