House Says No To User Fees, Yes to Fuel Tax Increase

It's difficult to believe, but it would appear that a rational
decision on user fees has been reached by the US House Of
Representatives:

User Fees Not the Answer, Says U.S. House

HOUSE COMMITTEE SAYS 'NO' TO USER FEES
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196161)
The House Ways and Means Committee has passed, essentially intact,
a tax bill that supports the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee's version of FAA reauthorization and does not include
user fees. In a unanimous voice vote Tuesday, the Ways and Means
Committee voted in favor of increasing the tax on avgas from 19.3
a gallon to 21.4 a gallon and the tax on jet fuel from 21.8 to
35.9 a gallon and the extra money will only be used for airspace
modernization. The committee also declined to adopt any of the
measures proposed by the airline lobby, which GA groups have been
saying would result in a tax break for the airlines. "We applaud
the Committee for rejecting user fees and instead building upon a
proven, stable, reliable and ultra-efficient system of fuel taxes
that clearly reflect aviation system use," said NBAA President Ed
Bolen.
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196161


Here's hoping the US Senate is able to see the wisdom in this bill.

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 05:26:58 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote in :


It's difficult to believe, but it would appear that a rational
decision on user fees has been reached by the US House Of
Representatives:

User Fees Not the Answer, Says U.S. House

HOUSE COMMITTEE SAYS 'NO' TO USER FEES
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196161)
The House Ways and Means Committee has passed, essentially intact,
a tax bill that supports the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee's version of FAA reauthorization and does not include
user fees. In a unanimous voice vote Tuesday, the Ways and Means
Committee voted in favor of increasing the tax on avgas from 19.3
a gallon to 21.4 a gallon and the tax on jet fuel from 21.8 to
35.9 a gallon and the extra money will only be used for airspace
modernization. The committee also declined to adopt any of the
measures proposed by the airline lobby, which GA groups have been
saying would result in a tax break for the airlines. "We applaud
the Committee for rejecting user fees and instead building upon a
proven, stable, reliable and ultra-efficient system of fuel taxes
that clearly reflect aviation system use," said NBAA President Ed
Bolen.
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196161


Here's hoping the US Senate is able to see the wisdom in this bill.


Update:


SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE REJECTS USER FEES
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196189)
The Senate Finance Committee has approved the "American
Infrastructure and Investment Act" as part of Congress's FAA
reauthorization process. The Act in part uses an increase in fuel
taxes as a source of additional funding for the FAA and its
infrastructure modernization efforts. The move was lauded by NBAA,
because it does not include the $25-per-leg user fee that the
Senate Transportation and Infrastructure Committee was endorsing.
"We agree with the Committee that everyone should support the
NextGen effort, and that the best way for general aviation to
contribute is by 'paying at the pump,'" said NBAA CEO, Ed
Bolen. (Be sure to listen to Bolen's comments on the bill in
Monday's audiocast).
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196189
HOUSE PASSES ITS VERSION OF FAA BILL
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196185)
There have been backslaps all around about the House's convincing
267-151 vote to essentially maintain the status quo on the way the
FAA is funded. In rapid succession, the Ways and Means Committee,
the Rules Committee and the full House rejected user fees as a
method of funding the Next Generation Airspace System (NextGen)
and instead allocated modest increases in aviation fuel taxes to
that effort. The House vote was considered a slam dunk by most
aviation leaders but things get more interesting with the Senate.
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196185
DETAILS COULD SCUTTLE FAA BILL
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196196)
While there seems to be agreement in the Senate and House that
user fees will not be part of the FAA's next reauthorization
package, details in the House bill that was recently passed could
hamstring its passage and lead to a veto. The administration has
already said it would veto the bill over a section that requires
the FAA to resume negotiations with air traffic controllers and to
go to arbitration if those talks fail. The FAA imposed a contract
on the controllers (with Congress' tacit blessing) more than a
year ago, and the controllers union has relentlessly criticized
the deal, blaming it for an exodus of experienced controllers and
a bottoming-out of morale. The White House has the votes it needs
to veto since the 267-151 margin is less than the two-thirds
required to block a veto. The other hot-button issue tucked in
bill that could cause political fireworks is a provision to
increase the mandatory retirement age for airline pilots
from 60 to 65.
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#196196