<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>

      <rss version="2.0">		
        <channel>
          <title>WashingtonWatch.com - Comments for S. 1300, The Aviation Investment and Modernization Act of 2007</title>
          <link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills</link>
          <description></description>
          <managingEditor>info@washingtonwatch.com</managingEditor>
          <generator>http://www.pjdoland.com/chai/?v=0.1</generator>
          
<item>
<title>Comment by Gov Engineer (November 11, 2008, 19:53:23)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#46062</link>
<description>since Air Traffic Controllers make more than $100,000 / year to do a job that requires no formal education and has been proven to be performed better by computers, I think anything other than greatly reducing the cost of ATC is stupid....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">46062@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:53:23 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by atcguy (April 30, 2008, 14:10:53)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#33434</link>
<description>Lets get this bill passed! it will help the whole air traffic system. Everyone worries about the GA stuff but people should be more worried about the air traffic system that moves hundreds of thousands of people daily and it going down the drain unless this bill is passed!...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">33434@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2008 13:10:53 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by QuietRockland (April 29, 2008, 12:32:30)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#33358</link>
<description>This bill needs to be amended as follows:

1) Any funding for the disastrous NY/NJ/PHL Airspace Redesign needs to be pulled.  It is a $50mm waste of money and Very Unsafe, per NATCA and the Pilots (all for an illusory 3 minutes savings per flight)  

2) Funding should only be provided when Robert Sturgell steps down as Acting FAA Administrator.

3) The FAA publicly apologizes to the Air Traffic Controllers for the past 5 years of mis-treatment.

If you are flying in or out of any of the NY or PHL Airports, this is a big Safety concern!  Can you trust the same FAA Administration to Redesign the Airspace, when they can’t even get the Airlines to properly inspect of fuel their planes? 
When you weigh the Danger/$$ against the marginal benefits – the Airspace Redesign does not make any sense.  Curbing bad Airline behavior – like Airline over-scheduling – is the only way to solve this problem.

Flight Delays should be the least of your worries!...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">33358@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:32:30 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Matt E (April 25, 2008, 18:08:31)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#33006</link>
<description>If vetren controller's continue to early retirements because of Gov't imposed wages and work conditions, how will we as a nation deal with the growing air traffic in the years to come?  I urge everyone to support S. 1300!...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">33006@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 17:08:31 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by ATC_OZ (February 15, 2008, 12:27:24)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#30545</link>
<description>From my understanding, S.1300 has come about largly due to the imposed working conditions the FAA has forced on our Nation's ATCs. If the air traffic continues to grow as it has recently and the number of CPCs continues to decline due to these imposed working conditions, where will our NAS be then??? As a controller, I'm all for S.1300!...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">30545@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 15 Feb 2008 11:27:24 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Greg R (December 24, 2007, 08:22:39)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#25299</link>
<description>This bill has been sitting since Aug. What is the Senate doing except sitting on the ASSES? The Senate needs to consider their country and not their time off. They are off more then they are on....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">25299@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 24 Dec 2007 07:22:39 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by SMF (September 19, 2007, 13:55:49)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#21546</link>
<description>Passing this tax along to General Aviation is just a bail out for the airlines... again.  It will signal the death of GA....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">21546@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:55:49 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Greg McMichael (September 11, 2007, 09:26:58)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#21234</link>
<description>It seems ludicrous to me to write a bill which will under-fund the existing FAA budget from its current funding level and open the door for the demise of GA through higher taxes and fees, which will only get higher and higher and higher..............</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">21234@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2007 08:26:58 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by David T. Condra (August 15, 2007, 23:05:04)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#20407</link>
<description>Yes, folks this will means higher taxation but the bottom line is that we have come to rely on air travel.  We cannot stick our heads in the sand any longer on this issue.  The investment in infrastructure is long overdue.  It will pay off in improved productivity....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">20407@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:05:04 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by God Bless NATCA Members (August 13, 2007, 15:43:53)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#18782</link>
<description>No I am not a controller and I don't even play one on TV, but I do fly frequently!
What a mess the FAA has made of the whole agency! Thank God we still have(a few)dedicated, under appreciated people working long hours under horrible conditions to guide the growing number of planes safely across the skies. S.1300 makes no sense and creates a more hoistile work place for the people who are responsible for so many lives everyday!! Thanks ATCs...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">18782@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:43:53 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by CJW (August 13, 2007, 15:34:26)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#18771</link>
<description>The house bill fixes the problems fairly! The senate bill will create more problems and be devastating to the aviation industry. S.1300 is a prime example of corruption in our governemnt and the airlines in the hip pocket of Blakey and the rest of the presidents puppets....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">18771@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:34:26 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Free State (July 7, 2007, 11:13:52)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#16945</link>
<description>This bill is crazy. It will push GA into the ground, through the taxing of pilots with &quot;User Fees&quot;. Hopefully this bill wont come to a vote. The House bill is much better....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">16945@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 07 Jul 2007 10:13:52 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Jim Moscardini (June 12, 2007, 10:45:23)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#16349</link>
<description>As ludicrous as it sounds, there should be no reason against AGE 70.  If a pilot is capable of flying to that age, he should have the option. Anything else is age discrimination.  Period.  The antagonists of AGE 65 are the ones who can't support their position.  Why? Because their only interest in the issue is the selfish and self serving desire to get the more senior pilots out of the way.  ALPA's history on the issue makes this blatantly clear.

I support ANY legislative that will  end the decades of discrimination that was AGE 60....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">16349@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2007 09:45:23 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by JetJock (May 17, 2007, 19:14:10)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#15722</link>
<description>Anyone beside me notice that Age 60 becomes Age 65 if this bill passes? Funny,...seems like the proponents of change can't argue the merits of their case so they're piggy-backing (slipping thru the back door)Age 65 on a 4 year $65 Billion FAA Budget reauthorization bill. Careful what you ask for, you just might get it. Here's to Age 70!...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">15722@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 18:14:10 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Pat Bradley (May 17, 2007, 13:37:54)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#15702</link>
<description>Airline management  is generally incompetent and  
S.3000 is just a way for them to pull money from 
GA to help their bottom line....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">15702@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 12:37:54 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Mr Hill (May 17, 2007, 01:09:03)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#15695</link>
<description>This legislation is a complete joke. It will destroy General Aviation and merely take money from the pockets of General Aviation Pilots so the Airlines can be more profitable...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">15695@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 00:09:03 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Stephen Reading (May 16, 2007, 14:58:10)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_1300.html#15680</link>
<description>Our government seems not to have the competence, imagination, or motivation to find solutions to service problems except by means of additional taxes.  The S.3000 bill will just drive GA further underground - just like the tax structure did for GA in Europe.

We still have the best damn country in the world, but our government is driven by special interest groups - and the route of least resistence.  

If we had more accountability and less corruption in our government we would be able to provide more services, do more GOOD and all for less money....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">15680@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2007 13:58:10 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
        </channel>
      </rss>
  		