White House budget contains user fee despite opposition

I'm gonna hear it for this . . .

While this specific budget is only aimed at commercial aircraft and corporate GA ("recreational piston" aircraft are exempt,) I also agree it sets a dangerous precedent. AOPA assumes it would only be a matter of time before all controlled airspace users were given the fee regardless of GW or engine type or purpose.

If the law could be written to permanently exempt piston GA users I really don't see the big deal. If you are paying $5000 + per hour to fly a jet around I doubt you would notice another $100. Also, with IATA predicting the airline industry to be more profitable than EVER BEFORE this coming fiscal year, I assume they could absorb a $100 per flight fee. Really, they would just pass that down on the fares (easily less than $1 per passenger fare increase.) (http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_12_12_2013_p0-646093.xml)

I don't want to see this go into effect any more than the next pilot (I doubt it will) but I laugh at the doomsday posts I read. Flying is expensive and the airports, government, and FBOs are gonna leverage aviation users regardless.

Like the other posts I would like to see any proceeds from user fees actually go to aviation infrastructure and not to support the indolence epidemic.

Boy, lots of aviation-related comments here. Really reflects well on FA.

The fee itself applied to all commercial flights to pay for ATC would actually be a good thing.

The problems are:
1) Aviation already has quite a high level of taxation in the US. Certainly more than enough to pay for necessary government-provided aviation-related services, like ATC, security, and regulatory function.

2) The fee, if implemented, would not likely be locked only to the funding of ATC. If so, eventually the fee (or substantial amount if funds collected through the fee) would be diverted for other non-aviation uses.

3) The fee may be extended to all flights, including small plane recreational flights. This woul be an undue and unecessary burden on general aviation, Whig is already struggling under the regualatory burden.

So while, the fee is not bad on principle, especially if used exclusively for the provision of efficiently provided ATC services. In the real world, the implementation of these user fees can be problematic.

Why would we be so naïve to think that this fee would be dedicated to ATC and infrastructure. All you have to do is sit back each year and see the Highway trust fund begging for money and politicians wringing their hands trying to figure out where the money is going to come from to repair our aging infrastructure. Our user fees are being spread out now to where they can't keep up

He is an idiot.. tax and spend...

Someone has to pay for all the new food stamp recipients and benefits to illegals.

Lazy people in the U.S. today - and there are a lot of them - are more than willing to give up their rights - religion, to bear arms, unreasonable search and seizure etc. to have Obama/Reid/Pelosi & Mother Government, the most corrupt and stupid institution out there, take care of them. Unfortunately we all pay the price as the country marches towards corrupt socialism.