Originally Posted by
Nucflash
I wasn’t concerned with any specific congress; just what’s been coming to a head the last few months. I’m sure the idea for 65++ has been in people’s heads since the day 65 passed in ‘07.
Agree; no dispute. But you generally get more hype for an idea with a standalone bill with a fancy name while amendments tend to get buried in committee briefs.
Ambrosi’s update of 17 July alluded to it.
It’s absolutely not politically driven, if that’s what you are asking. Just by people who can’t give it up. Hoot Gibson would be flying at SWA to this day if he still could.
Ah, yes, this:
The proposal, which is being pushed by a lawmaker whose goal appears to be granting favor to a family member, risks the U.S. airline industry economic recovery that you and other ALPA members worked so hard to achieve.
I would call that a major faux pas. Nehls is on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. That statement likely got back to Nehls through his brother since his brother received that blast email.
Making an enemy on an important committee that your industry relies on doesn't seem very intelligent.
All of those amendments that you listed above (labeled NEHLS AMENDMENT by you) were by members of the T&I Committee. That's the process. Committee members propose amendments. Ambrosi knows that, or should know that. I can't believe that was allowed to be sent out with that statement. Unbelievable.