Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 22, 2019, 01:44:45 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  The Lobby  |  Topic: What happened to:H.R.1333 : To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  All Send this topic Print
Author Topic: What happened to:H.R.1333 : To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002  (Read 14273 times)
mikeylikey
Banned

Posts: 3,755

« Reply #20 on: May 18, 2008, 12:15:23 AM »

Wow......we will get a report from the GAO.  Expect that to be in 2010, and expect it to state that CAP should not be used.  Everyone needs to look up what the GAO does.  I wouldn't be surprised if they come back with a  recommendation that CAP should not receive any more Government funding.  These are the guys that try to cut Govt spending and find ways to make organizations work with less money. 

The Bill is dead.   
Report to moderator   Logged
What's up monkeys?
RiverAux
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,978

« Reply #21 on: May 18, 2008, 12:24:27 AM »

Basically, yeah.  And, I'm pretty sure they could have gotten the GAO to do a study without making it a law that they do so. 
Report to moderator   Logged
MIKE
Super Moderator

Posts: 5,461
Unit: LANTAREA

« Reply #22 on: May 18, 2008, 01:06:50 AM »

"Class A" Uniform - we'll never get away from that - no wonder.   ::)

OT:  If I were a soldier, I'd show up in Class A's... and if they said anything I would say that they said "Class A's"... Where's yours? That'll teach 'em. >:D
Report to moderator   Logged
Mike Johnston
FW
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,186

« Reply #23 on: May 18, 2008, 01:32:06 AM »

Everyone needs to look up what the GAO does.  I wouldn't be surprised if they come back with a  recommendation that CAP should not receive any more Government funding.  These are the guys that try to cut Govt spending and find ways to make organizations work with less money. 

The Bill is dead.   

I don't know about that.  It is a gamble though.  Let's see, $11M plus O&M for 1 UAV to fly border patrol vs. $29H for 1 CAP aircraft to fly each day.   Hmmmmm...
Cut spending..... make organizations work with less money.....  Hmmmm.... :-\

"Class A" Uniform - we'll never get away from that - no wonder.   ::)

OT:  If I were a soldier, I'd show up in Class A's... and if they said anything I would say that they said "Class A's"... Where's yours? That'll teach 'em. >:D

Let's be careful dressing. People may think we have no class. >:D

Report to moderator   Logged
Gunner C
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,748

« Reply #24 on: May 18, 2008, 12:51:43 PM »

Everyone needs to look up what the GAO does.  I wouldn't be surprised if they come back with a  recommendation that CAP should not receive any more Government funding.  These are the guys that try to cut Govt spending and find ways to make organizations work with less money. 

The Bill is dead.   

I don't know about that.  It is a gamble though.  Let's see, $11M plus O&M for 1 UAV to fly border patrol vs. $29H for 1 CAP aircraft to fly each day.   Hmmmmm...
Cut spending..... make organizations work with less money.....  Hmmmm.... :-\

"Class A" Uniform - we'll never get away from that - no wonder.   ::)

OT:  If I were a soldier, I'd show up in Class A's... and if they said anything I would say that they said "Class A's"... Where's yours? That'll teach 'em. >:D

Let's be careful dressing. People may think we have no class. >:D



I think the problem shakes out something like this:

  • We don't lobby well. While we have good contacts in congress, we don't have the full help of the AF.  As Randy Quaid said in Independence Day "They have bigger fish to fry."
  • We don't look like we can do the job. We don't look all that good in uniform, our uniforms aren't uniform, our paperwork isn't uniform.  We just don't live up to the military addage "It's not how you play, it's how you look."
  • We don't play well with others.  We haven't standardized our own training much less being NIMS compliant. We don't follow the lead of Mother Blue in most of what we do.  We cry and moan when we don't get our way and complain when other organizations don't pat us on the head and say "Let me kiss it and make it better."
  • We complain that we're asked to do hard things and protest that we shouldn't because we're just volunteers:  get haircuts and loose the beards, wear uniforms correctly, complete paperwork, etc.

Seriously, if you were an outside agency and came to the typical CAP unit would you say "We need to get these guys to the front lines!"  Heck no!  CAP officers tend to be sloppy managers, high ranking officers (too many times) are relieved for (basically) corruption, and your typical commander or operations officer couldn't write an operations plan or an operations order if their life depended on it (much less explain the difference). 

It pains me to say it, but CAP is a mess and we'll never get the organization changed until we get away from the NEC/NB format we have now.  We can't create change if the people who need changing are in charge.  We need a MAJOR overhaul.

GC
Report to moderator   Logged
FW
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,186

« Reply #25 on: May 18, 2008, 03:58:17 PM »

Gunner, that is an interesting opinion.  However, I disagree with it.  We lobby well; perhaps too well.  I see things from a slightly different perspective.  Our "lobbyist" is very busy and gets great responses.  I met with him last week while delivering an aircraft for the CAP exhibit at the JSOH Andrews AFB.  He was very excited about funding for new and existing projects and missions.  He was also optimistic about H.R.1333.

We do well with the Air Force.  It is their job to see we spend our grant "appropriately".  Let's say we have an obligation to "question" their judgement from time to time. 

Outside agencies are calling for our assistance all the time.  Sorry you don't see it.  Our problem, as you did state,  is having enough qualified members to assist.  Organizationally, we do play well with others. We will be NIMS compliant by the federal deadline.  IS300 & IS400 courses are being set up all over the country for our members.  But, we can only lead them to the promised land; we can't force them to cross over :angel:

We may have had some "corrupt" commanders in the past.  There may be some who are less than perfect today.  But, we deal with it best we can.  Give me one example of the "perfect" organization and I'll show you one without members.  And, I'm not really interested in the"self licking icecream cone" comparison anymore.  It is flawed and does not accurately describe our "management" situation. 

Complaints are good.  I complain all the time.  But I still do the job, and I enjoy what I do. 

Uniforms, well this situation predates my involvement with CAP (1967).  Anyone want an old Guyaberra(sic) shirt? ;D  I wouldn't mind us being a bit more "uniform".

CAP is no "mess".  Yes, it needs changing and, it will.  The people "in charge" direct the change and they will. Every member of the NEC is committed to positive change.  Don't take my word for it;  just follow the events of the next few months. 

Report to moderator   Logged
RiverAux
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,978

« Reply #26 on: May 18, 2008, 04:51:21 PM »

How is our training not standard?  We have national standards for all mission ratings and at this point we're no more non-NIMS compliant than most police or fire departments .  Yes, we've got a ways to go, but then again so does everybody. 

The fact that CAP has funding from well over half the states shows that we do play pretty well with others as a general rule and that most states like us.  Sure, we've got room for improvement in terms of local coordination, but that will always be a challenge given turnover in CAP and in local agencies. 

We don't lobby well?  Heck, just last year or the year before we went around the AF and got a ton of money restored to CAP's budget.  Not sure how we pulled it off, but we did. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Gunner C
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,748

« Reply #27 on: May 19, 2008, 01:07:23 PM »

Gunner, that is an interesting opinion.  However, I disagree with it.  We lobby well; perhaps too well.  I see things from a slightly different perspective.  Our "lobbyist" is very busy and gets great responses.  I met with him last week while delivering an aircraft for the CAP exhibit at the JSOH Andrews AFB.  He was very excited about funding for new and existing projects and missions.  He was also optimistic about H.R.1333.
No question, he is a fine officer and does a great service.  He's only one person - we need many more like him to be really effective.  Capitol Hill is up to the gunwales in lobbyists and we need more folks talking to congress AND the executive departments on a continuing basis.

Quote
We do well with the Air Force.  It is their job to see we spend our grant "appropriately".  Let's say we have an obligation to "question" their judgement from time to time. 
But, in the context of above, the AF doesn't spend much time helping us get our name out there.  1st AF is sold on us but the reason we're not heavily engaged with other organizations is that we (1) don't give them the impression that we're a serious organization and (2) we don't sell ourselves.  If we showed up every time with blue and green flight suits for air missions, BDUs and BBDUs for ground missions, and appropriate "serious" uniforms at mission bases we'd sell ourselves much better.

Quote
Outside agencies are calling for our assistance all the time.  Sorry you don't see it.  Our problem, as you did state,  is having enough qualified members to assist. 


(I'll keep this non-descript since the specific info is FOUO) We have 19 lines on the ATO for last week for the whole country. 8 of the lines are to fly other agencies' people so they can do their own recon.  So 11 lines are for CAP doing what CAP does - reconnaissance. BTW, only 1 line is for a GA8.  That's not impressive for a 500 aircraft force.

People aren't getting qualified in the numbers we need because there's not national training plan and we don't retain nearly enough of our people (if folks were getting training, we'd retain many more).  Each region, wing, group, and squadron trains what they see fit.  We spend a lot of money in the wrong places because of that.  Since there's no training management, we don't get the most bang for the buck.  I did this for my last four years in SF and coordinated all SOF high risk training plus all classified courses. 

Quote
Organizationally, we do play well with others. We will be NIMS compliant by the federal deadline.  IS300 & IS400 courses are being set up all over the country for our members.  But, we can only lead them to the promised land; we can't force them to cross over :angel:

 :D As a former commander (2x looser) and former chief of staff I know what you're saying.  But when I talk to ICs, they don't understand the NIMS relationship between CAP and the mission lead agency.  I can tell you that it pisses off other agencies when a CAP officer calls up and introduces himself as the "Incident Commander."  We, as a force, have a long way to go - there's still a lot of the old mission coordinator mentality left over.

Quote
We may have had some "corrupt" commanders in the past.  There may be some who are less than perfect today.  But, we deal with it best we can.  Give me one example of the "perfect" organization and I'll show you one without members.  And, I'm not really interested in the"self licking icecream cone" comparison anymore.  It is flawed and does not accurately describe our "management" situation. 

The current leadership (collectively, not individually) is a product of decades of no comprehensive program to train leaders at the squadron/group, wing/region, or national levels.  There's a large amount of discussion on this forum about how the CAP PD system doesn't really address the skill sets needed to train the next generation of leaders - a weekend here and there won't get it.  We have thousands of Lt Cols who are great guys and gals, great members, great technicians, but as far as leadership goes, they can't find their wallets with both hands and a flashlight.

Quote
Complaints are good.  I complain all the time.  But I still do the job, and I enjoy what I do. 

Uniforms, well this situation predates my involvement with CAP (1967).  Anyone want an old Guyaberra(sic) shirt? ;D  I wouldn't mind us being a bit more "uniform".

See above.  Uniformity should be part of marketing.

Quote
CAP is no "mess".  Yes, it needs changing and, it will.  The people "in charge" direct the change and they will. Every member of the NEC is committed to positive change.  Don't take my word for it;  just follow the events of the next few months. 

They're good people but they're a bit like the blind men trying to describe an elephant.  Ever since the AF got out of the business of being the national commander, we've been slipping in a bad direction - we need to change.

GC
Report to moderator   Logged
mikeylikey
Banned

Posts: 3,755

« Reply #28 on: May 19, 2008, 03:31:52 PM »

CAP is no "mess".  Yes, it needs changing and, it will.  The people "in charge" direct the change and they will. Every member of the NEC is committed to positive change.  Don't take my word for it;  just follow the events of the next few months. 

Sir, I agree with your entire post except what I quoted.  Too often we hear "just wait and see what we do in the months ahead".  That is an excuse used when an organization knows it sucks, but does not want to admit it publicly.  Why do we need to sit and wait when we can look at the events leading up to today?  That is what a reasonable person would do.  I am now anxious to see what is coming in the next few months, because I bet it will only be more of the same.......NOTHING.  We talk about change all the time, we are still waiting on CAP reg's that could have been produced by a Monkey in a week. 

Perhaps some of us are tired of playing the "wait and see" game.  Maybe we wanted to see some results and action a year ago when it was promised to us. 

This whole thing is BOGUS.  There still is no real vision, mission or direction from the Woman who is supposed to be leading our organization.  Oh but wait, those issues are not as important as discussing what bling Hawk MTN and NBB grads should be wearing, so it gets put on the side burner.  At least with Pineda, we were headed somewhere (although we were headed to self destruction, it was still somewhere). 

Maybe it is time for the AF to emplace an AF General Officer back in the Commander seat. 
Report to moderator   Logged
What's up monkeys?
RiverAux
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,978

« Reply #29 on: May 19, 2008, 05:00:49 PM »

Quote
There still is no real vision, mission or direction from the Woman who is supposed to be leading our organization.

I suppose you haven't read her column in the May-June Volunteer, which lays out all of that.  It would be nice for them to post the actual strategic plan, but I imagine they're waiting to officially announce it.
Report to moderator   Logged
Gunner C
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,748

« Reply #30 on: May 19, 2008, 06:02:59 PM »

Quote
There still is no real vision, mission or direction from the Woman who is supposed to be leading our organization.

I suppose you haven't read her column in the May-June Volunteer, which lays out all of that.  It would be nice for them to post the actual strategic plan, but I imagine they're waiting to officially announce it.

But will each of the 8 regions be required to publish a plan to support the strategic plan?  Will the 52 wings be required to publish plans to support their regions' plans? Will the subordinate units be required to do the same?  Will these plans drive training, dollars, and equipment?  If not, then all I stated above is true.

GC
Report to moderator   Logged
mikeylikey
Banned

Posts: 3,755

« Reply #31 on: May 19, 2008, 06:52:57 PM »

Quote
There still is no real vision, mission or direction from the Woman who is supposed to be leading our organization.

I suppose you haven't read her column in the May-June Volunteer, which lays out all of that.  It would be nice for them to post the actual strategic plan, but I imagine they're waiting to officially announce it.

It lays NOTHING out.  It was a "feel good" letter, nothing more.  When they publish a document that is longer than half a page and clearly defines the what, how, when, and where.....then that is something. 
Report to moderator   Logged
What's up monkeys?
FW
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,186

« Reply #32 on: May 19, 2008, 07:59:57 PM »

Well, since my last name starts with "W", I haven't yet got my Volunteer.  So, I'll assume she put forth CAP's 9 strategic goals in her letter.

If that is the case, she left out some things you all should know.  The NEC has been broken down into working groups to figure tactics to obtain the goals.  We have developed a new "business plan" and are bringing interested and experienced members into the groups to help flesh things out.  It takes time however, more should be known at the summer NB meeting.  BTW, the plan includes everything from training to aircraft fleet size.

We will have a "road map".  This is already member driven.  NHQ staff is assisting with every step.  Every region commander and wing commander will adapt the plan for their respective area.  Gen Courter insists we will all be on the same page.
The BoG insists we will all be accountable.  And , we are.

What's the story with the regs, Mikey?  I don't know of any regs we're waiting for?
The CAP/CC can issue a reg immediately if a need arises.  If you know of any Monkeys that can help with this, send me a line. ;D

If we look at where we were 1 year ago and compare it to now, I would say we are moving toward some great things.  I'm more excited now than at any time in the last 3 years.  YMMV but I'm not worried at all about where we are headed.  I am quite determined however, to keep focused on the prize and will "gently" remind all concerned not to lose sight of the finish line.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2008, 02:42:36 AM by FW » Report to moderator   Logged
Earhart1971
Seasoned Member

Posts: 397

« Reply #33 on: May 20, 2008, 06:13:25 AM »

Well, since my last name starts with "W", I haven't yet got my Volunteer.  So, I'll assume she put forth CAP's 9 strategic goals in her letter.

If that is the case, she left out some things you all should know.  The NEC has been broken down into working groups to figure tactics to obtain the goals.  We have developed a new "business plan" and are bringing interested and experienced members into the groups to help flesh things out.  It takes time however, more should be known at the summer NB meeting.  BTW, the plan includes everything from training to aircraft fleet size.

We will have a "road map".  This is already member driven.  NHQ staff is assisting with every step.  Every region commander and wing commander will adapt the plan for their respective area.  Gen Courter insists we will all be on the same page.
The BoG insists we will all be accountable.  And , we are.

What's the story with the regs, Mikey?  I don't know of any regs we're waiting for?
The CAP/CC can issue a reg immediately if a need arises.  If you know of any Monkeys that can help with this, send me a line. ;D

If we look at where we were 1 year ago and compare it to now, I would say we are moving toward some great things.  I'm more excited now than at any time in the last 3 years.  YMMV but I'm not worried at all about where we are headed.  I am quite determined however, to keep focused on the prize and will "gently" remind all concerned not to lose sight of the finish line.


I have not read a copy of the Bill.

The questions I would have, is there proper funding to support CAP performing this mission included in the frame work of this Bill, or will it take another piece of legislation?

CAP is great at getting missions and poor at projecting the cost of performing extra missions.

And we have a declining population of pilots and membership to support these missions.
Report to moderator   Logged
FW
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,186

« Reply #34 on: May 20, 2008, 06:10:59 PM »

I haven't read a copy of the latest bill either.  However, CAP "funding" is not the issue per say.  The issue is DHS using us as a force multiplier and cost efficient asset. 

Funding for assigned missions from other agencies come from the requesting agency.  Fees charged are for  expenses and "appropriate" per diem if authorized. Current policies are already in place.

Getting more young and experienced mission pilots is a difficult task.  It may become easier when the Flight Release Program becomes more streamlined and Post Flight reporting is made simple with a smooth reimbursement processes in place.  (all being worked on at this time)
Report to moderator   Logged
FW
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,186

« Reply #35 on: May 20, 2008, 09:34:44 PM »

Here's the latest.  Good support from the field.  More work needs to be done.
 :clap:

To the National Board,

I want to pass on the good news about HR 1333, the amended version of the Civil Air Patrol Homeland Security Support Act of 2007.  It was successfully marked up this morning in the House Homeland Security Committee and has been sent to the House for a possible vote later this year.

This is only the start of the billís legislative journey--we still have a ways to go before this bill becomes law and before it has an impact on CAP.  For starters, the House leadership has not yet scheduled the bill for a vote and we will need to do some work in the Senate to ensure that it is supported on that side of the legislative house.  Still this is a most important first step.

Everyone should also be aware that the bill has been amended so that it now asks for a Legislative Branch study of the functions and capabilities of the Civil Air Patrol to support Homeland Security missions.  This study will also address whether or not the current mechanisms for Federal agencies and states to request support from us are sufficient or whether new agreements between relevant Federal agencies are necessary.  This last item gets to the heart of the matter.

Once the bill becomes law it will take the Government Accountability Office (GAO) six to nine months to complete its investigative study and to report back to the Congress.  At that time GAO will likely also make recommendations to the Secretary of Defense relative to CAP and its use for Homeland Security missions.

Iíd like to thank the Pennsylvania Wing, Maryland Wing, and Middle East Region staff for supporting this last minute event and for having uniformed personnel at the hearing.  Everyone looked great in their blue service uniforms and they all were exceptional representatives for CAP.  The large Maryland contingent also included some great cadets from the Bethesda Chevy Chase and Bowie Squadrons.  The large CAP presence was noted during the hearing, with appreciation, by Congressman Dent who brought it to the attention of the Committee Chairman.


Regards,

 
John Swain, Colonel, CAP

Government Relations Advisor

Civil Air Patrol

Report to moderator   Logged
Earhart1971
Seasoned Member

Posts: 397

« Reply #36 on: May 21, 2008, 02:57:26 AM »

I haven't read a copy of the latest bill either.  However, CAP "funding" is not the issue per say.  The issue is DHS using us as a force multiplier and cost efficient asset. 

Funding for assigned missions from other agencies come from the requesting agency.  Fees charged are for  expenses and "appropriate" per diem if authorized. Current policies are already in place.

Getting more young and experienced mission pilots is a difficult task.  It may become easier when the Flight Release Program becomes more streamlined and Post Flight reporting is made simple with a smooth reimbursement processes in place.  (all being worked on at this time)

Thats what I was afraid of "current policies" on funding.

We are gaining another underfunded mandate for missions.



Report to moderator   Logged
SJFedor
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,689

« Reply #37 on: May 21, 2008, 04:25:28 AM »

I haven't read a copy of the latest bill either.  However, CAP "funding" is not the issue per say.  The issue is DHS using us as a force multiplier and cost efficient asset. 

Funding for assigned missions from other agencies come from the requesting agency.  Fees charged are for  expenses and "appropriate" per diem if authorized. Current policies are already in place.

Getting more young and experienced mission pilots is a difficult task.  It may become easier when the Flight Release Program becomes more streamlined and Post Flight reporting is made simple with a smooth reimbursement processes in place.  (all being worked on at this time)

Wings just need to have corporate avgas cards in the planes to be used on reimbursed missions. Take the burden and responsibility off of the individual pilot, and let the corporation handle themselves getting reimbursed like the rest of the world does it. Both wings I've flown with (PA and TN) have cards in the planes for these uses, I can't imagine why every wing wouldn't.

And the Flight release program is relatively simple. I've been an FRO for over a year now, it's nothing complicated unless you're doing stuff through WMU. Our mission tasking process (going through the NOC and all, "A/B" missions vs "C" missions, etc) needs some streamlining though.
Report to moderator   Logged
Steven Fedor, NREMT-P
Master Ambulance Driver
Former Capt, MP, MCPE, MO, MS, GTL, and various other 3-and-4 letter combinations
NESA MAS Instructor, 2008-2010 (#479)
Earhart1971
Seasoned Member

Posts: 397

« Reply #38 on: May 21, 2008, 05:11:16 AM »

I haven't read a copy of the latest bill either.  However, CAP "funding" is not the issue per say.  The issue is DHS using us as a force multiplier and cost efficient asset. 

Funding for assigned missions from other agencies come from the requesting agency.  Fees charged are for  expenses and "appropriate" per diem if authorized. Current policies are already in place.

Getting more young and experienced mission pilots is a difficult task.  It may become easier when the Flight Release Program becomes more streamlined and Post Flight reporting is made simple with a smooth reimbursement processes in place.  (all being worked on at this time)

Wings just need to have corporate avgas cards in the planes to be used on reimbursed missions. Take the burden and responsibility off of the individual pilot, and let the corporation handle themselves getting reimbursed like the rest of the world does it. Both wings I've flown with (PA and TN) have cards in the planes for these uses, I can't imagine why every wing wouldn't.

And the Flight release program is relatively simple. I've been an FRO for over a year now, it's nothing complicated unless you're doing stuff through WMU. Our mission tasking process (going through the NOC and all, "A/B" missions vs "C" missions, etc) needs some streamlining though.

Agree, and the other missing ingrediants, are a per diem ($300 per day for a Pilot makes sense), and approved employee time off from work, like the National Guard gets.

I think the problem is, we are eager for the missions, and we still have not learned to negotiate the funding.

Everybody assumes there is a an endless pool of pilots.

Numbers of people with pilots licenses are falling. Look at the FAA stats.


« Last Edit: May 21, 2008, 06:53:04 AM by Earhart1971 » Report to moderator   Logged
FW
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,186

« Reply #39 on: May 21, 2008, 11:06:39 AM »

Wings just need to have corporate avgas cards in the planes to be used on reimbursed missions. Take the burden and responsibility off of the individual pilot, and let the corporation handle themselves getting reimbursed like the rest of the world does it. Both wings I've flown with (PA and TN) have cards in the planes for these uses, I can't imagine why every wing wouldn't.

And the Flight release program is relatively simple. I've been an FRO for over a year now, it's nothing complicated unless you're doing stuff through WMU. Our mission tasking process (going through the NOC and all, "A/B" missions vs "C" missions, etc) needs some streamlining though.

Steve, having fuel cards in the aircraft is probably the single best way to help.  But wings still have a somewhat complicated paperwork process, even with WIMRS.  We're trying to simplify the process employing electronic signatures and an eventual fully on-line "108" to speed reimbursements to the wings. thereby enabling all wings to put fuel cards in their respective aircraft.  Also, the consolodated aircraft maint. program will  take a large paperwork burden off of wing staffs and freeing up money for more training.  This will let more pilots "in on the fun".  

And, yes, the actual flight release is simple enough.  However, I was also including flight authorization, flight classification, review of  60-1, AIF fill, and preflight paperwork.  Also, I've been told by more than a few pilots, " I can't find a FRO."   An electronic FR with a printed verified release would be, IMHO, safer and fit accountability standards; in addition to being easier, as simple or, simpler than a phone or personal release.  

To bring us back on topic; I'll say that by making the process more accessable, easier and affordable, we will incite more pilots to join us and train for our expanded missions.  We can then rise to the occasion when H.R. 1333 is passed and the GAO gives its report to congress and DHS decides we're the ones to go to....

And Earhart, maybe we will get those $300 per diem checks for members. :D

Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  All Send this topic Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  The Lobby  |  Topic: What happened to:H.R.1333 : To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.081 seconds with 26 queries.
click here to email me