Hmmmmmmm. this idea is still a work in progress.
Jaba, while it would be "tempting" to work with AOPA, SAAA, RAA, etc. I think it has to be avoided because those organisations have to have productive engagement with CASA and they need total plausible deniability about participating in what is primarily political action.
To put that another way, Public Servants have every right to hate the guts of people who go behind their backs and talk direct to the Minister, with of course the honourable exception of invited submissions to Parliamentary committees. It would be death for AOPA, SAAA, RAA etc to be seen to be going behind CASAs back over something CASA has done or not done.
To put that yet another way, how can AOPA, etc. expect to maintain any sort of relationship with CASA and the Minister if they are perceived to be greasing the skids under them?
However the "Accessible Aviation Movement (tm)" has no such scruples. It simply operates to try to deny election to candidates at Local, State and Federal level who are not responsive to the needs of Aviation for a level playing field, transparency, fairness, Glasnost, Perestroika, a chicken in every pot and a airport in every suburb.
It doesn't get involved in details or particular cases, it has no relationship whatsoever with CASA and must never have one - it is a political animal concerned with Politicians.The idea of participating in "task forces" is a tempting bait to make you part of the process, it must be avoided. What AAM is concerned about is how its charter is being implemented. It focusses on the organ grinder, not the monkey.
To put that another way AAM doesn't get involved in discussion of CASAs new regulations about Thronomister servicing and suchlike or if your Yak can't be registered as experimental - talk to AOPA, about that, its none of our business. Its nothing personal.
What AAM s charter might look like is up to you, My laundry list would look something like.
1. No more airport closures - ever.
2. Build more airports
3. Scrapping the entire regulatory suite and replacing it with the FAA or NZ regs.
4. Separating regulation from enforcement.
5 Restoring the independence of the ATSB and AsA.
6. Changing the CASA charter by legislation to require it to foster the industry and be mindful of regulatory impact on costs.
7. Removal of strict liability provisions and criminal sanctions.
8. Standardisation of requirements and procedures in plain english across the country.
Please feel free to modify..
The way AAM attempts to advance its charter is limited by its financial resources but could include:
a) Newsletters and press releases.
b) Direct funding to preferred candidates in marginal seats both state Federal and at the Council election level (Jaspers Brush A/P users take note)
c) Direct funding for negative advertising campaigns against perceived "enemy" candidates - borrow the old "you are for us or against us" line sign up to the charter or else - as used by the NRA. These campaigns need not be related to Aviation - which the general public can't be made to understand anyway. For example, perhaps a donation to another pressure group. Concentrate on marginal seats where every dollar counts.
It is important to remember that we are not trying to get a candidate elected, we are trying to
prevent a candidate from being elected by any legal means available. Under that scenario donations could be made to any person or group that has the ability legally to hurt the candidates electoral chances.
This is the NRA attack dog model: We are trying to ensure electoral failure. We don't necessarily care if the eventual winner is a green or a calathumpian. All we are trying to say is "mate, unless you sign up, then we will do everything legally possible to make sure you dont get elected, nothing personal, this is politics."
The NRA political action group website gives an idea of the not inconsiderable effort involved, These guys are the experts:
The NRA Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF) is NRA's political action committee. The NRA-PVF ranks political candidates - irrespective of party affiliation - based on voting records, public statements and their responses to an NRA-PVF questionnaire.
In 2008, NRA-PVF was involved in 271 campaigns for the U.S. House and Senate, winning in 230 of those races (85%). NRA-PVF also endorsed thousands of state legislative candidates that same year and achieved an 84% success rate in those elections.
NRA resources in the 2008 elections were more widely deployed in more critical battles than ever before. Millions of dollars were spent on direct campaign donations, independent campaign expenditures and on mobilizing the most aggressive grassroots operation in NRA history.
In 2009 and '10, NRA-ILA has continued to build upon that grassroots organization with programs that work to effectively communicate with NRA members and others.
NRA relies on a very simple premise: when provided with the facts, the nation's elected officials will recognize that "gun control" schemes are an infringement on the Second Amendment and a proven failure in fighting crime. The importance of this premise lies in the knowledge that, as one U.S. Congressman put it: "The gun lobby is people."
NRA-PVF | About PVF