Lobbyist's comment is likely valid. The underlying issue is that the airlines have not built the extensive and expensive lobbying network that is required to get things done in Washington. Microsoft made the same mistake and had to ramp up efforts quickly to catch up with the game.

The airlines have helped their course mainly though accepting the regulatory process, as in saying "how high" when the regulators said "jump."

But, now that they may need to force an issue from the other direction they find that their strategy of compliance leaves them without power to influence or move opinions.

If lobbyist is correct, just assume for a moment that he is, then our best course of action may be to push the organizations we are part of to activate their lobbying activities to help us. They will need valid reasons that support their core purpose and principles.

The Chamber of Commerce is a good start, I might just join if I thought they would support this. They will if it can be shown that the multitude of small businesses that support the airport infrastructure will be shown to be hurt by any loss of air traffic commerce. Unions sometimes have strong lobby arms that may help. Organizations such as ACLU, ABA, AMA, AAA and AARP all have influence. Large religious organizations often have a significant lobbying presence and there are ample arguments in this debate that can be connected to religious practice and beliefs.

The airlines will suffer from this whether we try to make them suffer or not. They operate at the margins of acceptable cash flow anyway, and even very small changes in that can affect the ability of the airline to manage their financial obligations. If they are cashed strapped, they can not ramp up effective lobbying. They can only whine. Sort of like us.

Maybe they can be ready the next time. This type of influence buying at this level can not be built overnight at the grass roots.