Message Boards

Message Boards (
-   Save the DELTA QUEEN (
-   -   Past Exemptions (

Jim Reising 03-01-2016 04:06 PM

Past Exemptions
Were any of the past exemptions (I believe there have been 4 or 5 of them) passed by an up or down vote by both houses of congress or were they all passed because they were admendments to other bills? I can remember a couple of them were attached to "must pass" bills, but I don't remember congress ever actually voting on a stand alone exemption bill.
We need another Leonore Sullivan to find a "must pass" bill to have the exemption ride along on the coat tails of a larger bill.

Jim Reising 03-08-2016 10:46 AM

The reason I originally posted this question is because I really don't know how the past exemptions got through congress. It wasn't Ol' Reising being negative. I believe that what worked in the past should work today. Obviously trying to get a stand alone bill through both houses of Congress isn't working, how many times in the past few years has it failed?
I do wonder why the management of the DQSC isn't coordinating the effort. JoAnn seems to be the one who is spearheading the effort and, as far as I know, she has no financial stake, she is doing it only for the love of the boat. She deserves all our thanks. I sincerely hope that all her time and efforts are successful.

Wesley Paulson 03-08-2016 01:25 PM


I think we are in a different reality where amendments are concerned. Taking from experience working for non-profit advocacy in my state legislature, things like passing the DQ exemption are often traded with reluctant legislators as chits for major votes. This happened in a much friendlier state-level environment than what the current state of things in Washington DC.

I would not count the DQSC out. Just because we aren't hearing anything doesn't mean it isn't happening. If they were trying to tack an exemption in a larger bill they might not want to call attention in a big way until time to pop the cork and celebrate.


Frank X. Prudent 03-08-2016 11:46 PM

I think that much of what is happening or lack there of at least in the Senate is due to the current Majority Leader of the Senate. McConnell won't allow it to be put as an amendment to a bill that must be passed. I know it hasn't been for the DQ's owners lack of trying that S 1717 hasn't gone anywhere!

Mike Washenko 03-11-2016 08:33 PM

Wes you hit the nail right on the head. I don't remember his name but the guy that owns ACL has again spent big bucks (like he did in 2013) to stop the exemption from passing. He hired the top maritime lobby firm and they're spreading bad information about the DQ.

David Dewey 03-11-2016 11:53 PM

Sad, it was hoped that by now the DQ would be considered a "small thing" and not attract ACL's attentions.
What is the name of this Lobbyist group, so we can rally against them---I think it would help in our letters, etc. to our representatives that they are being paid to tell lies by a competitor.
I also think this may be the "Human Interest" story we need to get major media coverage--Big Corporation Bullying little guy. Maybe we can embarrass ACL some??

R. Dale Flick 03-13-2016 09:59 AM

*Urge caution with Exemption attempts*
Morning, Steamboating colleagues:
Interesting discussion Jim Reising has initiated above with fine comments/questions following. As Wesley states, and I agree, 'things' not the same now as when Betty Blake and the company launched the first exemption cause for the DQ. Betty was successful in making the issue of a private for profit corporate entity as the DQ in the center of a national campaign as if the boat were in the public domain. And even then the list grew of "those we love to hate" with congressman Garmatz leading the list. I would hope--and advise--that what I see as another "hate list" being drawn up now quickly be shredded as the preceived opposition of today could well be the ally of tomorrow. With the current political debates etc. leading to the election in November, I can assure you that most if not all representatives have their attention riveted to other matters. Betty's campaign was new, novel at the time with her knowing she was pushing the envelope to the max--and won then. The big clincher was when she carted those thousands of signatures on a long, heavy roll of paper in a wheelbarrow up the steps of the Capitol in Washington, D.C. Even crusty Garmatz had to give her credit with a smile. Betty one in a zillion with her mold broken.

This now the second time we've heard statements about ACL hiring lobbyists in opposition to the DQ initiative. If so I think we all would be interested in seeing nailed down names on this so provided and not just rumors. Remember, that hiring lobbyist representing ANY interest in congress is totally legal, part of the political process whether we like it or not. Again, if we 'can't lick em then join em in the process.' Sorry, but contacting representatives with news about who is being paid what by a competitor nothing new. All representatives know the process all too well with their own links into who is saying, doing what and when. Be very careful in openly placing ACL high honchos--or anybody else--in a dark light as it can well come back to haunt you with no excuse in applying 'free speech.' Yes, been there, done that in the past here as president of the Civic Association, work with City Hall on many issues back nearly 50 years. Not fun mounting an opposition no matter how noble only to open your mail box finding a letter on expensive paper stock bearing the heading of a major law firm or corporation beginning with, "Dear, so and so. It has come to our attention that you have..." giving you chills down your back. Worse yet a phone call. Confront a lobbysit group and you'll see what happens. More than a few in leading initiatives lending their names have found themselves suddenly swept in with financial, legal and political issues landing in their laps. And, as Wesley states, an exchange of votes important. Remember, no member of the U.S. House or Senate lost their seats due to just the past DELTA QUEEN initiatives.

We ALL are free to donate our own financial resources, volunteer time and attention as we so wish to whatever. Any 501(c)3 or Charitable Trust forbidden by law to donate any cash in hand, be involved in any political initiative directly for 'private for profit corporate initiatives.' To go one step beyond thrusting ourselves in a private corporate issue another matter as the DQ is not in the same category as a museum vessel like the Str. W.P. SNYDER. Yet, we do what we think right and proper--just be careful in what we say about a 'perceived' but unseen so and so enemy. I would suggest we continue for answers but let Mr. Martin and his vested group in the DQ initiative do what they can, provide us with information or requests for help in due time. Again, I DO know what I know in matters like this having had my head kicked in with scars and bruises. Any who think I'm wrong, out of line free to try on my battered hat to see how it fits and feels.

R. Dale Flick
Old Coal Haven Landing, Ohio River, Cincinnati

Jim Reising 03-18-2016 10:50 PM

Just read that the AMERICAN QUEEN people are looking to expand again. Business is so good on both their boats they need more capacity. NUF SED

Russ Ryle 03-19-2016 08:19 AM

re: Could this approcah be of value?
Morning friends,

This is an old question of mine I never could get a good answer to.

"If" the DQ would stay docked at a port at night, operating sort of like she did in Chattanooga, and sail during daylight hours - would this approach relieve her of some of these operating restrictions?

Our rivers are blessed with interesting small(er) towns with interesting things to see that would openly welcome a visit.

Keep your steam up!

Russ Ryle

Judy Patsch 03-19-2016 12:57 PM

Passenger counts reported to lockmen on UMR last year generally in 200 range, with 2 for 1 offers in effect. 'nuf said!

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:23 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
All content on this site is copyright protected and may not be re-used without written permission.