Sending Out Letters...

Yes, you have the correct House and Senate bill numbers. Let us know if you get more than a standard response, "we'll take your thoughts into consideration". Good Luck.

W.R. Dancey;35731 wrote: Hi all,

The new bills are H.R. 1248 and S. 1717, correct?

You are correct. Here are links to each:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1248

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/1717

Jim

Time is running out!

There are fewer than 51 days left in this session. Do try to get all your acquaintances to write or call. Don't let ACLs $130,000+ financed opposition win!! (again!)

Once again I called Rep. Sanford's office, whom is on the House Sub-committee where HR1248 has been roosting since last year, and Senators Scott's and Graham's offices about S 1717. Hopefully, during the remaining days on Congress' calendar something will be done!

Think what you posted...

David Dewey;35734 wrote: There are fewer than 51 days left in this session. Do try to get all your acquaintances to write or call. Don't let ACLs $130,000+ financed opposition win!! (again!)

If ACL is spending $130,000+ to oppose the bill, don't you really want to know how much the DQ Company has spend to support it???? If that answer is $0, do you really think DQ fans' letters (without money in them) will overrule the professional lobbying effort? I don't want to hear the same old, same old they are working behind the scenes and don't want to reveal their strategy stories. How much have the DQ owners invested in professional lobbying efforts? Jo Ann, David, and other loyal foot soldiers in this battle - doesn't it bother you the least little bit that NO dollar amount has ever been admitted to being given to the cause by the owners?????? You're good with just an occasional bone thrown of a we're working very hard behind the scenes statement??????????????????

Judy Patsch;35736 wrote: ...doesn't it bother you the least little bit that NO dollar amount has ever been admitted to being given to the cause by the owners?????? You're good with just an occasional bone thrown of a we're working very hard behind the scenes statement??????????????????

That really is an unfair statement. During February, 2015 someone had to write a good check to purchase the boat for the cause. If that check wasn't written, there's a darn good chance the Old Gal would have been broken up by now. Also I rather imagine that the owners of the property where she is currently tied up expect to get their check for moorage each month. That payment is for the cause. God only knows what sort of taxes have to be paid on an 89 year old steamboat for the cause. And there is property in Kimmswick that has to be maintained for the cause. I'm pretty sure there are plenty of other costs for the cause that must be paid for the boat to be just in existence another day!

The problem isn't with the owners of the DQ; the problem rest squarely on the shoulders of a broken political system in Washington, DC! And until each American of legal age goes to the voting polls our politicians are more beholden to the fat cat lobbyists than to We the People. Today when I called Senator Scott's office despite having called before about S 1717 I wasn't even in their database of previous callers. I am a bit surprised that the hapless staffer even mentioned that fact. He assured me though that he did indeed register that call, but the fact remains that this constituent didn't even make a blip that first call. We deserve better!

The cause

The cause to which I was referring was the lobbying effort. I know the owners have spent on all those things you mentioned, obviously.

re: What we can all do to facilitate the next positive steps forward

Morning all,

Let us all write the owners of the DQ and thank them for saving our beloved boat and ask them what we can do as a community to further their success.

Friends, we have been given a most precious gift by the new ownership group - the gift of time.

How will the next chapter in the "Journey of the Delta Queen" unfold?

Best regards,

Russ Ryle

I really don't understand something which is Rep. Chabot of Cincinnati introduced the exemption bill in the last congress and in this one. I remember reading that he wanted to bring her majesty and the resulting jobs home to Cincinnati. Then the powers that be in the DQSC chose Kimmswick, Mo. as the homeport. If the boat ever had a true friend in Congress it was Rep. Chabot. If I were him, I know I wouldn't give the DQSC the time of day nor would I lift a finger to try to get the bill out of committee. What are the Missouri Congressmen and Senators doing?
Who is going to introduce the exemption bill in the next session of Congress?

re: Was there a competing offer from Cincy to host the DQ?

Hi Jim,

Politics may never be in our favor; but, we push forward anyway.

Did Cincinnati make a comparable offer to be her home?

I would hope Rep. Chabot and the others we need on our side in Congress to eventually win our point take the broader view of the value of an operating DQ to the entire inland river community beyond just having its home port in their district. Our selling point is her operating value to all.

Personally, I am just relieved she has a port to rest in giving us time to move forward.

Keep your steam up!

Russ Ryle

Frank, all the expenses you described....taxes, wharfage,insurance, utilities...are all normal business expenses which come with any boat. Surely they knew what they were getting into before they wrote the check. It didn't take a genius to realize that they were buying a very expensive problem if the boat wasn't quickly granted an exemption. Like Mrs. Greene once said "the DELTA QUEEN is the biggest white elephant in the world".
It was their decision to put money into a restaurant in Kimmswick. I think I would have used that money to hire a good lobbyist to counteract what the ACL lobbyists are doing. But, as Dale says "what do I know".

I will have to agree with Jim, and Captain Greene! Yes, the owners have given the DQ some more time. But, with the attitude of the public and congress, I don't know if it's enough. Here's the latest response on one forum from the detractors:

"Sam Jones
June 23, 2016, 8:50am (report abuse)

The only people I shill for are the citizens of the United States of America. You, on the other hand, have shown your true colors by being a parrot for the owners of this old derelict.

This tired, worn-out piece of junk is dangerous and should have been dismantled years ago.

There is no reason for this bill to be considered. The laws are working as designed to provide for the safety of those who would otherwise be placed in harms way through the greed of a few."

Trying to get the logic of the DQ's condition through to these guys seems to be impossible. Their lack of understanding of old machinery, engineering principles and overall marine design seems to be insurmountable. I can say it on this forum: They are IDIOTS! And the world seems full of them--hey, two of them are running for President! Oh wait, now I'm getting political. sorry!

Jim Reising;35742 wrote: Frank, all the expenses you described....taxes, wharfage,insurance, utilities...are all normal business expenses which come with any boat. Surely they knew what they were getting into before they wrote the check. It didn't take a genius to realize that they were buying a very expensive problem if the boat wasn't quickly granted an exemption. Like Mrs. Greene once said "the DELTA QUEEN is the biggest white elephant in the world".
It was their decision to put money into a restaurant in Kimmswick. I think I would have used that money to hire a good lobbyist to counteract what the ACL lobbyists are doing. But, as Dale says "what do I know".

You're right, Jim, and I realize that all those expenses are the cost of doing business. I'm in the process of starting a new business, and, as you know, you have to allocate your funds where they do the most good! My point being is that the current owners have a lot of their money invested already, and that alone should not be discounted. Not to mention the lost sleep they've probably incurred! Without that money, and willingness to lose sleep, it's a very real possibility that the Old Gal might not even be with us anymore. It's easy to play Monday morning quarter back when you have no skin in the game.

We also don't know what all of the fine print of the agreement with Kimmswick says. Perhaps the company was faced with Hobson's choice and had to allocate funds in a manner that might not seem wise to us on the sidelines. I'm just sayin'!