I don’t doubt that it will take some hammering to get what they want(and everyone and their peanut stand will want a ‘national security’ no-drone-zone); but there is a substantial difference between upgrading a gigantic, hairy, safety-critical, legacy system that isn’t yet broken enough to keep people from suggesting that you really shouldn’t poke it; and approving a more or less ‘greenfield’ new system that a variety of helpful friends conveniently are really enthusiastic about. (It probably also doesn’t hurt that the FAA has the option of authorizing short-range, relatively cheap, drones on a provisional and/or purely domestic basis; while anything that affects international aviation or requires avionics upgrades to airliners is going to be a hell of a mess unless you can get the FAA, EU, and anyone else interested to do something marginally interoperable.)
Amazon’s main problem is likely to be that the areas with the greatest challenges(both regulatory and technical) are also the ones most viable to serve by drone. Thinly settled and low-rise areas with minimal passenger/freight air traffic and just a modest population of light aircraft and crop dusters? A good place to try to get approval; but the number of prospective customers within a viable radius of each distribution center would be pretty lousy.
Dense inner suburbs and metropolitan areas? The market you actually want; but also where all the potential obstructions and people concerned about your plans are.
