Something similar "The Tort Law Relating to Drones" was discussed and rejected by the Uniform Law Commission recently. The kicker is that this leads to lawsuits for trespass into someones airspace, yet noone can prove whether you were below or above the 200' limit. This proposed law complicates it further by adding on airspace around high buildings.
The real nonsense comes here, though.. consider this section of the draft:
SENSE OF CONGRESS .—It is the sense of Congress that
(A) in order for landowners to have full enjoyment and use of their land, they must have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of airspace over their property;
(B) the States possess sovereign police powers, which include the power to regulate and use, protect property rights, and exercise zoning authority; and
(C) the Federal Government lacks the authority to intrude upon a State’s sovereign right to exercise reasonable time, manner, and place of operations of unmanned aircraft systems operating within the immediate reaches of airspace
So the premise is that landowners should be able to control what goes on in the 200' above their land ,but then it claims the States have the right to regulate that (not the landowner).
So it's bollocks (a British legal term).