If you have followed the news reports from the nation's capital, you probably know that privatization of the air traffic control system is a top priority for the powerful new chairman of the House Budget Committee, Republican congressman John Kasich of Ohio. Kasich's proposal calls for more radical reform than the Clinton Administration, which for the past year or so has advocated turning the ATC system into a government-owned corporation like the U.S. Postal Service or Amtrak; and we know how well both those organizations work. Kasich's plan would completely eliminate the government's role in managing the ATC system by transferring the system to a private, nonprofit corporation.
AOPA has been the leading opponent of the Clinton corporatization plan, and it appeared the plan would go nowhere — until the electoral earthquake back on November 8. The new Republican Congress has come to town with a much greater philosophical interest in privatizing government programs. Privatization of government services might be beneficial if multiple private providers compete for business and reduce cost to the consumer. ATC, however, must be a monopoly service to ensure safety, and therefore no competition can exist to create benefits.
Now we're facing a new challenge in the form of the privatization proposal put forward by Kasich. Under a draft of the Kasich plan obtained by AOPA, this new nonprofit corporation would issue stock to various categories of ATC system users at an initial stock offering price of $100 per share — with most shares going to the airlines. (Can you imagine anyone buying stock in a "nonprofit" corporation unless the benefit was complete control?) The corporation would be managed by a board of directors made up largely of airline and union representatives, with a token number of seats available for general aviation.
One of the strategies we're employing to fight the Kasich plan is to encourage other respected Republicans in Congress with a greater knowledge of aviation to speak out against privatizing the ATC system. For example, AOPA member and longtime congressional ally Jim Lightfoot (R-IA) describes privatizing the ATC system as "a very bad idea" and "absolutely the wrong direction to go." On the other hand, Senator John McCain (R-AZ) told us on a recent visit to Capitol Hill that, except for the Department of Defense, he feels every other agency of the federal government would operate more efficiently if privatized.
In addition to continuing to speak out against the growing number of plans to corporatize or privatize the FAA, AOPA Legislative Action in late December proposed an alternative to reforming the FAA, but within government. This month, "AOPA Action" (p. 6) outlines our new five-point proposal. The two key elements establishing the FAA as an independent agency and removing the Airport and Airways Trust Fund from existing budget calculations by taking it "off budget." This will ensure that your tax payments are dedicated to aviation use and no longer used to reduce the deficit.
These reforms from within government are a more prudent and realistic approach to the FAA's problems than the extremely risky alternative of privatizing the air traffic control system — an approach under which the federal government would essentially abdicate its responsibility for the safety and efficiency of the ATC system. Appropriate reforms from within government will preserve public accountability and ensure continued congressional oversight of the safety of our nation's air transportation system, rather than placing the system in the hands of the airlines to control.
In researching the ideas put forth in our proposal, we recently came across remarks in the Congressional Record that were delivered on the Senate floor by another prominent Republican. These comments clearly articulate the important reasons for removing the FAA from the political clutches of the Department of Transportation. Let me share these senatorial remarks with you to help better explain our own reasons for making an independent FAA the central element of our five-point reform plan:
"Today I introduce a bill which, to put it in plain words, simply removes the Federal Aviation Administration from the Department of Transportation and reestablishes it as an independent Federal Aviation Agency in the executive branch."
"The safe and efficient use of airspace is the primary objective in the original Federal Aviation Act of 1958. To achieve this major purpose, it is obvious that an independent aviation body must exist into which are consolidated all the essential management functions and responsibilities needed for air traffic and space control. This was the initial concept that led to enactment of the Federal Aviation Act in August of 1958, and it is as true today as it was then. This act created a Federal Aviation Agency and gave it full powers over air navigation."
"But in 1967, when the then-new Department of Transportation was created, the Federal Aviation Agency was terminated and its powers and functions were transferred to and vested in the Secretary of DOT. The previously independent Federal Aviation Agency was in effect converted to a new bureau within the Department of Transportation, named the Federal Aviation Administration. The administrator of this 'bureau' reports to and is subject to the control of the Secretary of Transportation."
"There is extensive evidence to show that subsequent to this transformation, there has been undue interference on the part of the Department of Transportation in the internal affairs of the Federal Aviation Administration, so much so that the FAA's procurement process has been slowed down to an average time period of one and a half years or more, resulting in the cancellation of many procurement projects or unnecessary losses in the millions of dollars to companies involved. It is important to note, too, that aviation users, who pay much of the money which goes into the airport and airway trust fund, have no effective participation in the development of FAA finance plans so long as it is under the Department."
"It is my strong opinion that air safety management will be improved by separating the FAA from the Department of Transportation and reestablishing the office as a completely independent agency of government, not subservient to any other organization."
These are the remarks of revered Republican Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona, who also happens to be a pilot and an AOPA member. Ironically, this speech should be delivered today, by the Republicans who won a stunning victory on November 8 — yet, in fact, it was delivered 20 years before, on September 30, 1975.
It's an idea first introduced by Republicans. Of course, others from both parties in Congress have taken up the call for an independent FAA since then, always supported by AOPA. But it was a good idea when Senator Goldwater explained it to his Senate colleagues, and it's a good idea today. Let's give it a try.
Related Articles
