On Friday, May 19, the first tangible results of our product liability victory last year were scheduled to materialize. The location: Independence, Kansas. There, Cessna Aircraft Company was set to hold a groundbreaking for its new piston-engine airplane assembly plant. With residents of the community enthusiastic about the 1,500 jobs that will be created, this event will answer the many skeptics who doubted the company's pledge to build new piston airplanes. It will not be hard for all in attendance to savor the moment as the possible start of a revitalization of the general aviation industry.
Just a few weeks ago, Piper Aircraft President Chuck Suma explained to me the details of his company's bankruptcy reorganization. Suma indicated their production and employment for this year are up more than 30 percent, and orders are being taken for 1996 models. In addition, the companies that did not halt production — such as Mooney, Beech, Aerospatiale, Commander, and others — are optimistic about the remainder of this year.
Yet, with this positive news, why aren't those of us who represent you at AOPA and AOPA Legislative Action feeling euphoric? An even greater ill is upon us, replacing product liability as the number one issue threatening the future of GA in the United States. This is the two-year effort by politicians to corporatize or privatize our FAA air traffic control system. Reform of the FAA's air traffic control system has been on a roller-coaster ride since I last wrote about our five-point reform proposal (" President's Position: Independent FAA," February Pilot).
The House aviation subcommittee held three days of hearings in February on the subject of corporatization or privatization of the ATC system. Total privatization, selling shares in a true corporation, received no support from members of the subcommittee. The Clinton administration's proposal was severely criticized by Representative James L. Oberstar (D-MN) and others. Many excellent questions were asked, and the association representing the airlines angered several committee members by failing to specifically declare support or opposition to the administration's proposal. On the second day of this important hearing, I testified and submitted our Five-Point Proposal for Reform of the FAA. Unlike other groups, AOPALA had a constructive approach to counter the DOT's ill-conceived United States Air Traffic Services plan (USATS). Instead, we have proposed that the FAA be made an independent government agency — free of the constraints imposed on it by DOT.
Also during those hearings, a panel of former FAA administrators (Halaby, Busey, and Engen) testified on behalf of all living former FAA administrators. They related that all but one former administrator agreed on the concept of an independent FAA, and all of the former administrators endorsed a reform agenda that closely tracked our own proposals.
Throughout February and March, we worked closely with Representative James Lightfoot (R-IA), an AOPA member and former flight instructor, to draft comprehensive FAA reform legislation based on our five-point plan. It appeared that Lightfoot would craft his bill around four of our five elements. Previously, on February 8, Representative Bud Shuster (R-PA), chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, introduced legislation (H.R.842) to take the aviation and other transportation trust funds "off budget." Combined, Shuster's and Lightfoot's bills cover all five of our initiatives. AOPALA is heavily supporting a coalition of groups organized by Shuster to advance the bill, called the "Truth in Budgeting Act."A companion bill was recently introduced in the Senate by senators Max Baucus (D-MT) and Trent Lott (R-MS).
Lightfoot's bill, the Federal Aviation Reform Act, was introduced on April 4 as H.R.139. Twenty-eight organizations representing a variety of aviation interests support the plan. To get such diverse groups to agree on anything is nearly impossible.
Unfortunately, at the end of April, our Washington staff began to hear reports that the Senate Budget Committee might include privatization of the ATC system in its proposed budget for the coming year. Meanwhile, on the other side of the Hill, the House Budget Committee — which had previously considered such an idea — appeared to have been persuaded by our efforts and had backed off that concept. The reports that the issue was receiving interest in the Senate raised our serious concerns. AOPALA initiated aggressive lobbying of the Senate Budget Committee.
While the committee's final budget recommendation contained expense savings that the government believes it would realize from a corporatized ATC, I anticipate that we have at least softened up whatever support might exist and laid the groundwork for acceptance of a more reasonable reform package. Countering this setback, senators James M. Inhofe (R-OK) and Conrad Burns (R-MT) plan to introduce their version of Lightfoot's bill in the Senate in mid-May. Removing the world's safest and most efficient air traffic system from the FAA is an ill-conceived idea, whether it be a private enterprise or quasi-government corporation like the U.S. Postal Service.
AOPA remains committed to pushing for reform of the FAA within government and maintaining oversight of the agency by our elected Congress, not an airline-dominated board of directors whose profit motive could put safety and the operation of the system in jeopardy. How many new airplanes will be sold in an environment that deters private flying with direct user charges, rather than our present system of aviation fuel taxes? Political interests should not be allowed to kill what may be the last opportunity in this country for revitalization of the general aviation industry, and your association will continue to work diligently to ensure this doesn't happen.
