President's Perspective

As a student pilot, new pilot, or CFI, your days are probably filled with crosswind landings, short-field takeoffs, and waiting for weather. So legislation before Congress may be the last thing on your mind, but today Congress has an opportunity to change the way you and I fly for years to come. It's called AIR-21.

Two decades ago, Congress established the Aviation Trust Fund based on the principle that excise taxes on aviation would be used to fund, build, and maintain the infrastructure of America's air transportation system. General aviation would benefit from such things as more modern flight service station services and funds for GA airports. Over the past 20 years, the trust fund has been piling up incoming revenue-yet much of it has not been used for aviation but to pay for other budget items, such as social programs. Revenues in the fund come from taxes on airline tickets, cargo carriers, and avgas and jet fuel. You pay the tax even if you rent an airplane. It's part of the cost that an FBO passes on to renters in the "wet rate." Most estimates have the Aviation Trust Fund reaching $54 billion by 2008. Now, add to this the fact the Congress is faced with the first federal budget surplus in 30 years.

AIR-21 provides the perfect opportunity to finally "unlock" the trust fund and spend the billions inside to improve our aging airport and airway system. The vacuum tubes running radar screens in air traffic control centers could be replaced, the latest technology in navigation could be implemented, and that nagging answering system at flight service stations could be traded in.

With the help of AOPA members, we have fought hard to see that AIR-21 is passed and the Aviation Trust Fund is finally unlocked. However, negotiations between the House and Senate over AIR-21 have broken down, and the opportunity is fading away.

A booming economy has meant the first federal budget surplus in a generation, giving Congress the ability to solve the problem of funding aviation over the long term. In fact, House Transportation Committee Chairman Bud Shuster pledged to make 1999 "the year of aviation." Accordingly, he put forth the most dynamic aviation funding proposal in recent history. The House bill, H.R. 1000, or AIR-21 as it came to be known, focused upon two basic principles. First, protect the trust fund so that the money it takes in is spent strictly, and fully, on aviation. Second, guarantee that the 30 percent of the FAA's budget that comes from the U.S. Treasury's general fund would not be eliminated. The Aviation Trust Fund would finally be protected, and $57.35 billion could be spent on aviation over four years. That is $14.3 billion more than Congress would have been likely to spend if the trust fund was not protected. Late last spring, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed AIR-21 by a vote of 316 to 110, but then the trouble began.

After receiving AIR-21 from the House, the Senate delayed debate on its own version of the legislation. In frustration, I wrote to Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott and Minority Leader Tom Daschle, urging them to bring their version of the bill to the floor. They did so, but the bill was very different from the one that had passed the House. It did not include the provision permitting all money in the trust fund to be fully spent on aviation. Furthermore, the $3 billion general fund contribution had been eliminated. This Senate bill would do little to address aviation's future funding needs. The only hope was that some sort of compromise could be reached.

That was in November. No further progress has been made. What makes the Senate inaction so odd is that in 1998 almost all the senators on the current conference committee voted for a highway and transit bill that is almost identical to AIR-21. Why are highways more important than runways? The answer is power and turf.

For almost two decades we have struggled with the issue of the surplus in the aviation trust fund. Meanwhile, the Clinton administration budget for next year calls for funding aviation through $1 billion in user fees. All of this simply reinforces the need to pass AIR-21.

How does this affect you? User fees could mean that you would be forced to pay for every takeoff and landing, every weather briefing that you receive, or every tower, tracon, or center radio transmission that you make. New taxes could force FBOs to raise the cost of renting you an aircraft.

Perhaps you were one of the more than 350,000 AOPA members who we have contacted, encouraging them to write their senators. Many have already sent me copies of well-written letters that make the point to their elected politicians. We must all realize the position general aviation could be in if a steady and predictable funding stream is not established by this important legislation.