Waypoints: Concrete

To many, “privatization” may seem like a good thing. After all, surely a “private” entity can operate more efficiently than a government-run program, no? In this case, no. Because what Shuster’s bill lays out isn’t privatization at all. It only shifts a natural monopoly where Congress has oversight for the public good to a monopoly where the airlines and their allies can gain control over ATC and the billions of dollars of publicly funded assets associated with it. This giveaway of assets and control is akin to handing over the interstate highway system lock, stock, and barrel to six trucking companies and asking them to be sure to look after those who drive cars. In addition, Shuster’s bill, according to the Congressional Budget Office, would add nearly $100billion to our national debt over several years to transition the system from the government to a nonprofit monopoly, run by the airlines.

If all this time and money were to end up solving some of the challenges facing the air traffic system, perhaps it would be worth a consideration. But it won’t, because it doesn’t address the inherent problems that lead to delays. It doesn’t force the airlines to address their own scheduling conundrum—the one that schedules more flights out of some airports during push times than the runways there can possibly handle. Throw in some severe weather in the region, and the system falls apart. Not because of the failings of the ATC system itself, but because of the impossible task asked of the system by the airlines.

If all this time and money were to end up solving some of the challenges facing the air traffic system, perhaps it would be worth a consideration. But it won’t.The Washington Post published an op-ed piece I wrote about problems in the air traffic system. The newspaper titled it “The Airports are Regulated by…Concrete.” Here are a few quotes from it: “Whether one considers the culprit to be short-sighted city planners…or noise-sensitive airport neighbors, the fact remains that until more concrete is laid, the FAA could train every man, woman, and child in the country to be an air traffic controller and airspace congestion would still haunt us. In the meantime, only realistic scheduling by air carriers and level-headed communications between controllers and pilots will bridge the safety gap…. Today, however, it is a lack of runways, not the federal government that regulates the air carriers and general aviation as well.”

The date on that op-ed: December 27, 1986. Yes, 31 years ago.

President Donald Trump kicked off “Infrastructure Week” in June with a press conference touting the benefits of ATC privatization, making his case by denigrating the current system—a system that is the envy of the rest of the world. And, in fact, his privatization proposal doesn’t really address new infrastructure at all. The investments in ATC modernization mentioned by the president are already programmed and in the works, many of the recent ones ahead of schedule and on budget. What a shame that he did not use the opportunity to promote real infrastructure investment—in new runways and airports that would make a significant impact on the flourishing aviation system in this country, improvements that would create good-paying jobs and generate decades of benefit for the nation.

General aviation for years has promoted the idea that the FAA procurement process and decision making regarding infrastructure should be reformed. The NextGen Advisory Committee, of which AOPA is a part, has made great progress in helping the FAA focus attention and resources on projects that make a difference in moving more air traffic safely. More can be done to improve the current system. It’s time for the airlines and Congress to join GA leaders in working to improve the current system, rather than handing these public assets over to an entity that will ultimately be accountable only to the airlines.

Email [email protected]