Health Care Reform

Lots of news in Washington today. Looks like a bipartisan group of senators on the Finance Committee are moving toward a deal on health care legislation. It also looks like House Democratic leaders have a deal with Blue Dog Democrats.

So, perhaps we may get somewhere on health care. I must admit, I don’t really understand health policy. I worked on it during the four years in the mid-80’s when I worked for Sen. Joe Biden but always struggled with it. I don’t know what the answer is, but I am pleased that members of different ideologies are working together on this.

That’s the way it should be, our system works best when this happens. That’s what the Founders intended. I commend all the members of both parties who are working so hard on this.

I also commend members of both parties who are working on FAA Reauthorization. Some of the best members of both houses of Congress are working on the FAA bill and I am confident we will have a result….eventually. And as I said in a recent blog post on the National Journal, an FAA Bill would be an economic stimulus bill.

One final note: I see that Sen. Chuck Schumer wants to outlaw texting while driving. I agree. You shouldn’t text while you drive. That’s what red lights are for!

Filed under: Airports, Government policy, politics

Ducks, Cargo and NextGen

I’m here in Memphis for the ACI-NA Cargo Conference.  The meeting is being held in the historic Peabody Hotel, which features its famous ducks that come down the elevator at 11 a.m.; swim around in the lobby fountain and then go back up to their suite.  Today, the mascot of the Marshall University Thundering Herd basketball team served as the ducks’ escort; they are in town for the Conference USA Basketball Tournament. 

Much of today’s discussion centered on the economic challenges we face.  The mayor of Memphis began by reminding us that we have come out of every economic challenge we’ve faced thus far, and so we will again.  But in the hours that followed, it was hard to avoid coming back to the impact a recession has on cargo. 

I thought it was interesting, too, that a couple of other subjects kept coming up, namely the need to modernize air traffic control by moving forward with NextGen, the need to ensure adequate ground infrastructure, and the need to deal with environmental issues, especially those surrounding climate change.  This came up in the panel I moderated on regulatory and legislative challenges (nearly the entire session was focused on the economy), as well as in the keynote speech by FedEx Chief Operating Officer Bill Logue. 

In other words:  We cannot allow the economic slump to divert our attention away from these important issues that will have a critical impact on our business for a long time to come.  Truer words have never been spoken. 

P.S. If you are concerned about congested skies and the future of air traffic control, then join the new National Alliance to Advance NextGen.

Filed under: Airports, Government policy, Travels

Others join the cause to fight congestion

I’m writing this on the Amtrak Acela Express, returning from New York. I was attending the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey’s NextGen Symposium. 

NextGen refers to the project to (finally) modernize air traffic control and turn it into a satellite-based system. The Port Authority runs the New York area airports which are among the most consistently delayed in America. Modernizing air traffic control would go a long way to alleviating those delays. 

The Partnership for New York City estimates that delays and congestion will rob the area of $80 billion in economic activity the next decade and a half. I think that number might be low. But even it if it right, if you look at the country as a whole the number would be more than a trillion — easy. Anyone think we have a trillion dollars of economic activity to throw away? 

The Port Authority brought together a number of aviation interests, but more significantly, brought together leaders in the business, labor and civic communities. The National Alliance to Advance NextGen is composed of nearly 100 organizations representing millions of people. ACI-NA is a member of this coalition. 

That is critical. Failure to do something about this issue has an enormous economic cost. But participation in this debate has been limited to aviation interests. By expanding the universe, the Port Authority has performed a valuable service by demonstrating the true economic cost of inaction.

Filed under: Airlines, Airports, Government policy, Regulators, Travels

Who Wants to Invest in Infrastructure?

The National Governors Association (NGA) is meeting in Washington right now.  When I was in state government in Virginia, I was very involved in these meetings and I know the three-day NGA Washington meeting is among the most substantive and important on the calendar here in D.C. 

The meeting comes just days after the President signed the stimulus bill.  On Saturday, the governors held a debate on infrastructure investment, sponsored by the University of Virginia’s Miller Center.  I had dinner the night before with former Virginia Gov. Gerald Baliles, my former boss who is the Director of the Miller Center and who persuaded Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell to hold the debate.  Rendell is chair of the NGA.  That event, part of the Miller Center’s debate series, will air on PBS sometime in the next few weeks.  There is a lot of talk at the governors’ meeting about investment in infrastructure. 

As I was preparing earlier this week for a presentation to the board of directors of Jacksonville Airport Authority, I thought a lot about the NGA and the infrastructure debate. I thought about the work I have done on this topic over the years, including one high level commission in 1992 that recommended more than $10 billion in new infrastructure spending annually (over and above what was already authorized) — and was criticized for being TOO TIMID!  Times have changed. 

Aviation is the transportation mode that is best able to generate its own investment, whether from the ticket tax, from the passenger facility charge (PFC), from airport bonds, or from airport revenues.  Yet, incredibly, our users, as represented by the airlines oppose generating resources for investment.  To me, this is incredible!   I have never met a passenger who feels we have more infrastructure than we need, but airlines have largely succeeded in pushing the passenger out of the way in this debate. 

Airports do not need new general tax dollars to invest in our nation’s economic future.  (Though the general fund should support more of the FAA’s operating budget than it does now, but that is the subject for a future piece).  Airports are ready to go.  Congress, by allowing more bond financing in the stimulus bill, has already made a start, and can go even further by raising the limit on the PFC user fee (local money that is project based and does not support a bureaucracy). 

I was on a flight last week and was told I could have a blanket — for $7!!  It came with ear plugs and eye shades and a drawstring bag with the airlines’ logo on it.  And the airlines don’t want Congress to add $2.50 to the PFC limit to build runways, taxiways, terminals and other important infrastructure.  Is there a group of passengers out there who really believe we have all the infrastructure we need and has been pushing for that $7 blanket bag?  I doubt it.

Filed under: Airlines, Airports, Government policy, politics

Remembering Continental Connection 3407

Like all of us, I woke up Friday morning to the news of the Continental Connection crash in Buffalo. It is a horrible, heartbreaking story. The human costs can’t be calculated, they go well beyond the numbers involved. I believe in prayer and all involved will be in mine. 

At times like this it is always important to remember, as well, that the work of finding answers to why this happened is difficult and does not move at a pace most people find satisfactory. But finding those answers is critical, such work in the past has saved the lives of thousands as answers have been found to such problems as wind shear and controlled flight into terrain. And training has developed to the point that a plane can be “landed” in the Hudson and everyone gotten off.

 I was watching ABC News last night when I got home from work because I knew they would cover it and I knew their aviation reporter, Lisa Stark, would put together a report that included critical information and perspective — which is exactly what she did. She, and her many colleagues who do the same, also provide a service to a public desperate for answers.

 In this case the evidence seems to lead in a certain direction. Analysis will determine whether that is correct. And a lot of hard work will help find answers that might keep this from happening at some point in the future.

Filed under: Airlines, Airports, Government policy

I Have A Complaint . . .

Last week, I flew on four different flights.  While the flight times varied from between 75 minutes and 90 minutes, we were on the plane for 2 hours each time, counting from the time we boarded till the time we left the jetway.

Each flight was smooth; in fact the pilots always announced that the flights were expected to be smooth.  But the seat belt sign never came off, on any of the four flights.

I have noticed when I fly on a non-U.S. carrier, that the seat belt sign usually comes off within 10-15 minutes of takeoff, but it is rare that the seat belt sign on a U.S. flight goes off sooner than 30-40 minutes into the flight.  Sometimes, it does not come off at all.

For those of us who need to move around because of hip or back issues, or both, this can be a problem.  For those of us in the “Flomax Generation” this can be a problem.  Especially when we are on the plane a full 30 minutes before it even leaves the gate (as much as 45 minutes for an international flight).

I don’t know why that seat belt sign stays on so long on U.S. carriers and can be taken off so much sooner on a non-U.S. carrier.  (And I should say I have never been in a situation on a non-US carrier when the sign was off, but really should have been on.)

I don’t know if this has to do with our litigious society, some insurance regulation, or something else.  But I don’t like it.  Do any of you?

Filed under: Airlines, Airports, Government policy, Travels