Senate Democrats Seek $7.3 Billion FAA Extension

[Bret Walker]

Edit: As you may or may not know, I work as a contractor at the FAA Tech Center in Pomona, NJ. As a Tech Center employee, and an FAA Contractor, this issue is very close to home for me. As of yesterday I was still pissed at my New Jersey senator, Frank Lautenberg, who threatened to fillibuster the FAA reauthorization if it meant killing the issue of Air Traffic Control privatization. Today, my anger has shifted away from Lautenberg and toward the people who really deserve it: the Republicans. Where Lautenberg suggested a six-month extension to avoid furloughs (unpaid days off, basically being unemployed and unemployable, with no income and no way to earn a living!), the House Republicans have now countered saying they would NOT support such an extension, that they would rather let the FAA be effectively shut down than to let the privatization issue rest for even six months. In the meantime, at the risk of their own pride or whatever it is they're exercizing, tens of thousands of FAA employees and contractors will be sent home without pay, to wait until the babies of Capitol Hill stop playing with the shit in their diapers and get the airline safety system, the first line of defense in "Homeland Security," back up and running.

This is a very dark time for Americans everywhere; those who have families or friends who perished in the 9-11 attacks will certainly see the need for improved and sustained air travel security. This infantile stance will cut that security down at the knees. I wish the Senate and House Republicans would just give up their whining and bitching and stop jeopardizing the lives of air travelers everywhere, and stop jeopardizing the livelihoods of tens of thousands of hard-working individuals at the FAA. You could help by writing your congressperson/senator and letting him/her know that they should stop being babies and just SIGN THE DAMN REAUTHORIZATION.

Senate Democrats Seek $7.3 Billion FAA Extension
Aviation Daily09/17/2003


Senators John Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) and Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) yesterday introduced legislation aimed at heading off a looming FAA funding crisis -- fueled by continuing wrangling over the FAA reauthorization conference report -- by extending some FAA funding until March.


The measure extends funds while excluding air traffic controllers, maintenance and some other personnel from privatization. It allows privatization of technicians and service station workers.


The bill continues funding FAA at about $7.3 billion, earmarking $1.7 billion for the Airport Improvement Program; $1.6 billion on FAA air navigation programs; $3.8 billion on personnel and $173 million for research and development. It also modifies some restrictions on using AIP funds and lets FAA continue reimbursing for terminal development costs, and protects the Essential Air Service program and the Small Community Air Service Development Program from service interruptions.


Rockefeller said "many Senators on both sides of the aisle cannot support" the conference report, which won't pass in the Senate. "The question is then do you simply let it [FAA authorization] expire and we can't do that."


Although Lautenberg proclaimed the conference report "is dead, that is the obvious prognosis," key GOP Senators say they will refuse to support the extension and will continue fighting for the report itself.


Senate Commerce Chair Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) told The DAILY he would not support an extension, which would probably be introduced as part of an appropriations bill, noting "I think we're very likely to have the votes" to pass the report.


Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), who sits on Commerce, said she would "not like to give up on the conference report at this time...I think we can work it out and I would hate to start all over."


"I don't think the conference report is dead and I still think we should pass the conference report," Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.), chair of the Commerce aviation subcommittee, told The DAILY yesterday. Eliminating all language that allows privatization is "totally ridiculous...I believe the House will move to pass the conference report."


Responding to Democratic statements that the White House would not veto the entire bill over privatization, Lott said lawmakers "probably didn't think Reagan was serious either," when he fired controllers in 1981. "I think the President is serious on this one. We're not going to do the extension, at least with my support."


FAA spokesman Greg Martin said an extension or further delay "can serve no beneficial purpose. This is the right bill for the right time. What good is there to be gained by withholding $60 billion from aviation at this critical time? What more can be learned about the contract tower program and its 21-year record of safety and value to the taxpayer?" -DM

[Bret Walker]

Edit: The following was published on September 12 in the FAA Voice, a weekly publication dealing with FAA Issues.

ARAMT Congressional Update for Friday, September 12, 2003

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our Reauthorization. At an Impasse?

Votes and debates over aviation bills usually aren't the stuff of major political battles, but this year seems to be the exception. The bill has become contentious and both sides are sticking to their guns. The question is will it all resolve itself with a compromise, will one side prevail over the other, or will there be an impasse?

While I would have projected a solution a week or two ago, now, along with a lot of others (folks far more politically savvy than myself) I am not so sure.

The Issue

The issue continues to be privatization and has centered on the future of 69 VFR towers. VFR, by the way, means "visual flight rules." These towers, while often having some radar capability (usually just one small screen), do not use radar to separate aircraft but instead use other methods for the identification and sequencing of arriving and departing aircraft.

What the administration wants to do is to evaluate some of these towers for possible privatization. For the record, the contract towers program has been around for about two decades. There are now 218 contract towers in the National Air Space System and this provision would up the total.

The Opposition and the Bill's Prospects

Over the past six weeks several of the unions, and in particular the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA), have been lobbying hard against this.

They have lobbied members of Congress in Washington, in their home districts, at airports, and for that matter, wherever they could find them. They have also hosted over 25 media events and press conferences and according to various articles in the press have spent as much as $4 million on their lobbying and advertising efforts. Their efforts have also included television ads. The bottom line is that the NATCA folks have been aggressively making their case and in the process, have managed, along with most of the Democrats, to get some Republican support for their position.

Right now, for all practical purposes, our reauthorization bill has been pulled from the House calendar. This means that as far as the House leadership is concerned, they have doubts about the bill's passage.

On the Senate side, the situation is even dicier. There is the threat of the filibuster, and again, the same concern about having enough votes. At the moment, there are certainly not enough votes to override a filibuster (takes 60 to vote cloture) and maybe not enough to pass the bill.

The Administration Position ? Hanging Tough

As for the Administration, they're hanging tough. The President's view is that he does not want to have his options on privatization restricted any further. Indeed, the White House tends to consider the current bill something of a compromise since it does include a set of restrictions on the privatization of air traffic control functions.

The President's Management Agenda for improving the performance of the federal government focuses heavily on privatization of certain government functions and the President wants that flexibility.

Last week, Secretary Minetta sent a letter to the leadership in both the House and Senate (House and Senate Minority and Majority Leaders) explaining the Administration's position, and advocating the passage of the bill. It was a very strong letter, and made a compelling justification.

Now, where does this leave us?

First of all, we need an authorization to operate. Not only was it made a requirement in our last reauthorization (in order to spend money from the trust fund) but it is also a requirement under House Rule 21. This latter says that all agencies must have some type of authorization to operate.

Of course, its been mentioned that there could be a "temporary" reauthorization. That's possible, but it's not a guarantee. What's more, given the highly contentious nature of the issue at hand, even such a temporary measure could prompt a standoff.

Contract Tower Hearing

While this debate is playing out amongst the staff and member to member, its also going to get a lot more public this week.

On September 18 (that's Thursday) the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (Subcommittee on Aviation) will be holding a hearing on the DOT Inspector General's September 4 report on contract towers.

Expect a full turnout of committee members, the aviaition community, and
lots of media. The Administrator will be testifying. This won't be easy
one, not at all, and there will certainly be more than a handful of pointed questions. The opponents to the bill will certainly be doing their best to score some points.

Appropriations

Our appropriations bills have seen some progress. On September 9, the House passed the Transportation and Treasury Appropriation. That was good news. However, as for getting a Senate Appropriations Bill to the floor, that's not quite so optimistic a picture. The Senate is running rather slowly on getting appropriations through (they still have ten to go I believe), and there is a potentially contentious item in the bill
concerning travel to Cuba. But, even with all that, there is some
expectation that our bill, along with most everything else that can be pushed through, could end up in an omnibus bill.

Other Matters

Supplemental Appropriation for Iraq ? As you probably know from the news, the President's request for an $87 billion supplemental appropriation to
cover operations in Iraq will shortly being to the hill. About $66
billion of this would go directly for war costs and the remainder for
reconstruction costs. It's expected that the reauthorization measure
won't reach the floor of either house for about a month or so. Though it
is expected to pass. And, oh yes, if you're keeping track of your supplementals, this is the second Iraq supplemental bill. The last supplemental was passed earlier this year.

Energy Bill ? There has been an expectation that there would be a new energy bill for months now. There were hearings, debates, but alas, no success when it comes to the Conference bill. The sticking point for many continues to be the prospect for drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge. That's way north in Alaska and is a real hot button for environmentalists. The House version of the bill gives it the OK, and the Senate, doesn't mention it.

Political Wisdom

"Politics is not a bad profession. If you succeed, there are many rewards; if you disgrace yourself, you can always write a book. " President Ronald Reagan

**********************

David S. Kerr
Special Assistant for Legislative Affairs (ARG-6)

[The Vonz]

Fag

[Bret Walker]

Emcee said:

Fag

Who? You know, I haven't told you this, but you really are one of the dumbest people I know. Like a box of rocks. Stop trying to front.