The followup to my previous diary. Here, we see that the Bush Administration gives up any pretense at being impartial.
FAA Administrator Marion Blakey parrots the propaganda of the airline industry whiel asking Congress to revamp the entire funding mechanism for the FAA.
More below the fold... (this previously published at www.faafollies.com).
So on Wednesday I posted about how the FAA Administrator is apparently not only a PR flack for right-wing neocon Republicans, but also for the airlines. You'll recall the quotes from the various airlines' in-flight magazines... I'll repost some here:
From United:
For example, the passengers aboard a commercial Boeing 737 traveling between Chicago and New York may collectively pay $1,356 toward their use of the ATC system, but a smaller corporate jet may pay just $70 for the same services.
From US Air:
...For example, a US Airways flight on a 193-passenger Boeing 757 traveling between Phoenix and Dallas might contribute $1,950 in taxes toward the use of the ATC system, while a smaller corporate jet flying the same route and using the same resources would contribute only $83.
Unfortunately, I missed this quote, from FAA Administrator Marion Blakey:
For example, a typical commercial airliner flying from LaGuardia to Miami would pay approximately $2,015 in taxes. In contrast, a large private jet, flying the same distance, through the same airspace, using the same air traffic services, would pay roughly $236 in fuel taxes.
Perhaps the Administrator's speechwriter is moonlighting for the airlines... but wait, that would be a conflict of interest, right? To work for the FAA and also for the airlines? (Apparently it isn't a conflict of interest for the FAA Administrator.)
We've had controllers told that they couldn't work at their local airport as flight instructors, because it could be seen as a conflict of interest to both be a controller there and also make money as a flight instructor there. Yet the FAA Administrator is lobbying Congress on behalf of the giant corporate airlines, using exactly the same arguments and speeches?
What's remarkable about this Administration (and by that I mean the Bush Administration, of the USA, along with the Blakey Administration of the FAA) is that they don't even see this as being even slightly unseemly or wrong. They're so totally bought and sold by corporate, neocon interests that they BRAG about it in their internal FAA communications.
This isn't even a Republican versus Democrat kind of issue. I know tons of Republicans who're ashamed and embarrassed that they ever supported any of these people.
Plain and simple, this is a shocking example of how we've become numb to shocking examples! The abuses of these people have become so overwhelming that we can't even see them anymore.
They honestly do not see anything wrong with the head of what's supposed to be the world's premier aviation safety organization (the FAA, which is NOT a business) going to Capitol Hill and shilling for the airlines.
What's more, they make a jump in logic.
Even if you agree that a corporate bizjet should pay a higher percentage of the funding to the ATC system (and there's plenty of arguments and reasons why the airline/Blakey line is false), the Administration is using a pretty low-down, sneaky tactic to try and convince Congress they should make some changes to the existing system (which, in case you hadn't noticed, has produced the world's busiest, most robust, healthy aviation system overall).
Let's break it down a little bit. Please bear with me a little bit here.
First of all, we hear this line from Administrator Blakey: "America needs the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen)."
What's NextGen, you might ask? Well, it's a dream. An idea. It's nothing real; there isn't any company selling something called "NextGen" as a product. It's basically a draft plan that would allow us to work a lot more airplanes, and the plan has statements in it like this:
By 2025, U.S. air traffic is predicted to increase two to three times. The traditional air traffic control system will not be able to manage this growth. The Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen), is the solution. NextGen is an example of active networking technology that updates itself with real-time shared information and tailors itself to the individual needs of all U.S. aircraft. NextGen's computerized air transportation network stresses adaptability by enabling aircraft to immediately adjust to ever-changing factors such as: weather, traffic congestion, aircraft position via GPS, flight trajectory patterns, and security issues. By 2025, all aircraft and airports in U.S. airspace will be connected to the NextGen network and will continually share information in real time to improve efficiency, safety, and absorb the predicted increase in air transportation.
Okay... sounds nifty. But that's not what it IS; that's what it DOES. Or, more properly, what they want it to be able to DO.
But does anyone actually build this right now? Has anyone actually tested equipment that allows for any of the Eight Key Capabilities that are identified as being critical to NextGen's success?
Well, no.
And what's the FAA's history show about buying massive computer upgrades? Have they ever been able to buy this kind of Great Leap Forward system and implement it, successfully?
Well, no.
So the FAA Administrator is asking Congress to massively overhaul the funding mechanism of the aviation system in this nation so the FAA can go out and buy a brand-new, never-tested massive computer and equipment upgrade of things that are only in the planning stages right now.
Now, here comes the Big Lie. From the FocusFAA articletalking about the Administrator's testimony:
Once again, she made the case for the principles driving the Administration's proposal: To develop the NextGen system successfully, she said, "we need a revenue stream that is tied to the actual cost of our operations..."
Like all Big Lies, this mixes in a little bit of truth, then makes a jump to falsehoods.
The bit of truth is this: We do need to develop new technology and improve our ability to handle aircraft. And that development work does need to be funded, and it's R&D funding that goes above and beyond what the typical operations of the FAA need.
The lie comes in the notion that it's crucial for that funding to be tied to operations, or that if her funding proposal isn't implemented then NextGen can't happen. Her Big Lie is a scare tactic; without NextGen, she says, the ATC system will come to a halt; NextGen requires funding; and therefore unless we fund NextGen the way she says we have to fund it, the ATC system will come to a halt.
But here's the thing: NextGen can be paid for by anything. We could take some of our profits from the Iraq war (remember, that's going to pay for itself thanks to increased oil production in Iraq!) and invest THAT money into NextGen development... it doesn't make a whit of difference to the R&D team where the money comes from.
What Blakey's really trying to sneak in there is an assertion that today's FAA funding mechanism is bad and that it should be all user-fee based. There's absolutely no proof of this assertion, and the fact is that today's operations budget doesn't need to be tied to costs.
Why?
Because the FAA is not a business.
That's the biggie, the most important thing to remember.
You see, the folks making these assertions are all coming at it from a politically motivated point of view. Their ideology is one where there is no "general welfare" kind of argument for government; all services are provided on a basis where the users pay their actual costs. Don't believe me? Go to the Reason Foundation web site and read some of Robert Poole's stuff. (He was the lead for the Bush Administration transition team when it comes to transportation issues.)
So who pays for the road that brings you milk, or allows the police and fire department access to your neighborhood, or that you drive on to work, or that your kids ride on in their school bus? You do. In these folks' ideology, there are user fees and tolls for EVERYTHING. Nothing is free. Government provides nothing strictly as a benefit to all of the citizens.
Want to stroll in the park? It's three bucks. Drive down the street to visit your uncle? 50 cents, please. Receive a letter that was flown through the air? There's a subcharge for that.
Now, this might seem to make a certain sort of sense on the surface of it. But here's the thing (and here's where I tie this all back in to the title of this post):
What this leads to is a society where the rich people and corporations get anything and everything they want, and the regular Joe Public gets screwed and never gets ahead.
Like, for example, an FAA Administrator who doesn't even bother pretending that she gives a rip about any segment of the aviation system other than the mega corporation airlines.
That's what the all-fee-based society leads to. When a government gives up the notion of, as Lincoln so eloquently put it, being "of the people, by the people, for the people" and instead starts being based strictly on money and user fees and so forth, the people and corporations that have more money will win out EVERY time over the little guy.
That's why what the Administrator is doing is so shocking, folks. She's essentially no longer representing the people of the United States; she's representing the ATA.
And sooner or later, that mentality is going to lead to body parts being strewn across the landscape. Heck, if a second controller in the tower might have prevented the Lexington crash in August 2006, then you can argue that it's already happened.
Lack of money (in overtime money and proper staffing) and the "business mentality" led to the FAA directly violating its own order to staff the midnight shift with two controllers; there is no other explanation for it than that.
The FAA is not a fee-for-service organization, and it's not a business. It shouldn't be run like one, and the American people deserve an FAA Administrator that is more than a shill for the airlines.