Four-Year Funding for FAA and the Aviation System Is Close to Reality …

Feb. 8, 2012
… and just requires the President’s John Hancock to make it happen

Back in the 1990s during a similar aviation funding impasse, the man who led the effort was Rep. Bud Shuster (R-PA) who essentially led the charge to unleash monies from the Aviation Trust Fund and actually put them back into the system, as intended. Back then it had become the norm for Administrations to keep trust funds hostage to make the federal budget balance look better. Thus, the tax dollars that came in to support the system weren’t redistributed as originally intended.

It’s been a different battle this time around. Slots into DCA; how unions organize; Essential Air Service continuation into small communities – still political, but brutally moreso.

At center stage this time around has been Rep. John L. Mica (R-FL), the chair of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee. He is a primary reason that the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (H.R. 658) is about to become law.

In a release, Mica’s office says, “This summer, Mica brought to a halt the nearly five-year series of ongoing short-term extensions by including in one of them reforms that eliminated several airports as well as exorbitant airline passenger ticket subsidies, some of which were $3,720 per ticket.  The Senate did not go along with this and allowed for a partial shutdown of the FAA for two weeks.

“Cutting outrageous ticket subsidies helped bring negotiators to the table to finally complete this long-term FAA bill.”

Good political PR copy, but not sure it’s definitive enough. What actually happened is that Rep. Mica played a gambit. He looked at the aviation funding debate, recognized that it represented a microcosm of the inability of Congress and Administration to lead, and decided to make a point, one that would resonate with the public at large.

The point? We’re shutting down FAA funding and everything that goes with it – like jobs; thousands at airports around the country. The reaction of the public and the consumer media was: No funding for FAA … are we safe? FAA funding means jobs?

It became a lead story (as written here before) across the nation. The reason this funding bill passed is directly tied to Rep. Mica’s gambit. Who in Congress wanted to answer to this one again – hindering FAA and safety; laying off thousands of workers? Hard to conjure up a defense for that in an election year.

Thanks for reading. jfi