Executive Calendar
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Madam President, it is nice to see the ranking member of the Commerce Committee on the floor today. I appreciate that he and I share a particular view about the privatization of air traffic control.
Today, we are going to presumably pass a 6-month extension for the Federal Aviation Administration. It was passed by the House earlier today, and once again we are in a position which, in my view, we shouldn't be in. We ought to be passing a long-term authorization of the Federal Aviation Administration. Last year, we did so. The Senate, with 95 votes, passed a 4-year FAA bill. It was the kind of meaningful, bipartisan accomplishment that is too rare in Congress today.
I supported that bill, but unfortunately when it was sent to the House and it came time to meet that last year's deadline, we were ultimately forced to pass a short-term extension--which I opposed.
Our ongoing efforts to pass a long-term bill, Republicans and Democrats in both Chambers of Congress, have found common ground and consensus among the entire aviation community on a wide range of important issues.
I am talking about reforms to strengthen the Contract Power Program, one of the most and overwhelmingly popular and successful FAA programs. That matters a lot to the State of Kansas, and communities in the State of Nebraska as well, the home of the Presiding Officer in the Senate.
I am talking about streamlining the aircraft certification process that allows the FAA to focus its valuable resources elsewhere while generating a positive impact on our economy and job security in the aviation manufacturing sector. Because, once again, Congress refuses to set aside the perpetually controversial proposal to privatize our Nation's air traffic control, we are left, again, with a short-term extension. It is another one of those take-it-or-leave-it moments that is occurring here at the eleventh hour in advance of September 30.
We know in the Senate this proposal for privatization will never have the votes to pass. Yet we keep considering short-term extensions that are damaging to the aviation community, particularly the airports that need certainty in planning their infrastructure projects, and they will be, first and foremost, to improve the safety for our air travelers.
A 6-month extension, in my view, is too short to provide the certainty that is needed. The grant process, at the Department of Transportation, will be ongoing, but no airport can plan based upon whether the FAA is going to be authorized 6 months from now.
I have come to the floor numerous times before to talk about how Kansas is a special place when it comes to aviation. Kansas has built three out of every four general aviation aircraft since the Wright brothers first flew at Kitty Hawk. Today, over 40,000 Kansans earn a living in manufacturing, operating, and servicing our world's highest quality aircraft. These aviation businesses and their employees depend upon our ability to compete in a global marketplace, an ability which is significantly damaged when we are putting off passage of a long-term reauthorization bill not just once but year after year.
While general aviation manufacturing is our State's largest industry, it is not just those manufacturers and their employees who understand the problems and ramifications with privatization of air traffic control.
I have often said on the floor that I think at times I get categorized, as a Senator from Kansas, as a State that manufactures lots of airplanes and that my views are therefore solely related to the airplane manufacturing sector. I certainly bring that perspective to Congress, and I speak often and work often on behalf of the manufacturing of aircraft. But any of us who represent airports and communities that are not the largest in the country ought to oppose the privatization of air traffic control.
This is not the traditional rural-versus-urban argument that occurs sometimes around here. This is not about little towns versus everybody else. This is about everyone except for the largest cities with the largest airports and the most travelers. So this is not about just Garden City, KS; or Manhattan, my hometown; or Hays, my former hometown. This is about Wichita and Topeka. This is about Kansas City. All but the absolutely largest airports would be damaged by the privatization of air traffic control.
We have said this many times. It is important to the manufacturers, but it is also important to the survival of communities that I represent and that all of my colleagues represent across the country.
Everywhere I go in Kansas, I am reminded that ATC privatization is a bad idea. The idea that we would allow a 13-member private board to make decisions about the future of airports and air transportation across the country is troublesome. Moreover, even the major providers of aircraft and avionics equipment that reside in Kansas--those businesses that create thousands of jobs in my State--are perhaps even more outspoken against privatization than anyone. These businesses know that privatization of the Nation's most complex air system is a solution without a problem that will ultimately create lots of problems, lots of unintended consequences.
Americans expect leadership from their elected officials in Washington. At a time when partisan dysfunction puts up constant barriers in the legislative process, we should be doing everything we can to find common ground and pass legislation that will have immediate positive impacts on our economy. For so much of the FAA reauthorization last year and again this year, we found that common ground--except for this one divisive issue that we know ultimately will not become law. It impedes the opportunity to do what, without almost any exception, Members of the House and Senate have agreed to.
True FAA reform will dramatically increase the ability of American aviation manufacturers and businesses to create jobs. This short-term extension represents yet another regrettably missed opportunity to do just that.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source