[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 80 (Wednesday, June 22, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: June 22, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                                  1995

                                 ______


                               speech of

                            HON. L.F. PAYNE

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, June 16, 1994

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4556) making 
     appropriations for the Department of Transportation and 
     related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
     1995, and for other purposes:

  Mr. PAYNE of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I rise to express my concerns 
about the provisions in this bill that apply to the Essential Air 
Service Program. H.R. 4556 implements the administration's 
recommendation to expand the mileage criteria determining eligibility 
for the program to include small hub airports, in addition to the 
medium/large hubs under current law. The effect of this change is to 
make some currently eligible areas, such as the city of Danville, VA, 
no longer eligible for the program.
  I oppose this change because I believe Danville is one of those small 
municipalities that the EAS Program was designed to protect. With a 
population of only 53,000, continued commerical air service allows 
Danville to remain a gateway for commerce and business for the entire 
south central part of the State.
  In the years before 1978, when the airline industry was deregulated, 
commuter air passenger levels at the Danville airport averaged almost 
13,000 arrivals and departures annually. In the years after the 
industry was deregulated, this number plummeted to an annual average of 
less than 2,400, with a low-point of 936 in 1981.
  In a deregulated environment, the ability of small airports like 
Danville to attract passengers is at the mercy of airline scheduling. 
Years when the airlines serving the area increase the number of flights 
or improve the routes, passenger levels soar. Other years, when few 
flights are provided or when the routes are so convoluted that you can 
actually drive the distance in less time than it takes to fly, not 
surprisingly, the number of passengers drops.
  Without the Essential Air Services Program, the airlines have made it 
quite clear that they would discontinue services to places like 
Danville entirely. For the tens of thousands of people in Danville and 
the surrounding areas, this means a 1\1/2\ hour drive to the nearest 
airport with passenger service, in North Carolina. It means less 
business travel into the area, and as a consequence, fewer 
opportunities for economic growth.
  It is my understanding and hope that, as in previous years, the 
support the Essential Air Service Program enjoys in the other body will 
result in this change in criteria being reversed. I strongly support 
this effort.
  I believe the investment we are putting into the Essential Air 
Services Program is a wise use of our scarce resources, making it 
possible for small, rural communities to expand their economy and 
increase jobs. Rather than cutting off their ability to efficiently 
interconnect with larger commercial areas, we should instead be looking 
into methods by which the EAS Program can more effectively serve these 
communities' transportation needs.

                          ____________________