[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 83 (Monday, June 27, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: June 27, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
              GENERAL AVIATION REVITALIZATION ACT OF 1994

  Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
Senate bill (S. 1458) to amend the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 to 
establish time limitations on certain civil actions against aircraft 
manufacturers, and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                S. 1458

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``General Aviation 
     Revitalization Act of 1994''.

     SEC. 2. TIME LIMITATIONS ON CIVIL ACTIONS AGAINST AIRCRAFT 
                   MANUFACTURERS.

       (a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), no 
     civil action for damages for death or injury to persons or 
     damage to property arising out of an accident involving a 
     general aviation aircraft may be brought against the 
     manufacturer of the aircraft or the manufacturer of any new 
     component, system, subassembly, or other part of the 
     aircraft, in its capacity as a manufacturer if the accident 
     occurred--
       (1) after the applicable limitation period beginning on--
       (A) the date of delivery of the aircraft to its first 
     purchaser or lessee, if delivered directly from the 
     manufacturer; or
       (B) the date of first delivery of the aircraft to a person 
     engaged in the business of selling or leasing such aircraft; 
     or
       (2) with respect to any new component, system, subassembly, 
     or other part which replaced another component, system, 
     subassembly, or other part originally in, or which was added 
     to, the aircraft, and which is alleged to have caused such 
     death, injury, or damage, after the applicable limitation 
     period beginning on the date of completion of the replacement 
     or addition.
       (b) Exceptions.--Subsection (a) does not apply--
       (1) if the claimant pleads with specificity the facts 
     necessary to prove, and proves, that the manufacturer with 
     respect to a type certificate or airworthiness certificate 
     for, or obligations with respect to continuing airworthiness 
     of, an aircraft or a component, system, subassembly, or other 
     part of an aircraft knowingly misrepresented to the Federal 
     Aviation Administration, or concealed or withheld from the 
     Federal Aviation Administration, required information that is 
     material and relevant to the performance or the maintenance 
     or operation of such aircraft, or the component, system, 
     subassembly, or other part, that is causally related to the 
     harm which the claimant allegedly suffered;
       (2) if the person for whose injury or death the claim is 
     being made is a passenger for purposes of receiving treatment 
     for a medical or other emergency;
       (3) if the person for whose injury or death the claim is 
     being made was not aboard the aircraft at the time of the 
     accident; or
       (4) to an action brought under a written warranty 
     enforceable under law but for the operation of this Act.
       (c) General Aviation Aircraft Defined.--For the purposes of 
     this Act, the term ``general aviation aircraft'' means any 
     aircraft for which a type certificate or an airworthiness 
     certificate has been issued by the Administrator of the 
     Federal Aviation Administration, which, at the time such 
     certificate was originally issued, had a maximum seating 
     capacity of fewer than 20 passengers, and which was not, at 
     the time of the accident, engaged in scheduled passenger-
     carrying operations as defined under regulations in effect 
     under the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (49 U.S.C. App. 1301 
     et seq.) at the time of the accident.
       (d) Relationship to Other Laws.--This section supersedes 
     any State law to the extent that such law permits a civil 
     action described in subsection (a) to be brought after the 
     applicable limitation period for such civil action 
     established by subsection (a).

     SEC. 3. OTHER DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this Act--
       (1) the term ``aircraft'' has the meaning given such term 
     in section 101(5) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (49 
     U.S.C. 1301(5));
       (2) the term ``airworthiness certificate'' means an 
     airworthiness certificate issued under section 603(c) of the 
     Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (49 U.S.C. 1423(c)) or under any 
     predecessor Federal statute;
       (3) the term ``limitation period'' means--
       (A) 15 years with respect to piston-powered general 
     aviation aircraft and the components, systems, subassemblies, 
     and other parts of such aircraft;
       (B) 18 years with respect to turboprop-powered general 
     aviation aircraft and the components, systems, subassemblies, 
     and other parts of such aircraft; and
       (C) 22 years with respect to other general aviation 
     aircraft (including jet-powered general aviation aircraft) 
     and the components, systems, subassemblies, and other parts 
     of such aircraft; and
       (4) the term ``type certificate'' means a type certificate 
     issued under section 603(a) of the Federal Aviation Act of 
     1958 (49 U.S.C. 1423(a)) or under any predecessor Federal 
     statute.

     SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE; APPLICATION OF ACT.

       (a) Effective Date.--Except as provided in subsection (b), 
     this Act shall take effect on the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.
       (b) Application of Act.--This Act shall not apply with 
     respect to civil actions commended before the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Texas [Mr. Brooks] will be recognized for 20 minutes, and the gentleman 
from New York [Mr. Fish] will be recognized for 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Brooks].
  Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such times as I may consume, 
and pending that, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota 
[Mr. Oberstar] and ask unanimous consent that he may control that 10 
minutes of time and yield blocks of time to other Members as he sees 
fit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. FISH. Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a similar request, and that is 
that I ask unanimous consent that I may yield 10 minutes to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Clinger], the ranking member of the 
committee, and that be may control that time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Texas [Mr. Brooks].
  (Mr. BROOKS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, S. 1458 would impose a federally mandated 
statute of repose with regard to general aviation liability actions. It 
would eliminate a claimant's right to bring a State tort action against 
a manufacturer for accidents that occur more than a specified number of 
years after the date of manufacture.
  Previous versions of S. 1458 read more like a textbook on how to 
rewrite all of product liability law than as a measured response to the 
special needs of this distinctive and once-vibrant U.S. industry. And, 
as the Members know, I have long cautioned against radical surgery by 
the Federal Government of this traditional province of State Law.
  However, I have always maintained that when proponents for change 
make a compelling case for legislation, I am willing to consider it. In 
this Congress, some of the supporters have wisely abandoned the generic 
reform strategy for a more narrowly focused approach. It is because of 
this realism that many in Congress feel that a carefully crafted 
legislative response is appropriate.
  I would also like to recognize the absolutely crucial contribution of 
congressman Dan Glickman in brining us to this point. He has 
represented his constituency very well indeed--especially by his good 
judgment in seeking a measured response that avoids extremes. He has 
markedly increased the chances of enactment this Congress by his 
actions.
  Finally, the leadership of Congressmen Mike Synar and Rick Boucher in 
helping to fashion a very balanced substitute amendment is much 
appreciated. The amendment they offered at subcommittee--subsequently 
approved by voice vote in the subcommittee and full committee with Mr. 
Glickman's support--provides for a statute of repose of 15 years for 
piston-powered general aviation aircraft, 18 years for turboprops and 
22 years for jets. This amendment thus provides the greatest relief in 
the area which will produce the most jobs--production of piston-powered 
aircraft.
  I think the bill before the House represents a product that was 
enhanced by the committee process, and vindicates that process. It is a 
lesson worth remembering.

                              {time}  1210

  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FISH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. FISH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. FISH. Mr. Speaker, the issue of liability reform for the 
manufacturers of general aviation aircraft has been pending in Congress 
for nearly a decade. During this period, the general aviation industry 
has lost thousands of jobs. Today, that industry is manufacturing only 
a fraction of the airplanes it was building just 15 years ago. Congress 
must act this year to affirmatively address this problem.
  I have been a cosponsor of legislation to reform our liability laws 
with respect to general aviation for four consecutive Congresses. I 
have been pleased to join in this long-standing effort with my good 
friend and colleague from Kansas, Mr. Glickman. He has been a very 
effective advocate for the general aviation industry and deserves high 
praise for his patience, determination, and perseverance.
  General aviation is an industry that has come to symbolize our 
Nation's finest qualities--inventiveness, imagination, technological 
innovation, individualism, self-reliance, and quality workmanship. Many 
of these companies--Cessna, Beech, Piper--have been building airplanes 
for decades. Unfortunately, it is an industry that has become the 
victim of its own success. The better it built the planes, the longer 
they lasted; the longer they lasted, the greater the potential 
liability because of judicial interpretations, such as strict 
liability, that altered tort law.
  General aviation is in a classic catch-22 situation--a quality 
industry that is being punished because of its success. For example, 
about 120,000 Cessnas are still in operation and their average age is 
27 years. Since 1986, that company has spent over $20 million a year--
$160 million over the last 8 years--defending lawsuits, involving 
aircraft as old as 47 years. it is simply time to draw a reasonable 
time line that allows these companies to get back to their real 
business.
  The bill before us would establish a Federal statute of repose to 
protect general aviation manufacturers from long-term liability in 
those instances where a particular aircraft has been in operation for a 
considerable number of years. A statute of repose is a legal 
recognition that, after an extended period of time, a product has 
demonstrated its safety and quality, and that it is not reasonable to 
hold a manufacturer legally responsible for an accident or injury 
occurring after that much time has elapsed. Fifteen States now have 
statutes of repose, some as long as 12 years and others as short as 6 
years.
  S. 1458 does not preclude an individual's ability to bring a lawsuit 
regarding an aircraft. It merely provides some relief to the 
manufacturer of the original frame and parts from liability, after the 
product has left the manufacturer's possession and control for a 
reasonable period of time. Furthermore, this bill provides for, what is 
in effect, a rolling statute of repose for all replacement parts--
component, system, subassembly, or other part--on an aircraft.
  Legislation analogous to S. 1458 has received overwhelming support in 
terms of cosponsorship in virtually every Congress since 1986. However, 
to date, the opponents of general and specific product liability reform 
legislation have been successful in blocking a vote in the House of 
Representatives. Fortunately, the logjam has now been broken and the 
House will finally get to vote on this important matter tomorrow.
  It is important to point out that the version of S. 1458 before the 
House today is not the same version that passed the Senate earlier this 
year. The original Senate language was amended in the Judiciary 
Committee and that substitute language is before us today. I must admit 
that I would have preferred that the Judiciary Committee report out S. 
1458 as passed by the Senate. I say that because there is, of course, 
strong opposition on the part of the trial bar to any type of product 
liability legislation. In fact, the delays that have affected this bill 
reflect how effective that opposition can be. By sending this bill back 
to the Senate, we risk giving the bill's opponents yet another 
opportunity to use procedural tactics to block its consideration 
there--and its ultimate enactment.
  However, aside from my parliamentary concerns, I would observe that 
the committee substitute is an acceptable bill. Instead of a uniform 
18-year statute of repose provided in the Senate bill, this substitute 
contains a sliding scale--a trifurcated approach. For piston-powered 
aircraft, the statute of repose would be 15 years; for turboprop-
powered aircraft, the statute of repose would be 18 years; and for jet-
powered and other remaining aircraft, the statute of repose would be 22 
years. The bill will apply to suits brought in either Federal or State 
court. Furthermore, the substitute language makes it clear that this 
act will not apply to suits filed prior to the date of enactment.
  It is my expectation that legal challenges, based upon constitutional 
arguments, could be made against this legislation. Presumably these 
challenges would be based either upon 7th amendment grounds, that is, 
jury trial--or upon 14th amendment grounds, that is, due process and 
equal protection. These challenges will not be successful. As the 
Nation's legislature, Congress is making a reasonable and appropriate 
policy choice similar to selecting a specific statute of limitations. 
That is our prerogative in this type of circumstance, and there is 
nothing unconstitutional about it. This bill simply says that a product 
cannot be considered a defective product in a legal sense after it has 
left the control of the manufacturer beyond a specified period of time. 
Once the statute of repose has expired, the Federal Aviation Agency's 
standards on air safety will still apply and the flying public will 
continue to be protected.
  I support S. 1458 and urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the 
bill. It is a reasoned response to a liability system that has crippled 
a once dynamic industry. I sincerely hope that the Senate will move 
quickly to consider our substitute language and send a bill to the 
President this summer.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, this day may well be known as the day in which the 
liberation of general aviation aircraft manufacturing began; a day in 
which we moved toward enactment of legislation that is the culmination 
of a 7-year effort to take up legislation to relieve the general 
aviation manufacturing industry from excessive product liability costs. 
It is legislation that is also note-worthy for its fair treatment of 
those who are injured in general aviation aircraft accidents.
  Much of the credit for success toward this objective goes to our 
colleague, the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. Glickman], who introduced the 
first House legislation in 1987, and has been dogged and persistent 
ever since in working toward this day, along with our colleague from 
Utah, Mr. Hansen, who also has given the issue his total time and 
attention, to shape what is essentially a compromise from the 
originally introduced legislation to one that I would call, focused, 
targeted, and workable.
  The Committee on Public Works and Transportation has been a strong 
supporter of this legislation for many years. In 1988 and 1989, we 
reported general aviation product liability legislation to the House. 
In this Congress, again, we held hearings and reported the bill.
  This is jurisdiction we share with the Committee on the Judiciary, 
and this year the Judiciary Committee has fashioned, together with our 
colleagues in the other body, modifications to the bill which I believe 
improve it, and, most importantly, make it possible to get this bill 
through the House, through the Senate, and on to the President for 
signature.
  Our full committee chairman, the gentleman from California [Mr. 
Mineta], who was chair of the Subcommittee on Aviation, has been a 
strong supporter of this legislation, was the first subcommittee chair 
to report such legislation, and has been a champion of it ever since.
  There has been strong bipartisan support in our committee. The 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Clinger], my partner on the 
Subcommittee on Aviation, the ranking member of the full committee, the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Shuster]; and, frankly, all of the 
Members on our subcommittee, have worked together to bring this 
legislation to the point where we are today.

                              {time}  1220

  We believe very strongly this legislation can play a major role in 
reversing the decline in the Nation's general aviation manufacturing 
sector. General aviation aircraft sales by U.S. manufacturers dropped 
from 17,000 aircraft built in 1979 to 954 such aircraft in 1993.
  For single engine, piston aircraft, the decline has been even more 
significant, from 14,000 units in 1978 to 555 in 1993.
  Along with the loss of production there has been, more importantly, 
the loss of over 100,000 jobs in general aviation manufacturing and the 
related industries.
  The decline in general aviation manufacturing has worsened our 
position in international trade. In 1980, we exported $120 million 
surplus in single engine piston aircraft, but that surplus declined to 
a bare $5 million in 1992.
  In fact, unless this legislation is enacted and general aviation 
manufacturing increases, we will have a whole generation of American 
pilots being trained on foreign aircraft, as aviation schools and, 
universities are buying aircraft such as the French ATR on which to 
train a whole new generation of pilots.
  We do not want that to happen. America must maintain its preeminence 
in aviation manufacturing and aviation technology.
  This legislation strikes a fair balance between manufacturers, 
consumers and persons who are injured in aircraft accidents. It is very 
unlikely that there would be a valid basis for a suit against the 
manufacturer of an aircraft more than 15 years old. Nearly all defects 
are discovered, we have learned in our hearings, during the early years 
of an aircraft's life. Design and manufacture are regulated by the FAA, 
which will order corrective action where defeats are revealed. The 
regulatory system has been very effective.
  Data by the National Transportation Safety Board shows that only 1 
percent of general aviation accidents are caused by design or 
manufacturing defects.
  However, even though a claimant is unlikely to be successful with a 
lawsuit against the manufacturer of an older aircraft, these suits are 
frequently filed. Manufacturers incur substantial expenses in defending 
or settling the cases.
  The best evidence for the fairness of the 18 years statute of repose 
is that the bill now before us is enthusiastically supported by the 
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, the Experimental Aircraft 
Association, the National Business Aircraft Association, and the 
National Air Transport Association. The members of these groups are the 
persons most likely to be injured in a general aviation accident. They 
are also the consumers that are damaged by the high aircraft prices 
resulting from excessive product liability costs.
  In sum, I strongly believe that the bill now before us will curb 
excessive liability costs and at the time afford fair treatment to 
persons injured in aircraft accidents. The bill can make a major 
contributions towards reversing the decline in our once powerful 
general aviation manufacturing industry. The result will be a 
significant increase in jobs, including the resumption of production of 
single engine piston aircraft by Cessna. Cessna estimates that this 
will create 25 thousands jobs.
  Again, I commend Chairman Brooks and his committee for enabling us to 
go forward with this extremely important legislation. I strongly urge 
my colleagues to support the bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CLINGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I think it is no secret that the general aviation manufacturing 
industry has been decimated. If it is not dead, it is clearly on life 
support.
  As the gentleman from Minnesota has said, since 1978, shipments of 
new piston aircraft have dropped about 95 percent to about 500 in 1993 
and Cessna, which once produced about 6,500 aircraft per year stopped 
building, totally stopped building small piston aircraft.
  Piper Aircraft, which once employed 3,000 people in my district in 
Lock Haven, PA, is basically out of business. They are bankrupt. They 
are not manufacturing airplanes at all. The jobs have been lost to 
foreign manufacturers.
  In 1980, there were 29 U.S. manufacturers of general aviation 
aircraft and 15 foreign manufacturers. Now that ratio has been 
reversed. In 1992, there were 29 foreign manufacturers of general 
aviation aircraft and only 9 U.S. manufacturers.
  One of the main reasons, the principal reason for the drop in 
domestic production is the enormous cost of product liability and the 
insurance to cover that.
  Beech Aircraft spent over $100 million in legal fees over four years 
to defend itself from 203 product liability lawsuits. This, despite the 
fact that in none of those cases did the National Transportation Safety 
Board find Beeches' Aircraft to be defective. These added costs have 
forced many manufacturers to curtail production and have forced many 
potential aircraft purchasers completely out of the market.
  The increase in product liability costs has occurred even though the 
safety of the general aviation aircraft has been improving, 
consistently improving over recent years. The number of fatal general 
aviation accidents has dropped a staggering 700 percent since the end 
of World War II. The general aviation accident rate itself has dropped 
about 30 percent just since 1981.
  Most general aviation accidents are not caused by defects in the 
aircraft or the parts but are caused by pilot error, weather or poor 
maintenance. So the legislation we are considering today would help to 
address the problem, just address the problem, and turn the general 
aviation manufacturing industry around.
  Here I want to commend the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. Glickman], the 
gentleman from Utah [Mr. Hansen], who have been instrumental in 
bringing this issue, persisting in bringing this issue to the Congress 
and ultimately to the floor of this House.
  As has been indicated, the legislation would establish a 15 to 18 or 
22-year statute of repose depending on the type of aircraft which has 
been discussed. The statute of repose would free manufacturers from the 
threat of eternal liability for aircraft that long ago have passed from 
their control or any ability that they have to really monitor that 
aircraft.
  The statute of repose would limit manufacturers' liability exposure 
and allow them to plan for the future and, thank heaven, begin building 
aircraft again and hiring workers again, something that we have not 
seen for 20 years.
  Legislation is really limited in scope. It does not place a cap on 
the amount of damages that an injured person can receive. It does not 
prohibit contingencies fees or limit the fees an attorney can collect 
in any other way. And as a result, I think this legislation actually 
represents a more moderate approach than other product liability reform 
measures that have been suggested.
  In 1988 and 1989, the Committee on Public Works and Transportation 
approved general aviation product liability reform measures, but those 
measures were blocked by a very effective effort of the American Trial 
Lawyers Association. And those versions were killed, which is why today 
is such an important, significant change.
  But now, our committee has worked out a compromise with the Committee 
on the Judiciary and that is the bill that is before us this morning. 
Similar legislation has already passed the other body. Hopefully, 
hopefully with the very reasonable legislation that we should pass 
today, there will be no difficulty in getting it through the other body 
one more time so that the general aviation industry can get back on the 
path of growth once again.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes and 30 seconds to the 
distinguished gentleman from Kansas [Mr. Glickman].
  (Mr. GLICKMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GLICKMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to 
support S. 1458, the General Aviation Revitalization Act. I am the 
sponsor of the companion legislation in the House, H.R. 3087, along 
with my colleague, Jim Hansen of Utah, which has 304 Democrat and 
Republican Members of the House as cosponsors.
  After a long journey to get this bill to the floor, I want to extend 
my deep appreciation to Judiciary Committee Chairman Brooks and ranking 
member Hamilton Fish, Public Works Committee Chairman Norm Mineta and 
ranking member Bud Shuster, Aviation Subcommittee Chairman Oberstar and 
Congressman Bill Clinger for all their work on this issue over the past 
several years, as well as to Congressman Mike Synar and Rick Boucher, 
who helped craft the substitute bill which passed the Judiciary 
Committee by voice vote last week.
  I also want to give special thanks to my friend and colleague, Jim 
Hansen of Utah, for his help and dedication to get this bill passed. I 
also wish to thank my Senate colleague, Senator Nancy Kassebaum, for 
her special role in pushing this bill.
  As many of you know, this legislation limits the time that civil 
liability suits can be brought against general aviation manufacturers. 
The compromise bill creates a 15-year statute of repose for piston 
engine aircraft, 18 years for turbo-powered aircraft, and 22 years for 
all other general aviation aircraft, including jet-powered aircraft. 
The Senate overwhelmingly passed a bill with an 18-year limit on civil 
suits for all manufacturers. Both versions contain exceptions for cases 
involving fraud.
  This legislation has the strong support of the Aircraft Owners and 
Pilots Association, the General Aviation Manufacturers Association, the 
International Association of Machinists and the Air Line Pilots 
Association.
  This particular liability bill is unique because the aviation 
industry is exclusively regulated by the Federal Government. Planes, 
manufacturers, pilots, airspace--everything related to the industry 
must be certified by the FAA. Airplanes are not the same as cars, or 
toasters or rollerblades.
  There is no other industry selling products to the public in which 
all of its segments are exclusively regulated by the Federal 
Government.
  Furthermore, this bill will create thousands of jobs shortly after 
passage. We have already been assured by at least one major 
manufacturer, Cessna Aircraft, that the assembly lines will be reopened 
immediately upon passage of this legislation, creating thousands of 
jobs in a very short time period. Ten years ago, Cessna had more than 
1,000 dealers worldwide selling their aircraft. Today, they have none.
  This bill is a narrow, focused approach to a problem we have been 
trying to solve for over 8 years. Unlike earlier versions of the bill, 
this is a simple time limit on suits against manufacturers. This bill 
is not about general tort reform. It is about providing some 
predictability to an industry which has stopped building small 
airplanes because of liability costs.
  But this is not just about small planes. The small plane industry is 
the genesis of the entire aviation industry. That is why companies like 
Boeing and McDonnell Douglas see this bill as critical to U.S. 
preeminence in the commercial aviation industry.
  And most importantly, it is about putting thousands of people back to 
work in a high tech, highly skilled industry without costing the 
Federal Government a single penny. Not many bills we vote on these days 
can make that claim.
  Just in Wichita alone, Beech Aircraft employed 9,000 workers in 1980. 
Today they employ 5,000. Cessna Aircraft employed 15,000 people in 
1981. Today Cessna employs 5,300. And Piper Aircraft, of Vero Beach, 
FL, while they had 8,500 people working in 1979, today just has 360 
employees. These statistics represent the human side of this bill, not 
to mention the increase in sales by foreign manufacturers, which have 
filled the void created by the U.S. decline.

  In 1980, there were 29 manufacturers of piston aircraft in the United 
States and 15 foreign manufacturers. In 1992, there were 9 U.S. 
manufacturers and 29 foreign manufacturers of piston aircraft.
  If we do not relcaim this industry which was once the exclusive 
domain of American companies, young pilots who are today learning to 
fly in foreign-built aircraft will never have the opportunity to climb 
into a new Cessna, Beech or Piper, Aerospatiale of France is now the 
leading supplier of flight training aircraft in the United States.
  These foreign companies have not and will not be hindered by the 
liability tail of tens of thousands of aircraft still in the 
marketplace which were built 30, 40, and 50 years ago.
  There is one small point I would like to clarify with regard to 
component parts, which are covered under the bill. The bill covers new 
component parts installed as replacements for original components. The 
component, when newly manufactured, receives the same limitation period 
as the airplane it is installed on.
  For example, a used propeller which has 3 years left on its 
applicable limitation period would still have only 3 years, if 
installed in its used condition on a different airplane.
  I urge you to join me and over 300 cosponsors of this legislation and 
vote for the General Aviation Revitalization, Act, and help get our 
manufacturing sector working again while giving not just small planes, 
but the entire U.S. commercial aviation industry a much-needed shot in 
the arm.

                              {time}  1230

  Mr. FISH. Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to yield 5 minutes to the 
gentleman from Utah [Mr. Hansen], who, along with the gentleman from 
Kansas [Mr. Glickman], has been the driving force, and to whom the 
industry and former employees who are about to get their jobs back 
should be very grateful.
  (Mr. HANSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from New 
York, for yielding time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to be a small part of what 
we are discussing today, which I think is one of the most enormous 
things that is going to happen this year, because it is truly a jobs 
bill.
  Mr. Speaker, since the time of Wilbur and Orville up to the time of 
Neal Armstrong, aviation in America has taken a real twist. At the time 
of the Wright brothers, it was kind of a novelty, kind of like 
telephones. They were a novelty at that point. What a funny idea, to 
think that man can actually fly, that idea. Then we saw Neal Armstrong 
step on the Moon.
  Mr. Speaker, everything we do in this body right here, we could not 
make it without airplanes. Each one of us depends on them.
  I think back, and as a young boy myself, I was looking up and looking 
at airplanes, and knowing that my dad used to fly the Curtis Jenny 
during World War I, a real old airplane. I remember being an airport 
bum, standing around airports, wanting to see if I could ever get the 
chance to do it. I still remember at the ripe old age of 16 sitting in 
an Aeronca Champ, 65 horsepower, it was what we used to refer to as 
two-blocking that throttle and going down the runway, with that all or 
nothing feeling when the fence is coming up and wondering if I have 
enough speed to get over the fence, kind of an interesting feeling. A 
lot of us in America have done that. A lot of people started out in 
Piper J-3's, Aeronca Champs, Aircoupes, Stinsons, you name it, Mooneys, 
and those people today are flying the DC-10's, MD-12's, they are flying 
the 747's, because they have a chance to do it.
  When I look back at those days and all the friends I had who were 
flying when I learned to fly, then what happened to this great 
industry? We can go around America, go around the world, go into 
Thailand, and what do we see? We see the L-19 Bird Dog with that 213 
Continental engine in it. Go into anyplace and we will see them. Go up 
to Alaska. How could they ever maintain the transportation they have in 
Alaska without light aircraft?
  It was pointed out by previous speakers, this is an old, old fleet. 
These are old airplanes. Now we are giving an opportunity for this to 
come back and be a dynamic industry. The trouble is through the years 
people have not looked at liability. They have looked at sympathy.
  I used to fly for the Civil Air Patrol. I know we would find somebody 
stacked in a peak, and the man had only VFR, visual flight rule 
training, but he is in instrument flight rule weather. He is in a place 
he has never flown in the mountains, but he is there, and 
unfortunately, there is something that is not predicated on liability. 
We find out that 92 percent of these accidents were caused by pilot 
error.
  Like anything, we have to learn to drive a car or anything we use. We 
have to know, and I still think of an instructor who was working with 
me when I was trying to get a commercial ticket. He said this, ``Know 
your own ability and know the capacity of your aircraft. That is 
important.''
  Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, like in cars and motorcycles and other 
things, occasionally these accidents happen. Now we are going to see 
ourselves bring back a great industry that is so important to America.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. 
Glickman]. What a tenacious, good man to work with.
  Mr. Speaker, we have had a lot of ups and downs in this bill. 
Together we and all of the good Members here, we came up with 305 
cosponsors, and a discharge petition with 185 names on it. I think 
America wants to see this industry come back.
  I do not want it to go overseas. I do not want other nations to say, 
``We took that industry away from you.'' We have seen enough of that 
happen since the Second World War.
  This is an industry that is basically American. It started here. We 
go back, and this is where our roots and genesis is in aviation. We 
should stay at the head of this. We are doing it by helping bring this 
back at this particular time.
  It does not only pertain to aircraft, though. Think about it. It is 
avgas, it is avionics, it is tires, and then go beyond that; it is 
motels, it is hotels, it is people such as that.
  Mr. Speaker, this will bring back an industry and help everything we 
are doing in this area. I would urge my colleagues to vote for it. I 
think this is an excellent piece of legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I would hope Members would keep in mind as we look at 
this particular piece of legislation, what are we going to do for 
America on this? Please do not get channel vision and say that this is 
only for airplanes. This is going to help us all.

  From now on when we go up to the area of our friend, the gentleman 
from Alaska [Mr. Young], we will see new airplanes in the air. I do not 
know if it makes Members nervous, but most of us fly in 757's, 767's, 
DC-10's, the modern and new stuff. For those of us, and I do not fly 
anymore, but I do take the controls occasionally from the right seat, 
and we are flying in things that are old as can be. We are flying in 
things where we wonder about the spars, we wonder about other things. 
Now we have a chance to rejuvenate it.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York [Mr. Fish] for 
yielding time to me. I surely hope we have an overwhelming vote on this 
today. This is the thing America ought to do. This is right for 
America.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kansas [Mr. Slattery].
  Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, I also yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Kansas [Mr. Slattery].
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Montgomery). The gentleman from Kansas 
[Mr. Slattery] is recognized for 3 minutes.
  Mr. SLATTERY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 1458, 
the General Aviation Revitalization Act. I am an original cosponsor of 
this legislation in the House and have cosponsored it in every Congress 
since it was first introduced in 1986. A similar measure passed the 
Senate earlier this year by a vote of 91 to 8.
  Mr. Speaker, I also want to join my other colleagues in expressing my 
gratitude to my colleague, the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. Glickman], 
who has worked tirelessly on behalf of his constituents in the aircraft 
industry.
  Mr. Speaker, S. 1458 is a simple concept which will have impact on 
our Nation. Over 300 House Members support it, and I am pleased that 
this measure is at long last being considered by the full House here 
today.
  Mr. Speaker, passage of this legislation means jobs for Kansas and it 
means jobs for this country. More than 1,500 jobs will be created in my 
State of Kansas alone, and according to other studies, nearly 25,000 
jobs will be created nationwide. These will be good paying jobs. I 
would say to the Members, we are not talking about minimum wage jobs.
  Cessna, Beach, Learjet, and other aircraft manufacturers have greatly 
reduced or altogether halted production of light aircraft because of 
product liability considerations. The General Aviation Manufacturers 
Association estimates that 100,000 jobs have been lost since 1980 due 
to U.S. piston airplane manufacturers going out of business or leaving 
the country. This was due in large part to fear of product liability.
  The industry has gone from 17,000 small aircraft being sold in 1979 
to less than 1,000 this past year. Over 100,000 workers have lost their 
jobs due to this decline, and the industry's liability insurance costs 
have skyrocketed to over $200 million per year. We must act to change 
this, and that is exactly what we are doing here today. This measure 
will enable light aircraft manufacturers to get back into the market, 
and they have pledged to do so.

                              {time}  1240

  This legislation means manufacturing employment opportunities, 
greater sales of aircraft parts and supplies, more flight instructors 
will be able to teach more students, and more tourism dollars will be 
spent all across the country.
  Mr. Speaker, I have had the opportunity to visit with Kansas aircraft 
industry executives, labor leaders, workers on the assembly line, 
pilots, and they all stress the importance of passing this bill. By 
passing this legislation, the manufacturers will be relieved from 
focusing much of their time and attention on lawsuits and will be 
allowed to remain focused on their purpose and, that is, to build the 
safest and best airplanes in the world.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to support passage of this legislation 
today. It is good for America, it is going to create thousands of jobs 
in this country. This is what we all should call a no-brainer and pass 
it immediately.
  Mr. CLINGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Nebraska [Mr. Bereuter].
  (Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member rises in strong support of S. 
1458, the General Aviation Revitalization Act. As an original cosponsor 
of the House version of this measure, H.R. 3087, and a cosponsor of 
similar bills in previous sessions of Congress, this Member is pleased 
to see this important legislation finally get off the ground.
  This Member commends the distinguished gentleman from Kansas [Mr. 
Glickman] for his persistence over the past 8 years as he has attempted 
to reform the aviation liability laws. This Member would also like to 
express his appreciation to the leading role of the distinguished 
gentleman from Utah [Mr. Hansen] who has just spoken with such 
eloquence and passion for his crucial role in advancing the legislation 
and, who, along with Mr. Glickman, initiated the discharge petition 
effort which served as the catalyst for today's consideration of S. 
1458.
  The aviation manufacturing industry in the United States has been 
devastated in recent years by unreasonable liability laws. The current 
law which allows for unlimited liability regardless of the age of the 
aircraft discourages manufacturers from producing planes and penalizes 
aircraft owners and pilots by increasing the costs of planes and parts.
  S. 1458 injects common sense into the current law and will allow the 
United States to regain its leadership in the general aviation 
industry. It is estimated that passage of this legislation will create 
at least 25,000 jobs in the next 5 years. The legislation will also 
greatly aid U.S. exports of piston airplanes, which have declined more 
than 80 percent in 15 years.
  U.S. production of general aviation aircraft dropped from 17,811 
planes in 1978 to 880 planes in 1992. Also, since 1983, 100,000 
American jobs have been lost in the general aviation industry and 
foreign manufacturers have stepped in to fill this void. In 1980, there 
were 29 manufacturers of piston aircraft in the United States and 15 
foreign manufacturers. In 1992, however, there were 9 U.S. and 29 
foreign manufacturers of piston aircraft. Such a reversal poses a 
significant threat to the future of U.S. commercial and military 
aviation.
  Enactment of this legislation will create tremendous benefits not 
only for aircraft manufacturers--such as Cessna, Beech, and Learjet--
but also for pilots, machinists, suppliers, contractors, and 
prospective aircraft owners. This Member expects this legislation to 
greatly assist Nebraska's 4,700 pilots and businesses such as Duncan 
Aviation in Lincoln, NE, which is a major national commercial 
enterprise servicing, retrofitting and repairing commercial aircraft.
  Mr. Speaker, this Member urges his colleagues to support S. 1458. 
General aviation liability reform is long overdue. The distinguished 
gentleman from New York [Mr. Fish] has rightly lamented and warned of 
the risk the committee unfortunately has been in amending S. 1458. It 
gives opponents of reform one more chance to stall this long overdue 
reform legislation. The American public should and will watch to see 
who acts or permits this legislation to be stalled before final 
enactment of S. 1458.
  (Mr. OBERSTAR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of our time to the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Mineta], chairman of the Committee on 
Public Works and Transportation.
  (Mr. MINETA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. MINETA. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Minnesota 
yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support for S. 1458, the General 
Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994. At the outset, I would like to 
express my thanks to several of my colleagues without whose efforts 
this extremely important piece of legislation would not be before us. 
First, I must acknowledge the tireless efforts of the original sponsors 
of the legislation, Congressman Glickman and Congressman Hansen. They 
have worked for years to bring this legislation to the House floor and 
I greatly admire their perseverance. Many others would have given up in 
the face of the opposition they have encountered over the years. I 
would also like to thank Congressman Oberstar and Congressman Clinger, 
the chairman and ranking member of the Subcommittee on Aviation. They 
have worked hard on this issue, been party to countless meetings, and 
held several hearings in an effort to bring relief to general aviation 
aircraft manufacturers. As always, I would like to thank Congressman 
Shuster, the ranking member of the Committee on Public Works and 
Transportation, for his continued and unwavering support of this 
legislation. Finally, I would like to thank Chairman Brooks and 
Congressman Fish, the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on 
the Judiciary, for their help with this legislation. I know that 
Chairman Brooks had significant concerns about the potential effect of 
this type of legislation. I am very grateful for his willingness to 
compromise on this issue to help save an once thriving industry, the 
general aviation aircraft manufacturing industry.
  The Committee on Public Works and Transportation has historically 
recognized the devastating effects of product liability litigation on 
the general aviation manufacturing industry. In both the 100th and 
101st Congresses, this committee reported comprehensive bills that 
would have established both a statute of repose and standards of 
comparative and general liability.
  S. 1458, which is not as broad as previous legislation in this area, 
enjoys overwhelming support within the House of Representatives, 
amassing 305 cosponsors. In addition, the support for this bill is 
bipartisan. Rarely does Congress have the opportunity to address the 
needs of a critical industry in a manner that has such significant 
bipartisan support.
  This version of S. 1458 is slightly different from the version 
reported by the Committee on Public Works and Transportation. It 
establishes a three-tier statute of repose, depending on the type of 
aircraft. Piston aircraft would be subject to a 15-year statute of 
repose, turboprop aircraft would be subject to an 18-year statute of 
repose, and jet aircraft would be subject to a 22-year statute of 
repose. These limits would prevent litigants from suing general 
aviation manufacturers if the aircraft is older than the applicable 
time limit. The statute of repose would not apply to aircraft parts or 
components that are less than the applicable age. For example, if a 
piston aircraft hull is 20 years old, but the engine is only 10 years 
old, in the event of an accident, only the aircraft engine manufacturer 
could be sued.
  This approach is both effective in limiting the number of lawsuits 
aircraft manufacturers must defend, and fair to litigants pursuing 
legitimate tort claims. Most aircraft are bought and sold repeatedly in 
a 15- or 20-year period. Different owners often provide different 
levels of aircraft maintenance. If an aircraft has performed without 
incident for many years, I believe the product has sufficiently proven 
itself. To require an aircraft manufacturer to repeatedly defend tort 
actions regarding aircraft for which the manufacturer has not had 
responsibility or control for more than a decade is unreasonable. To 
impose these statutes of repose allows litigants ample opportunity to 
uncover product defects and take appropriate action, if warranted.
  It costs an aircraft manufacturer approximately $500,000 to defend 
itself in a lawsuit, even if the manufacturer prevails. The excessive 
cost of defending tort suits regarding aircraft that are 20, 25, or 
even 30 years old have directly attributed to the manufacturers' 
decision to limit the type of new general aviation aircraft produced.
  The United States was once a major producer of general aviation 
aircraft. In 1979, U.S. companies manufactured more than 17,000 general 
aviation aircraft. In 1992, only 899 such aircraft were produced. The 
number of single engine piston aircraft manufactured declined from 
14,000 aircraft in 1978 to about 500 in 1992. This market is now being 
supplied primarily by foreign manufacturers that do not have the same 
exposure to liability because they have not been manufacturing aircraft 
for as long as their U.S. counterparts.
  This translates directly into jobs lost in the general aviation 
manufacturing industry. We know with certainty that if this bill is 
enacted, it will have an immediate and positive impact on general 
aviation manufacturing. A representative from Piper Aircraft testified 
at the hearing held on this bill before the Subcommittee on Aviation 
that if the bill is passed, Piper will resume manufacturing single 
engine piston aircraft which it has not built for several years.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important piece of legislation 
which is long overdue, and will result in the revitalization of an 
entire industry.
  Mr. FISH. Mr. Speaker, I yield my remaining 30 seconds to the 
gentlewoman from Kansas [Mrs. Meyers].
  Mr. CLINGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from Kansas.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Montgomery). The gentlewoman from Kansas 
[Mrs. Meyers] is recognized for 1\1/2\ minutes.
  (Mrs. MEYERS of Kansas asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend her remarks.)
  Mrs. MEYERS of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 
1458, the General Aviation Revitalization Act and I would like to thank 
all those who have worked so hard to bring this bill to the floor. I am 
pleased the House finally has the opportunity to give its approval to 
this much-need legislation.
  As my Kansas colleague noted earlier, product liability has not only 
been driving aviation manufacturing away from Wichita, it has also been 
pressing its heavy hand on avionics manufacturers in my Kansas 
congressional district, including Allied-Signal which employs 2,800 in 
Olathe, KS. The legislation before the House today will shield these 
jobs from being jeopardized because of the fear of questionable 
litigation. More importantly, it has the potential to create more jobs 
nationwide, since general aircraft manufacturing will likely increase 
after it is enacted. So the potential is there for job creation in all 
of our districts.
  My support for this legislation is also spurred by Kansas 
constituents who are private pilots, for which this is one of their 
legislative goals. I urge my colleagues to support S. 1458.
  Mr. CLINGER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. Synar], a distinguished member of the 
Committee on the Judiciary and one of the coauthors of this compromise 
that has received so much public acclaim.
  (Mr. SYNAR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SYNAR. Mr. Speaker, today's legislative effort, I think, should 
demonstrate to both Republicans and Democrats the proper deliberative 
way to solve problems on the floor of the House and in this country. 
That is in comparison to regrettably growing methods of mob rule, and 
there-ought-to-be-a-law type of movement. The gentleman from Kansas 
[Mr. Glickman] and the gentleman from Utah [Mr. Hansen] are to be 
commended as others have for their tenacious, dynamic, aggressive, 
never-say-die attitude to get this issue before us.

                              {time}  1250

  But also we should commend the chairman, the gentleman from Texas 
[Mr. Brooks], and the gentleman from New York [Mr. Fish], for their 
sage, patient, and wise judgment in correcting legislation to make sure 
that it will work properly.
  You know, I have been an active supporter of commonsense product 
liability reform for the better part of my career. But I have never 
forgotten, and I hope my colleagues will never forget, that we must 
strike a balance between the manufacturers as well as the consumers. 
Such a balance was struck with this legislation, because the General 
Aviation Revitalization Act, as its title suggests, will assist an 
ailing industry to create new jobs without jeopardizing the public 
interest.
  That is good news for my State of Oklahoma, where we are in need of 
jobs. That is good news for my State of Oklahoma, where we have 
manufacturing. That is good news for my State of Oklahoma, because the 
aviation industry will continue to grow. But most importantly, it is 
good news for America, because jobs in manufacturing in aviation, a 
vital industry to this country, will be insured with the passage of 
this legislation.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support this compromise agreement.
  I rise today in support of the General Aviation Revitalization Act 
which has long been championed by my good friend from Kansas, Dan 
Glickman. S. 1458 is unprecedented in its preemption of State tort law 
because it would, for the first time, impose a Federal statute of 
repose limiting suits brought more than a specified time period after 
the original date of manufacture for general aviation aircraft.
  As a longtime supporter of commonsense product liability legislation 
that balances the needs for both manufacturers and consumers, I have 
always supported reform legislation that addressed a narrowly defined 
problem for manufacturers while affording comprehensive protections for 
consumers. I believe S. 1458 achieves this balance.
  The narrowly focused goal of this legislation is to limit the general 
aviation manufacturers' liability to correct the financial 
disincentives of litigation which many claim have caused the decline of 
the general aviation industry. All sides to this debate agree that the 
House considers this bill in the midst of a long-term decline in the 
sales of general aviation aircraft and the job loss that accompanies 
such a decline.
  Supporters of the legislation have promised to restart production of 
single engine, piston-powered airplanes in an attempt to restore our 
Nation's status as a world leader in aircraft manufacture. For this 
reason alone, we should give serious consideration to today's 
legislation.
  While jobs are important, especially in my state of Oklahoma, where 
an already vibrant general aviation industry should be helped by this 
bill, my role as a policymaker who cares about his constituents forces 
me to consider whether this bill provides adequate protection for the 
consumer and all those who could be impacted by legitimate aircraft 
failures caused by manufacturers.
  General aviation aircraft manufacture and maintenance is one of the 
most heavily federally regulated industries in our Nation. Federal 
guidelines, inspections, and licensing control almost every phase of 
aircraft manufacture, flight, and repair. In addition, during the 
lifespan of an aircraft, almost every major component will be replaced 
or updated. Because the bill provides for a new repose period each time 
a new component is installed, anyone who may suffer from a failure of 
any component would have legal recourse. Finally, the changes made 
during the Judiciary Committee's consideration of this legislation will 
help the balance of the bill and improve the legislation as passed by 
the Senate.
  The General Aviation Revitalization Act is narrow enough in scope to 
ensure that it is a fair way to assist a devastated industry and create 
jobs without jeopardizing the public interest. I urge my colleagues to 
support this bill.
  Mr. BARCA of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my 
support for S. 1458, the General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994, 
and to express my appreciation to Chairman Brooks and the members of 
the Judiciary Committee for their diligent efforts to work through a 
compromise and bring S. 1458 to the House floor for passage. I would 
also like to thank Chair Mineta and Chairman Oberstar for their 
leadership in their effort to establish Federal limits on 
manufacturer's liability.
  American Champion Aircraft and Jacobson are both industries in my 
district that have been hampered by liability that has helped lead to 
the decline of the general aviation aircraft manufacturing industry. I 
have heard from many pilots as well as business leaders that sales of 
general aviation aircraft have dropped from 17,000 planes in 1979 to 
just 954 planes in 1993 with sales of single engine piston aircraft 
alone dropping from 14,000 planes to 555 planes. This has resulted in 
the estimated loss of 20,000 aircraft manufacturing jobs and estimated 
80,000 jobs in related aircraft sales and service industries.
  This bill establishes a Federal statute of limitations on civil 
liability of manufacturers of general aviation aircraft. It is my hope 
that this Congress will be successful in codifying this legislation 
into law to help the U.S. general aviation manufacturing industry to 
increase its production of smaller aircraft.
  Mrs. UNSOELD. Mr. Speaker, the amended version of S. 1458, the 
General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994, passed by the House 
Judiciary Committee last week represents a compromise that will benefit 
the aviation industry without undermining safety. I have been working 
for such a compromise on this issue and am pleased that we seem to have 
found one.
  The bill creates a 15-year statute of repose for piston engine 
aircraft, 18 years for turbo-powered, and 22 years for jets. There is 
also an exception for cases involving fraud. Although this legislation 
breaks new ground in product liability law by imposing a federally-
mandated time bar to suits against a manufacturer, the aviation 
industry is exclusively regulated by the Federal Government and S. 1458 
is not about tort reform.
  Historically the U.S. aviation industry has led the world in sales 
and technological advances. Although a statute of repose alone will not 
return the general aviation industry to prosperity, this act should 
help to level the playing field with foreign competitors and set the 
stage for a gradual recovery. In the short term I am pleased that the 
Cessna Corporation has committed to reopening its piston engine 
assembly lines. This will create new high-tech, high-paying jobs, not 
just in Kansas, but around the country as general aviation begins to 
take off again.
  This is a particularly important issue in my district which is home 
to the Soloy Corporation, a piston engine aircraft manufacturer. Joe 
Soloy is recognized as an innovator within the U.S. aviation industry, 
producing such technological achievements as the dual-pack modification 
kit for the Cessna Caravan. S. 1458 will benefit Joe and others around 
the country who hope this legislation will lead to an improved business 
climate, and allow them to pursue with confidence what is not just a 
business or career, but a passion as well.
  I am pleased to support passage of this bill today.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Montgomery). The question is on the 
motion offered by the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Brooks] that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 1458, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the Senate bill, as amended, was 
passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________