[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 138 (Monday, September 30, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S11828]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      THE FAA REAUTHORIZATION BILL

  Mr. DORGAN. Madam President, the pending business before the Senate 
is the continuing resolution, the large appropriations bill. But there 
are a couple of other items--one of which we discussed earlier this 
morning--that must be resolved by this Congress.
  I wanted to just mention again why the FAA reauthorization bill is 
critical. We have talked about the issue of aviation safety and 
security this morning. But I want to mention to my colleagues one other 
item that is in this bill that I think is critically important. It 
deals with the issue of the essential air service program, and the 
ability to provide airline service to even rural areas of our country.
  I have said before--and I know it is repetitious but I want to say 
again--that, in my judgment, the issue of airline deregulation has been 
terribly hurtful to many rural States in our country.
  Prior to airline deregulation, the State which I represent here in 
the Congress had numerous jet carriers serving the airline service 
needs of North Dakota. We had the old Western Airlines, we had Republic 
Airlines, the old North Central which later became Republic, Northwest 
Airlines, Frontier Airlines, and Continental Airlines. At various times 
we have had a wide range of jet carrier service in North Dakota.
  But since airline deregulation we now have one carrier serving our 
State with jet service--Northwest Airlines. Northwest is a fine 
carrier. I think they provide good service. But, as all of us know, the 
market system works best only when you have competition. Competition 
means that people vie for the customers' business by better service 
and/or lower prices. And when you have one carrier you do not have 
price competition.

  We put in place an essential air service program when airlines were 
deregulated in this country some 15 or so years ago, and the essential 
air service program was designed to try to provide some basic 
protection for rural areas recognizing that the deregulation may mean 
that the major airlines will go compete between Chicago and Los 
Angeles, Los Angeles and New York, and New York and Miami. They are not 
going to rush to go compete between smaller cities and smaller markets.
  So the essential airline service program was developed. It was 
originally developed and authorized, and expended about $80 million a 
year; then down to $70 million; then $50 million; and, then $30 
million. Now it is down to about $25 million a year just providing a 
skeleton of support for airline service in small communities in our 
country.
  This piece of legislation creates a new and unique way to permanently 
resolve the essential airline service program at a healthy rate of 
funding--fully financed--that will be helpful to rural areas all across 
this country.
  Madam President, if I were to leave Washington, DC, today to fly to 
Los Angeles, CA, and I purchased a ticket with a 2-week advance, with a 
Saturday night stay and with all of the requirements that the airlines 
have on those who purchase these tickets, it would cost probably in the 
neighborhood of $250 to fly from here all the way across the country to 
California. The Commerce Committee framed it in terms of going to see 
Mickey Mouse at Disneyland in Anaheim, CA--about $250. Then I showed 
the members of the Commerce Committee a picture of the world's largest 
cow that sits on top of a hill outside of New Salem, ND. It is called 
Salem Sue. A giant cow sits on a hill out there not so far from 
Bismarck. If I wanted to see not Mickey Mouse but Salem Sue instead, 
and wanted to fly from here to North Dakota half as far as flying from 
here to Los Angeles, and I made reservations to do that, I would pay 
twice as much.
  In other words, we are left in a circumstance in this country with 
airline deregulation where--at least with respect to rural areas--if 
you want to fly twice as far you can pay half as much going to an urban 
area, but fly to a rural area and fly half as far you will double your 
ticket price.
  Does anyone think there is any rational basis for that? I do not. If 
you believe that transportation is sometimes repetitious of universal 
need, and you believe the need for transportation service is relatively 
universal, it does not make sense to say, ``Well, if you live in a very 
large area of the country you get dirt cheap prices but if you live in 
a small area of the country, what happens is you just pay through the 
nose.''
  What I proposed in the FAA reauthorization bill was an essential air 
service program that is funded by a fee that is assessed on overflights 
in this country by foreign carriers. Virtually every country in the 
world assesses a fee on airlines overflying their space by foreign 
carriers--virtually every country except the United States. We do not 
have such a fee. We were intending to promote such a fee, and I propose 
that when a fee is proposed we attach it, at least part of it, to the 
essential air service program so that it generates a sufficient amount 
of money each year; rather than have to go to the Appropriations 
Committee and seek diminished funding every year for that program, 
which is essential in providing airline service to rural areas, we 
would have a permanent source of funding to fill in where airline 
deregulation is injuring rural States and smaller communities.
  That is what we put in the FAA authorization bill. I authored the 
piece of legislation. It was supported on a bipartisan basis by 
Republicans and Democrats. It will permanently solve this problem in a 
significant way and provide opportunity through better air service in 
rural parts of our country that have been injured by deregulation. It 
is simple but effective in solving a real problem.
  That is part of this bill. And if this bill dies, that goes. A lot of 
work over a long period of time to solve a very real problem is going 
to be gone.
  We mentioned earlier this morning that the major issue here, however, 
is aviation safety and security. The responsibility to pass an FAA 
authorization bill is one that cannot be abrogated. We cannot end this 
session of Congress without passing this legislation. I know there is a 
controversial piece that was attached in conference. Whatever excuse 
one might want to find for one reason or another to say this is going 
to have to be delayed, it cannot be voted on now or then, the fact is 
this Congress cannot adjourn and cannot leave town without addressing 
this issue. Reauthorizing the functions of the FAA are critical in 
addressing the aviation safety and security issues that this Congress 
is obligated to address.
  The Senator from Alaska, the Senator from Arizona, and others have 
spoken this morning, and I would add my voice to theirs, although I 
might make some different characterizations than I heard in a couple of 
instances today about what is at stake in this fight, but I would say 
this. There is no disagreement about the fact that this Congress cannot 
adjourn unless it resolves this issue. And there will be some of us 
standing here at the end of this week preventing this Congress from 
ending its session if it has not enacted an FAA authorization bill that 
deals with the issue of safety and security in air travel in this 
country.
  I began simply mentioning that there are many other things in this 
bill which escape a lot of notice, one of which is a critically 
important piece dealing with improving airline service in rural States 
and smaller communities across this country which I think is critically 
needed.
  Madam President, I know there are others who want to speak. I did 
want to add my voice to those who spoke earlier this morning on this 
FAA reauthorization bill.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. KYL). The Senator from California.

                          ____________________