[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 121 (Thursday, September 16, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10968-S10969]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT--
                               Continued


                             Change Of Vote

  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be recorded as 
voting ``nay'' on yesterday's rollcall vote No. 274 related to the 
germaneness of a provision in the Shelby substitute amendment to H.R. 
2084, the fiscal year 2000 Transportation appropriations bill. This 
will not change the outcome of the vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GRAMM addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. GRAMM. Mr. President, I am eager for this bill to be complete. I 
don't intend to offer an amendment, but I would like to say a couple of 
words.
  I am somewhat taken by the fact that suddenly the Senate is made up 
of numerous Members who want to run the airlines. We have undertaken 
tremendous efforts to be elected to the Senate. In doing so, we have 
taken up a high calling. We have a responsibility in American 
Government.
  But for some reason, yesterday and today, all of a sudden Members of 
the Senate have decided we ought to take it upon ourselves to tell the 
airlines in the United States how they ought to be run, and we want to 
do it without the inconvenience of having to go out and invest billions 
of dollars.
  My point is a very simple point. That is, for some reason --I don't 
know if it is the weather, the change in the barometric pressure, 
whatever--suddenly Members of the Senate have become experts in running 
airlines, all without the inconvenience of having to go out and raise 
money or invest their own money and without the inconvenience of having 
to take responsibility if their plans go bad.
  My basic view is that we have good airlines in America. All of us 
have had bad experiences on airlines: The weather went bad. We have had 
experiences where we bought a cheaper ticket and would have liked to 
have flown on a different flight. We wanted a cheap fare, but it would 
have been nice had they let us fly on the other flight.
  The point is, we deregulated the airlines. We have benefited from a 
dramatic decline in the cost of air transportation. Millions of average 
Americans have moved out of the bus station and into the airport. Now 
all of a sudden it has become the popular mania in the Senate to want 
to start having the Congress--in this case, the Senate--run the 
airlines. I just didn't want it all to pass without making some comment 
on it.
  I thank the Chair for the time.


                           Amendment No. 1679

 (Purpose: To make available funds for the monitoring and reporting on 
  the transfer of passenger air transportation tickets among airlines)

  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on 
behalf of Senator Daschle, Senator Wyden, and myself.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is in order for the 
Senator to submit the amendment on behalf of the minority leader. The 
clerk will report the amendment.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Louisiana [Ms. Landrieu], for Mr. Daschle, 
     for himself, Ms. Landrieu, and Mr. Wyden, proposes an 
     amendment numbered 1679.

  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 65, line 22, before the period at the end of the 
     line, insert the following ``: Provided, it is the sense of 
     the Senate That the funds made available under this heading 
     shall be used for the submission to the appropriate 
     committees of Congress by the Inspector General, not later 
     than July 15, 2000, of a report on the extent to which air 
     carriers and foreign carriers deny travel to airline 
     consumers with non-refundable tickets from one carrier to 
     another, including recommendations to develop a passenger-
     friendly and cost-effective solution to ticket transfers 
     among airlines when seats are available.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. President, I think my good friend, the distinguished Senator from 
Texas, might be referring to me and others, but I assure him that I 
have no intention of trying to run an airline. I am challenged at this 
moment to run my office. I am trying to do a good job at that and to 
represent the 4.5 million people who live in my State, which is the job 
of all Senators.
  I come to the floor with great humility. The last thing I want to do 
is run an airline. I think the deregulation of the airlines has brought 
great benefits to our Nation and to this industry. I have no intention 
at all of moving the clock back.

[[Page S10969]]

  I do think--because so many people now, and growing by leaps and 
bounds, use air travel in our Nation and the world to conduct their 
business, which is very dependent on the efficiency of the system, and 
because this is a very important industry in our Nation, and because 
the Senate is responsible for giving guidance to many industries--that 
my amendment is most certainly appropriate.
  I have asked it to be a sense-of-the-Senate amendment to ask for a 
study to be done this year that would ask the airlines to find a cost-
effective way and a passenger-friendly way for the transfer of tickets 
between airlines to facilitate the convenience of our constituents who 
live in Texas and in Alabama and Louisiana and Montana and Ohio and 
Hawaii and all of our States--and in Kansas, particularly in Kansas, 
right in the middle there, people need to get out and about and around.
  I thank the Chair for the opportunity to present this sense-of-the-
Senate amendment. I am sorry if there are others who will object, but I 
think it is an important amendment. I offer it in serious fashion for 
the Senate's consideration.
  Senator GRAMM addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. GRAMM. Mr. President, I do object to this amendment.
  Here is the issue in a nutshell. It happens all the time. Someone 
buys a discount ticket. They get a lower price. They get a lower price 
because they commit that they are going to use that ticket on that day 
and they are going to use it as a through ticket. If it is round trip, 
they commit they are going to use it going and coming.
  What happens is, they get to the airport early. They find out there 
is another flight going exactly where they want to go that is getting 
there an hour earlier. So they go to that other airline and say: Will 
you take my excursion ticket or my discount ticket? The airline says: 
Yes, we have an empty seat; we would like to have the money. But they 
go on to say: The airline you bought the discount ticket from does not 
allow us to take this excursion ticket.
  Now, why is that? Basically when they entered into a contract with 
the airline, they got the discount fare because they committed to fly 
on that plane on that day.
  Now, they could have gotten a ticket that would have allowed them to 
change airlines, but they would have had to pay a higher price for it. 
Many people agonize constantly when they go on vacation and buy a 
discount ticket and have to lock in those tickets in advance. It can be 
misery wondering whether or not you are actually going to be able to 
leave that day. But the point is, the reason you are getting the lower 
rate is you are committing to use the full ticket.
  So the original way the amendment was written is subject to rule XVI. 
The amendment was not filed at the desk prior to the deadline. I don't 
doubt anybody's intention, but it is not the sense of the Senate--at 
least this part of the Senate--that we ought to be getting into the 
business of trying to tell airlines how their ticket structure should 
be made. If you don't want to buy a discount ticket, don't buy it. But 
the idea that we are going to set up a study where we are going to have 
the Government recommend to Congress, and we are going to begin to try 
to change laws that say you can have a discount fare, and then you can 
do things that the discount fare is not based on, that violates the 
contract.
  The contract you entered into with the discount ticket is a contract, 
whereby you agreed you are going to use that ticket on that day or you 
are going to lose it. It might be convenient to change the day. It 
might be convenient to fly on another airline, which would mean that 
the airline you entered into the discount fare with would lose their 
half of the fare to another airline. But the point is, that is a 
violation of the contract. I don't need the Government to study whether 
or not we ought to abrogate private contracts.
  Therefore, I object to this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment of the Senator from Louisiana--
is the Senator making a point of order against the Senator's amendment?
  Mr. GRAMM. I am. It was not timely filed at the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana asked unanimous 
consent to offer her amendment on behalf of the distinguished minority 
leader, who does have a reserved amendment under the agreement. The 
Senator's amendment is a sense-of-the-Senate amendment. Therefore, it 
is not legislation; as such, rule XVI does not apply.
  Mr. GRAMM. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative assistant proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________