[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 138 (Thursday, October 2, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12365-S12367]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          FAA REAUTHORIZATION

  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to speak for a few minutes 
on the pending reauthorization of the Federal Aviation Administration. 
A conference report on HR 2115 was filed back in July, and since then 
there has been no further action in either house of Congress.
  As I see it, the problem with the bill is that the conferees on the 
part of the majority chose to conduct a back-room conference without 
the participation of the minority. This was a flawed process, and the 
result is a conference report that can't pass either the House or the 
Senate. The House is now poised to recommit the bill to the conference. 
Meanwhile, Congress had to pass a short-term extension of FAA's 
administration just to keep the agency in operation.
  I think by now all Senators are aware of the many concerns that have 
been raised over the FAA conference report. On a number of key 
measures, the conferees ignored the will of the majority in the House 
and the Senate and arbitrarily inserted provisions that both houses had 
voted to oppose. I believe adding such extraneous and objectionable 
provisions is an egregious violation of the conference process. All 
Senators should be offended by what the conferees did in this case.
  Senator Reid spoke Tuesday about the conferees' rejection of House- 
and Senate-passed provisions regarding privatization of federal air 
traffic controllers. I was pleased to support Senator Lautenberg's 
bipartisan amendment on this issue, which passed the Senate 56 to 41. I 
want to reinforce what my colleague Senator Reid said yesterday about 
the air traffic control system. The privatization issue must be dealt 
with fairly, or the bill will not pass the Senate.
  Another particularly egregious violation of the conference process 
was a provision the conferees added affecting the Essential Air Service 
program, which helps small, rural communities maintain their vital 
commercial air service. In my State, five communities participate in 
EAS: Alamogordo, Carlsbad, Clovis, Hobbs, and Silver City. For these 
communities, commercial air service provides a critical link to the 
national and international transportation network that would not 
otherwise exist.
  The FAA reauthorization bill originally reported by the Senate 
Commerce Committee would have required EAS communities for the first 
time to pay to maintain their commercial air. In my view, this ill-
timed proposal would have jeopardized existing commercial air service 
in many rural areas. Across America, our small communities are facing 
depressed economies and declining tax revenues and are simply not in a 
position to pay for their commercial air service.
  To help preserve essential air service, Senator Inhofe and I offered 
an amendment with 13 cosponsors that struck out the mandatory cost-
sharing language. Our bipartisan amendment was adopted on a voice vote. 
In parallel, Representatives McHugh, Peterson of Pennsylvania, and 
Shuster offered an amendment that struck out similar mandatory cost-
sharing language in the House's bill.
  As a followup to our amendment, Senator Snowe and I, along with 
Senators Nelson of Nebraska, Bunning, Schumer, Brownback, Lincoln, 
Jeffords, Clinton, Inhofe, Leahy, Pryor, Collins, Hagel, Grassley, and 
Harkin, sent a bipartisan letter to the chairman and ranking member of 
the Commerce Committee reinforcing our strong opposition to mandatory 
cost-sharing for EAS communities.
  Most students of Government would tell you that when a majority of 
both houses of Congress have voted against a particular measure, the 
conferees couldn't arbitrarily put it back in. Well, they did. Section 
408 of the conference report basically restores the very cost-sharing 
language both

[[Page S12366]]

Houses one month before had voted to reject.
  This week, with the FAA conference report soon going to be 
recommitted to the conference, 16 Senators wrote to the conferees 
expressing grave concern over the restoration of the mandatory cost-
sharing language and urging them to drop this harmful provision before 
the conference report is brought back to the full House and Senate. 
Thirty-five members of the House signed a similar bipartisan letter.
  I want to pass an FAA reauthorization bill. The FAA plays an 
important role in assuring the safety of the traveling public. At the 
same time, New Mexico's 51 airports are in desperate need of the 
Federal funding provided under the FAA's Airport Improvement Program. I 
hope all Senators are aware that AIP was not extended under the first 
continuing resolution, and all new airport construction projects are on 
hold pending the reauthorization. With the serious unemployment 
situation the Nation faces, this is no time to shut down the jobs these 
vital airport construction projects produce.
  I've come to the floor today to urge the conferees to work together 
in a bipartisan manner to produce a conference report that all Senators 
can support. Inserting controversial measures in conference that are 
opposed by both houses has left us with an FAA conference report that 
is essentially dead. In my opinion, imposing mandatory cost sharing for 
EAS communities, which a majority in both houses rejected, will only 
delay further the FAA reauthorization bill.
  I do believe that by returning the FAA bill to conference we can 
begin to work in a bipartisan manner to restore integrity to the 
conference process that all Senators should demand. When this bill goes 
back to conference, I urge the FAA conferees to do the right thing for 
rural communities across America by preserving the Essential Air 
Service Program.
  I ask unanimous consent to print the above-referenced letters in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                    Washington, DC, July 24, 2003.
     Hon. John McCain,
     Chairman, U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and 
         Transportation, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ernest Hollings,
     Ranking Member, U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science 
         and Transportation, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
        Dear Gentlemen: We want to thank you for your leadership 
     in developing S. 824, ``The Aviation Reinvestment and 
     Revitalization Vision Act'' (AIR-V). As you lead the Senate 
     conferees and complete work on settling differences in the 
     House companion, H.R. 2115, we want to express our support 
     for the Senate position and our strong opposition to the 
     inclusion of any Essential Air Service (EAS) mandatory cost-
     sharing language in the final legislative package.
        As you know, EAS provides subsidized commercial air 
     service to 125 small communities nationwide that would 
     otherwise be cut off from the air transportation network. The 
     Committee-reported version of S. 824 includes a number of 
     innovative provisions to help EAS communities grow their 
     ridership, including a marketing incentive program that would 
     financially reward EAS towns for achieving ridership goals. 
     At the same time, the Committee's bill proposed a pilot 
     program requiring a 10 percent annual community cost-sharing 
     requirement at EAS airports within 100 miles of any hub 
     airport. In the end, the full Senate did not endorse the 
     concept of an annual local community match, having on June 12 
     unanimously approved an amendment offered by Senators 
     Bingaman and Inhofe to strike the EAS cost-sharing provisions 
     in S. 824. In addition, the House passed its FAA 
     Reauthorization bill after voting not to include cost-sharing 
     for EAS.
        While the Commerce Committee's proposed cost-sharing would 
     have only applied to an EAS community under certain specific 
     conditions, we remain concerned about the concept of 
     mandatory cost-sharing. Some of these cash-strapped 
     communities in economically depressed rural areas of our 
     states would be unable to contribute the hundreds of 
     thousands of dollars necessary to keep their air service. As 
     such, we ask that the final version of the FAA 
     Reauthorization legislation reflect the Senate's position on 
     this issue and not include any EAS cost-sharing language.
        We look forward to working with you and other members of 
     the Senate Commerce Committee on modernizing and 
     strengthening the EAS program. Thank you for your 
     consideration of our views on this issue and we hope they 
     will be considered during the upcoming conference committee.
           Sincerely,
         Olympia Snowe, Jeff Bingaman, E. Benjamin Nelson, Jim 
           Bunning, Charles Schumer, Sam Brownback, Blanche L. 
           Lincoln, James M. Jeffords, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Jim 
           Inhofe, Patrick Leahy, Mark Pryor, Susan Collins, Chuck 
           Hagel, Chuck Grassley, Tom Harkin.
                                  ____



                                                  U.S. Senate,

                               Washington, DC, September 29, 2003.
     Hon. John McCain,
     Chairman, Committee on Commerce Science and Transportation, 
         Dirksen Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ernest F. Hollings,
     Ranking Member, Committee on Commerce Science and 
         Transportation, Dirksen Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Don Young,
     Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
         Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. James Oberstar,
     Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and 
         Infrastructure, Rayburn House Office Building, 
         Washington, DC.
       Gentlemen: We write out of grave concern for a provision 
     added to the Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization 
     conference report regarding the adoption of a local cost 
     share for certain Essential Air Service communities. This 
     addition to the conference report not only goes against the 
     will of both the House and the Senate, but may also have a 
     disastrous effect on many of our small rural airports. 
     Therefore, we urge the conference committee to remove this 
     language before bringing the report to the respective floors 
     for a vote.
       The local cost share provision was removed from S. 824 by a 
     bipartisan amendment offered by 15 senators, which passed on 
     a voice vote. Likewise, a similar local cost share provision 
     was removed from H.R. 2115 by an amendment offered by 
     Representatives McHugh, Peterson (PA) and Shuster.
       It is our understanding that negotiations are currently 
     under way to remove language from the conference report 
     regarding the privatization of air traffic controllers. This 
     provides the conference committee an excellent opportunity to 
     remove the EAS local match provision that was already 
     stricken on both the House and Senate floors and not included 
     in either bill brought to the conference committee.
       Additionally, this provision will have untold effects on 
     many small rural communities. It is unacceptable to force 
     communities to pay up to $100,000 in a local cost share, in 
     addition to the many costs they currently incur in running a 
     small local airport.
       We respectfully request the removal of Section 408 from the 
     Vision 100--Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act 
     conference report before it is brought to the House and 
     Senate floors for consideration, and we look forward to 
     working with you in the future to ensure rural communities 
     continue to receive essential air service.
           Sincerely,
         Jeff Bingaman, Olympia Snowe, Hillary Rodham Clinton, 
           Patrick Leahy, Blanche L. Lincoln, Jim Jeffords, Mark 
           Pryor, Tom Harkin, Charles Schumer, Tom Daschle, Arlen 
           Specter, E. Benjamin Nelson, Susan M. Collins, Chuck 
           Grassley, Mark Dayton, Chuck Hagel.
                                  ____



                                Congress of the United States,

                               Washington, DC, September 24, 2003.
     Hon. John McCain,
     Chairman, Committee on Commerce Science and Transportation, 
         Dirksen Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Fritz Hollings,
     Ranking Member, Committee on Commerce Science and 
         Transportation, Dirksen Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Don Young,
     Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
         Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. James Oberstar,
     Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and 
         Infrastructure, Rayburn House Office Building, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Young, Chairman McCain, Ranking Member 
     Oberstar, Ranking Member Hollings: We write out of grave 
     concern for a provision added to the Vision 100-Century of 
     Aviation Reauthorization Conference Report regarding the 
     adoption of a local cost share for certain Essential Air 
     Service communities. This addition to the conference report 
     not only goes against the will of both the House and the 
     Senate, but may also have a disastrous effect on many of our 
     small rural airports. Therefore, we urge the conference 
     committee to remove this language before bringing the report 
     to the respective floors for a vote.
       As you known, the local cost share provision was removed in 
     H.R. 2115 by an amendment offered by Representatives McHugh, 
     Peterson (PA) and Shuster, which passed by a voice vote. 
     Likewise, a similar local cost share provision was removed 
     from S. 824 by an amendment offered by Senator Bingaman.
       It is our understanding that negotiations are currently 
     under way to remove language from the conference report 
     regarding the privatization of air traffic controllers. This 
     provides the conference committee an excellent opportunity to 
     remove the EAS local match provision that was already 
     stricken on both the House and Senate floors and not included 
     in either bill brought to the conference committee.

[[Page S12367]]

       Additionally, this provision will have untold affects on 
     many small rural communities. It is unacceptable to force 
     communities to pay up to $100,000 in a local cost share, in 
     addition to the many costs they currently incur in running a 
     small local airport.
       We respectfully request the removal of Section 408 from the 
     Vision 100--Century of Aviation reauthorization Act 
     Conference Report before it is brought to the House and 
     Senate floors for consideration and we look forward to 
     working with you in the future to ensure rural communities 
     continue to receive essential air service.
           Sincerely,
         John E. Peterson, Allen Boyd, John McHugh, Jerry Moran, 
           Bill Shuster, Chris Cannon, John Shimkus, Marion Berry, 
           Barbara Cubin, Charles F. Bass, Ron Paul, John Tanner, 
           Frank D. Lucas, Scott McInnis, Kenny C. Hulshof, Rick 
           Renzi, Rob Bishop, Dennis A. Cardoza, Jim Gibbons, Jim 
           Matheson, Ed Case, Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Mike Ross, Tom 
           Udall, Lane Evans, Timothy Johnson, Bernie Sanders, 
           John Boozman, Tom Latham, Heather Wilson, Ron Lewis, Jo 
           Ann Emerson, Doug Bereuter, Bart Stupak, Collin C. 
           Peterson.

                          ____________________