Congressional Record, Volume 157 Issue 115 (Thursday, July 28, 2011)

[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 115 (Thursday, July 28, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4987-S4990]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

THE FAA REAUTHORIZATION

Mr. BENNET. I thank the Senator from Alaska for allowing me to jump
ahead in the queue. I will have a word to say about the issues raised
by the Senators from Iowa and New York at the end, but I am rising to
talk about an issue that is actually separate. I have been out on the
floor week after week talking about the debt limit and debt reduction
negotiations, but today I want to talk about another absurd and
needless Washington-inflicted, what I can only think of as a mistake,
and that is the partial shutdown of the FAA. This shutdown--while
buried in the headlines--is affecting Colorado jobs and the economy
across the United States. Unable to walk and chew gum at the same time,
Congress's inability to resolve this impasse has caused the furloughing
of thousands of workers nationwide and put at risk several very
important summer construction projects at our airports in Colorado.
Earlier this year, the Senate worked together to pass a long-term FAA
reauthorization bill. This important bill, which I supported, will
modernize our Nation's air transportation system and reduce frustrating
and costly delays. The American people would be astonished to learn how
antiquated our system is right now. But the House and Senate conference
committee have been unable to finalize the bill.
Last Friday, Congress failed to pass a short-term authorization
measure to buy negotiators more time. Now certain FAA functions have
been shut down. This shutdown makes absolutely no sense to the people
in Colorado who rely on this industry for their livelihoods, their
businesses, and travel.
I know the same is true in Alaska. It is more than that. Colorado has
a short summer construction season--probably not as short as Alaska's,
but nevertheless short--and many airports set aside the summer months
to complete much-needed improvement projects, so this shutdown has come
at the worst time for them.
In Loveland-Fort Collins Airport in Colorado, they are very near
cancelling a planned runway improvement project. Loveland-Fort Collins
is a one-runway airport. Officials had already canceled summer flights
to accommodate a $7 million runway rebuilding project. Now they could
be forced to shelve the project, which was bringing around 150 jobs to
the area.
At Pueblo Memorial Airport--by the way, keep in mind this is about
Washington's dysfunction. There are not big policy debates here. It is
Washington turning its back on the rest of the country once again. At
Pueblo Memorial Airport, officials have said they may be forced to
delay a $12 million runway rebuilding project.
At the Durango Airport, officials are concerned that an ongoing $3
million apron rehabilitation project--which currently employs 30
Coloradans--will receive a stop-work order next week if Congress
refuses to act.
At the Denver International Airport, one of the crown jewels in this
country, officials are concerned that the shutdown will affect
scheduled concrete and asphalt work on a runway and maintenance on
passenger loading bridges.
These delays could affect the overall safety of Colorado airports and
they are affecting jobs right now.
Nationwide, an estimated 3,500 FAA workers began to be furloughed
this past Saturday; 27 of these workers are in Colorado. They were
either sent home or forced to work without pay.
To his credit, Chairman Rockefeller recently introduced legislation
that would allow the FAA to continue to pay those workers during the
shutdown. I have cosponsored the legislation. I hope the Senate
considers doing it today, but we need to do more than that. We have
been asked to do more than the bare minimum by our constituents. We
have gotten to the point around here where just keeping the lights on
somehow is a success. That is a pretty low bar. It is a low bar to
Heather Hilgers of Englewood, CO. She is an engineer. Airports hire her
to complete construction projects so they can meet FAA safety
standards. She wrote to my office:

Next week, if there is no one to reimburse the contractor,
the job has to stop. The stall is affecting engineering
contracts. The visible impact would be the construction
contractors' jobs.

Andrew Vogt of Denver, CO, is also an engineer. He wrote:

It's a frustrating experience that this whole industry has
gone through. We are hoping a long-term solution can be
achieved in short order.
As a professional engineer, certified construction manager
for airport improvement projects, there is literally no work
to do this year. . . . Put me back to work.

Jeff Campbell, also of Engelwood, CO--these are not government
employees, by the way. We are talking about private-sector employees
whose jobs and expectations and salaries and plans for their families
are being put on hold by the games that are being played here in
Washington.
Jeff Campbell, also of Engelwood, CO, is an aviation engineer who is
involved with five projects that are being affected by the shutdown.
One is the failing runway at Fort Collins-Loveland. He said 150 people,
expecting to begin work next week, are about to be put on hold and the
project will have to be rebid for the third time.
A lot of people in Congress talk about putting people back to work.
They talk about fiscal responsibility. But this delay is costing
thousands of jobs and an estimated $30 million a day in lost revenue.
If this shutdown continues, these losses could dwarf the entire yearly
budget of the EAS Program, which some claim is holding up the bill.
Congress must not allow the debate over our debt limit or deficit to
prevent action on a short-term FAA extension. Such inaction only proves
once again to the American people how broken this place is.
It would be a terrible shame for Members of Congress to resolve this
debt debate, adjourn, and board their planes home for recess without
resolving this issue. What a slap in the face to people all across this
country. On behalf of our constituents who make a much more forceful
case than I ever could, I implore my colleagues and Members of the
House to resolve this impasse and reauthorize FAA now.

The Debt Limit

With the indulgence of the Senator from Alaska, I want to take the
opportunity to say a word or two about this debt limit discussion we
are having right now. We face enormous challenges in our country right
now. Our economy is almost producing what it was producing before we
went into this terrible recession, but we have 14 million people who
are unemployed. The great productive American economy has figured out
how to produce what it was producing before with fewer people. But we
have not figured out how to put people back to work. My own view is
that we need to look hard at our Tax Code, our regulatory code, and
other things to make sure we are inspiring innovation and job growth
here in the United States and we are not just shipping it overseas and
saying it is too bad for everybody who is here.
We are at the end of a decade when median family income has declined
for the first time in our country's history. It never happened before.
The cost of health care has gone up. The cost of higher education has
gone up. It is harder and harder for the middle class in this country
to survive. If you are a child living in poverty in the United States,
your chances of getting a college education are 9 in 100 in the 21st
century in the greatest country in the world.
There are countries all over this globe that sense weakness, that are
trying to out-compete us, trying to out-educate us, trying to out-
invest in their infrastructure while we play foolish political games.
They are not waiting for permission from us to out-compete us.
One of the single greatest assets this country has had since almost
its founding has been our bulletproof credit rating. It has been the
fortress that is our full faith and credit of the United States.
Financial transactions all over the globe, spanning decades, centuries,
have been financed based on the

[[Page S4988]]

strength of our credit, the full faith and credit of the United States,
and generation after generation of politicians has done everything they
could to protect it, as any mayor in my State, as any superintendent of
schools in my State, would do anything to make sure they protected the
credit rating of their city or of their school district.

Now we face, for the first time in our country's history, a threat of
downgrade, a threat that our interest rates would spike. That is not a
political observation; that is coming from the credit rating agencies.
They are not politicians. What the math tells us is that every 1-
percent increase in our cost of borrowing adds $1.3 trillion to our
debt over the next 10 years, making the problems we face today even
harder to solve.
The President knows I have supported for a long time a comprehensive
approach, one that would actually make a meaningful difference to our
debt and to our deficit, and I will continue to fight for it, as will,
I know, the Senator from Alaska. But it is time for Washington to move
past these political games and reassure our capital markets that we are
not going to be the first generation of Senators to blow up our credit
rating over politics, to reduce the full faith and credit of the United
States to rubble--for politics. I don't want to be somebody who, 30
years from now or 40 years from now where somebody comes and says: Hey,
we detect you were once in the Senate, you were 1 of 100 people here
when we compromised one of the greatest assets this country has.
I implore the leadership of both parties, both here and in the House,
to work this out. Then let's get on with the tough discussion we have
to have about our debt and deficit.
Mr. President, I thank again the Senator from Alaska for allowing me
to speak ahead of him, and also for his leadership throughout this
entire debate. He, like a number of us, has been working hard with
Members across the aisle to try to get a bipartisan solution that is
balanced and that makes sense heading toward the future. I thank him
for his leadership.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, my friend and colleague from Colorado is
always so passionate on the floor when it comes to the issues pertinent
not only to his State and his country. He has laid out such a logical
case on the debt of this Nation and why we need to deal with it. I will
address the debt also.
But I came down here, like the Senator from Colorado, to talk about
the FAA reauthorization bill. I was not planning to come down. I was in
my office. As Senators, we have lots of meetings, events, activities
and photo ops--meet and greets, they call them. People come in and say
hello and chit-chat take a few photographs with you. They are residents
from your State.
I was sitting there and having a great conversation with young
people, four of them from Girls and Boys Nation here from the American
Legion Auxiliary: Clara Farley, from Kodiak, Joseph Mueller from Healy,
Derick Hanna from Palmer, and Marissa Torgerson from Anchorage. Then
there was another young woman who was there, a young leadership
student, Jocelyn Cayce from Juneau.
You know, to have a ``photo op'' is what they call them. We shake
hands and take some photos. It was interesting having this
conversation. The first question they asked me was what was going to
happen with the debt of this Nation. Before I elaborate on my thoughts
and what I told them, I, first would like to talk about the FAA
extension because they are both related. The FAA bill and what is going
on with the debt is all related. It is related because of the House
majority's inability to function and their inability to do their work.

The FAA is a great example. I know the Senator from Colorado
mentioned that the conference committee has not brought out a bill.
What is amazing about this is the Senate appointed their conferees in
April. For those who are watching, the way this works is the House
passes a bill and the Senate passes a bill. They are not always exactly
the same, so they go to a joint conference committee made up of Members
from the House and Members from the Senate--Democrats and Republicans--
and they work out a compromise. The Senate appointed their Members to
the conference committee in April. The House has not appointed anybody.
The battle we are in is because of one person. There is one person
who has decided that 4,000 people should be furloughed--about 80 in
Alaska--to stop projects that are critical to the safety of air
transportation. I can tell you there is no other State that depends on
air transportation like Alaska, with 82 percent of our communities not
able to be accessed by road, they are predominantly accessed by air.
For one person in the House to decide he wants to play politics with
aviation safety because he doesn't like something--oddly enough, the
items he wanted to eliminate are from States that are represented by
Democrats and chairmen of committees. It is unbelievable.
I did not come here 2\1/2\ half years ago to play those games. I came
here to do the work the people of Alaska sent me to do. Part of that
work was to make sure the Federal Aviation Administration actually has
a reauthorization they can operate under because they haven't had it
since 2007. I was elected in 2008. There have been 20 short term
extensions of the FAA's authority while the House and Senate try to
pass legislation and work out the differences. The Senate did pass a
bill. We did our work. We did it, and we did it with a lot of debate.
I sit on the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee
with jurisdiction over the FAA. Senator Rockefeller and Senator
Hutchison, Democrat and Republican, worked in a bipartisan manner with
all the members. The Senate passed our FAA bill. The House passed
theirs, and now we are waiting for the House to appoint conferees. We
are waiting for the House to do something. Not one person. That is not
how this system should work. They need to appoint conferees so we can
sit down and resolve these final minor issues. Instead the chairman in
the House decides he knows best.
Here is what happens: Yes, 4,000 FAA employees get furloughed all
across this country. These are people who have mortgage payments to
make and kids planning to go to college this fall, or maybe they are
the only breadwinner in their homes--but 4,000 people are furloughed.
There are 79 FAA employees in Alaska who have been furloughed.
Compound that with the next piece of the equation. Part of the FAA
reauthorization bill is to invest in our aviation infrastructure. I
think I will hit 100,000-plus miles this year, maybe more, 125,000
miles flying back and forth from Washington to my home State, visiting
communities all across my State. I pay a small fee like everyone who
flies does. We pay for our airline tickets and a portion goes to the
FAA, who then invests this money into making our runways and our air
traffic facilities safer. It is the people who fly who pay for our
aviation system, and their money goes to the FAA to pay for the
improvements that we use to make sure we fly safely. It is not
complicated. Yet what is happening because the FAA doesn't have the
authority to collect this fee, is the airlines and passengers are
getting a tax holiday. That fee is important. I will get back to that
fee and what has happened with that money.
First, without that money, we cannot do airport construction
projects. It is all part of the system. In Alaska it is a pretty
important piece.
In Bethel, a project now has a stop-work order issued by the FAA
because they cannot complete the project without an extension. As my
friend from Colorado mentioned, Colorado has a short construction
season, and we have a very short construction season in Bethel, Alaska.
We are trying to build a project that improves the approach lights to
make it safer for people to land at the Bethel Airport. That project
has been stopped. There is no other access to Bethel except by air.
Bethel is 400 miles from Anchorage, the largest city in the State, by
air. We cannot drive to Bethel. That project has stopped because the
House hasn't passed a clean FAA extension.
Another project makes seismic improvements to the air traffic control
tower in Anchorage. People say it is just a tower, what does it matter?
The

[[Page S4989]]

tower is old. It needs improvements. It is not only important for
Alaska and the people who would work on the project, it is important
for this country. We are the third busiest air cargo airport--in the
sense of cargo throughput--in the world. We move products that are
produced in this country and around the world through Anchorage. If you
are shipping something to Europe or Asia and you are west of the
Mississippi, the odds are you are coming through Anchorage's
international airport.
Almost 700 wide-body jets fly through Anchorage every single week
carrying cargo. It is the third busiest airport in terms of cargo
throughput in the world. It is an economic engine. It is a job creator.
I remember almost 25 years ago when the idea came from a couple of
companies, FedEx and UPS. They said: We will look at Anchorage as our
international hub because of its location. Today it is a robust
facility and many other airlines cargo carriers use our airport
facilities. It is huge.
Instead of the House doing their job and appointing conferees to
resolve this issue, one person in the House decided he wanted to play
politics over the life-safety of our air traffic system, the Federal
aviation system, and now that project is not happening. Not only are
the 79 FAA employees furloughed in Alaska, but projects in Bethel and
Anchorage are not moving forward. So that means the private
contractors--it is not government employees who make these improvements
and build lighting systems or remodel the tower. It is private
contractors who employ people who then pay mortgages and buy cars and
spend money in the economy and help our economy move forward. This is
clearly a job-killing action. That is what it is. They will say some
other reasons, but that is what it is doing. It is killing jobs, and it
is hurting America.
Again, it costs more because when the construction season in Bethel
is over in the next month or month and a half, we don't get to come
back in November and say we are going to finish this project. We can't.
The weather conditions don't allow it.
What will happen is, next year the costs will go up because the
private contractor will have to remobilize--I hear a lot from folks on
the other side over there in the House talk about the private sector. I
am from the private sector. I don't know how many of those guys worked
in the private sector, but I have. That is where I made my living, and
that is how my wife makes her living, from the private sector. They
spout off about how they want to support the private sector. Well, pass
the FAA reauthorization legislation that the private sector supports
and wants moved forward for the creation of more jobs and the
opportunity to make our air safer.
Again, it is astounding to me how dysfunctional the House majority is
and how they are unable to do their work. They complained a lot earlier
this year that the Senate doesn't do their job, and we are not doing
our work. We are doing our work. We passed the Military Construction-VA
bill. We passed the FAA bill. We passed several things. They go over
there and they die. They go over there, and they have one person who
decides they know best.
A lot of those guys ran in 2010 on the effort to open government, 72
hours to review bills, which is great. I have not seen it. They had
some Rules Committee meeting earlier last night or whatever late night
they did it to set the rules on what they are going to vote on in less
than 12 or 13 hours. I am sure that has been notified to a lot of
people. It is amazing they ran on the fact that they want to open
government, the system is broken, and then it is so dysfunctional over
there.
The FAA bill, as I mentioned, these airlines collect fees that then
go to the FAA to make sure all this happens. It is part of the fee we
pay to travel. Now the FAA is not authorized to collect it, but what
happened? Several of these airlines jacked up their fees to collect the
money for their own. There is $200 million a week coming from consumers
into the pockets of these airlines for their profit, not to improve the
safety of the airports, which is what the money is supposed to be
designed for. I will say Alaska Airlines--and I am proud to say Alaska
Airlines, Hawaiian Airlines, and Spirit Airlines are three examples of
companies that did not do that. They did not jack up the price to the
consumer for their own bottom line. Also, remembering that those fees
are for the purpose of improving airports and not improving the
corporate profits or the CEO's million-dollar-plus checks they get at
the end of the year for the work they do.
The problem is--something like this happened many years ago--we are
not going to be able to get those resources back to make sure these
airports are safer.
I, of course, implore the airlines to do one of two things: Lower
those fares they jacked up or put that money aside and work with
Congress to make sure that money goes into the fund to ensure that we
improve these airports. I challenge every one of those airlines that
have done that.
As a consumer who is watching this issue, you should be appalled that
$200 million a week that you thought was going to improve the airports
you fly through, it is not. It is going into the pockets for profit for
some of these companies. Again, I point out Alaska Airlines, Hawaiian
Airlines, Spirit Airlines are a few of the only major airlines that are
not doing that. I commend them for that. I commend them for doing the
right thing by the consumer.
I was originally coming down and going to talk--as I got inspired by
the students sitting there--about the budget, but then I wanted to talk
about the FAA. I want to get back to the budget.
As I mentioned, these young people came to my office and asked the
first question: What are we going to do about the debt? Great. It is
the question of the day. What are we going to do? We can debate how we
got here. Everyone got us here: Democrats, Republicans, current, past,
everybody. We have a problem. We have a challenge. I know the Presiding
Officer is new. You came here to solve problems, create solutions, not
just play the politics and push it off for another day, but actually do
some things. That is why people sent me here, and I know that is why
they sent you here: to do the job the American people expect us to do--
I know Alaskans expect me to do.
There is no question in my mind why we are here today. It is because,
again, the House majority, I will point out, cannot do their job. They
are unable to do their job. They are not dealing with reality.
Do I want to add more debt to the Nation? No. No one does. As my
colleague from Colorado earlier said--and I know the Presiding
Officer--we have been working on ideas. One thing that is unique about
the Senate is there is an effort here--it may not be as visible as the
press would like to portray because they would like to see the battles,
that is better press. There is a lot of bipartisan discussion going on.
The Gang of 6, you can argue if that is good or bad, but the point is
three Republicans, three Democrats sat down for months. In the Budget
Committee, we sat down for months. We came up with proposals. We are
talking to Republicans. Republicans are talking to Democrats. We are
looking for solutions. We are trying to weed through this. The Senate
is trying to do this. We are trying to solve this problem and create a
solution that moves us forward. But there are several in the House
majority over there who believe to drive off a cliff is good policy. I
don't know, I don't think that is good policy. I would rather drive on
the road, going somewhere. That is what we are trying to do over the
next few days.

As I think of the differences--and people say: Well, why don't you
just take that deal or this deal? Here is the difference. They are
fundamental. They are not complicated. The deal the leader, Speaker
Boehner, has in the House is about $900 billion in reductions. It is
short term. It has a joint committee to look to the long term. What is
the Reid proposal? The Reid proposal, as it is now scored by CBO--the
Congressional Budget Office, for those who are watching and wondering
what all these things mean--is $2.2-plus trillion in reductions, almost
2\1/2\ times more than the House version, and it is long term. Here is
why that is important. I am not voting for anything short term. Let me
make that very clear to the Presiding Officer and others who might be
watching. If we want to disrupt and continue to disrupt this economy,
keep doing these shenanigans and keep doing these

[[Page S4990]]

2-, 3-, 4-month deals, that is disastrous to this economy.
I have heard and talked to business leader after business leader,
from associations, to individuals, to people back in my home State, and
they say over and over: Don't do short term. Whatever you decide, give
us certainty--certainty.
The unique thing about the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House: Only we
would describe long term as 16, 18 months because that is all we can do
around here. But short term, as one can imagine, is 3, 4 months. That
would be more disruptive to this economy than anything we can imagine
because all we do as we shift it--and I can describe this because I
understand this business. I have been in it. My wife is in it. Here is
what happens. We will have this same debate in November, probably. Here
is what happens in November. This is the biggest time for people who
are buying. For retailers, this is the most important time--actually,
back to school a little bit, but November through December is when
people make their expenditures and are buying things, consuming, and
spending money in our economy. But people always like to blame
Democrats: It is all about government. I come from the private sector.
As I said earlier, that is where I made my living. It is an important
part of our economy.
So here we are going to debate, create more uncertainty at the most
important time, when consumers are going to try to judge what to do.
What do they do? Do they spend a little bit extra for a gift for their
friend? Do they go on that trip they were planning? Do they make that
extra expenditure? Yet we will have the same debate. So long term is
important--again, 16, 18 months, but that is better than the short-term
plan.
No businessperson has come to me--and I challenge any businessperson:
Pick up the phone. Call me. Let me know. Tell me you want a short term,
and I will be happy to come down here to the floor and say that. I will
mention your company name. I will tell people: This company is
interested in short term. I would be happy to do that. I am not going
to get those calls because they know that is not the way to run a
business, that is not the way to run a household, and that sure as heck
should not be the way we run our government.
So there is a clear difference. For all of those people who--I get a
lot of pro and con on this issue, calling my office, sending me e-
mails--for all of those people who say: Hey, just vote for the Boehner
thing, I will tell them why I will not. I want people to understand
clearly my position. It is not about, he is a Republican, I am a
Democrat. That is irrelevant. It is short term. It is fewer spending
reductions. It keeps us in turmoil. It doesn't move us forward. It is
all about shenanigans and game-playing and politics. That is what he is
presenting.
Now, maybe the Reid proposal isn't perfect. I know there are
Republicans who have some ideas here in the Senate who want to modify
it. Great. But it is long term, it has more significant reductions, and
it moves us down a path in the right direction. It is not perfect, but
I can tell my colleagues that the idea they have over there will not
work for this economy.
I have probably spoken too long, but those kids from Juneau and Healy
and Anchorage and Kodiak had a great question. When kids are asking
that question and they say to me--and I give them the same exact
presentation. I say: Here are the differences. I give them the papers
and say: Here, you look at it. And they say to me: Why aren't we doing
a long term, because these kids are now at an age where they are
thinking about their future. They are not thinking about the next
weekend; they are thinking about their future. They have a position we
could learn a lot from around this place, I will tell my colleagues
they made it very clear to me: Whatever you do, make it long term,
because they are thinking about their future and where they want to be.
It is an incredible commentary when we have kids who have more
wherewithal in the sense of their knowledge of what should be done in
the body we sit in today. It should wake us up.
The last thing I will note is this. I think about what my colleague
from Colorado said about the value of our position in this world when
it comes to ensuring that people understand America will stand behind
everything we do--the debt we do, the positions we take. As a matter of
fact, it was so important, it was written into the Constitution that we
should never question the ability to pay our bills.
For those on the other side who like to spout off, and they pull out
of their pocket the little portable Constitution--all of us get those;
we all have those--and they cite the Constitution, sometimes they
forget sections of it. I hope we don't forget this section. We should
never be questioned in regard to our debt. We pay our bills. We stand
behind what we do. That is what makes our country different from any
country in this world.
So I challenge them to get their job done, maybe on the FAA bill,
maybe on this issue involving the debt, but the House needs to get
their act together--the majority. Let me make that clear. The majority
over there needs to get their job done, quit killing things over there,
from jobs to legislation, and focus on the work people sent them here--
especially the group of 2010--but who sent me here and sent the
Presiding Officer here--we were sent here to do a job.
It is outrageous to me that we cannot move forward when it is so
simple in the sense of a plan that gets us on a path that is long term
and has better spending reductions. Maybe it is too logical. Maybe that
is the problem around here: If it is too simple, too logical, it
doesn't work. It has to be complicated with a lot of gamesmanship is
the only way it works. I want to prove that wrong.
I thank the Chair for allowing me the time to say a few words.
Hopefully, the people who are watching us and listening will hear the
real debate and cut through all the moment-in-time politicizing. Maybe,
hopefully, they will hear those five kids whom I heard and will hear
their concerns and what their position is.
So, again, I thank the Chair for the time, and I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. FRANKEN. Mr. President, are we in morning business?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. We are in morning business.

____________________