[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 167 (Thursday, November 3, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H7324-H7328]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  CONSTRUCTING NEW AIRPORTS IN AMERICA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 5, 2011, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Jackson) will control 
the remainder of the hour.
  Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as how much time 
I have remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has 48 minutes remaining.
  Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. I thank the gentlelady from Houston for her 
kind remarks.
  Mr. Speaker, as many of you know, I have been talking about building 
a third airport for Chicago's metropolitan area since my first 
campaign, which was in 1995. The congressional district that I 
represent has nearly three people for every one job in many 
communities; and compare that to the northwest suburban parts of the 
city of Chicago, there are nearly three jobs for every one person. It 
is an enormous disparity.
  Since that time in 1995, the United States has not built a single new 
airport. In fact, the United States has not built a new greenfield 
airport in more than 40 years. The last totally new airport built in 
this country was Dallas/Fort Worth which opened for business in 1969.
  Now, some of you may say that Denver built a new airport. Well, yes 
and no. Denver has a new airport, but it was a replacement airport. 
Once the new Denver International Airport was completed, the old 
Stapleton Airport was shut down. So while Denver has an updated 
facility, that airport really didn't add to the number of U.S. 
airports.
  Since 1969, when Dallas/Fort Worth opened, the U.S. air traffic, the 
number of passenger and cargo flights, has more than tripled. Yet, 
despite a tripling of activity and 40-plus years of aviation growth, no 
new major airport has come online to accommodate that expansion. That's 
absolutely incredible, Mr. Speaker.
  Compare our record to China's. The Chinese Government recently 
announced plans to build 97 new airports between 2008 and 2020. So the 
U.S. builds zero airports in 42 years; China is embarking on a plan to 
build 97 new airports in just 12 years.
  If the United States wants or hopes to stay competitive in the global 
economy, we need to start thinking a little bit bigger. We need to 
start thinking about ports, and specifically airports. We need to start 
thinking a little bit more like the Chinese, 100 new airports by 2020. 
The General Administration of Civil Aviation of China said that it 
plans to spend over 450 billion yuan, building no fewer than 97 
airports by the year 2020.

                              {time}  2020

  If the plans are carried through, this massive expansion of capacity 
will see the number of Chinese airports increase to 244. The plans will 
mean that eight of every 10 Chinese people will live within 100 
kilometers of an airport.
  If the United States wants to compete, we simply have to be prepared 
to build more of these facilities. And I'm happy to report that some of 
us in Washington and in Illinois are doing precisely that. In the past 
2 months, I've heard President Obama talk about the need to build new 
airports. Not once, not twice, but several times I've heard the 
President say this. The first time when he unveiled his national jobs 
plan, the President said: ``We can put people to work rebuilding 
America. Our highways are clogged with traffic. Our skies are the most 
congested in the world. It's an outrage.
  ``Building a world-class transportation system is part of what made 
us an economic superpower, and now we're going to sit back and watch 
China build newer airports and faster railroads at a time when millions 
of unemployed construction workers could build them right here in 
America,'' the President said.
  Mr. Obama even noted that perhaps the best way and maybe the only way 
to build new airports, new highways, new infrastructure is through a 
public-private partnership, also known as PPP. In fact, Mr. Speaker, I 
explained this concept to State Senator Barack Obama while he was 
running to become a United States Senator in 2004. When he wrote an op-
ed in the Chicago Sun Times in support of this proposed new airport, in 
his article he said: ``There is a strong case for a regional third 
airport in the south suburbs, a region that has struggled economically 
while other suburban areas have prospered. Employment and income in the 
south suburbs lags the rest of the Chicago area. The construction and 
operation of a new airport near Peotone would bring 1,000 construction 
jobs in the next 2 years and 15,000 permanent jobs by the first full 
year of operations, as well as billions of dollars in new economic 
activity to residents and communities that sorely need it.
  ``Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr., a key leader in the Peotone effort, has 
assembled a group of private investors who are willing to risk their 
capital on the new airport's prospects. State government's role in the 
project would be limited to providing infrastructure improvement such 
as roads, transit, and sewers, which it routinely provides to other 
development projects around the State.''
  Mr. Obama said: ``The benefits of a south suburban airport would not 
be limited to the Chicago region. Many downstate communities are 
hampered by their lack of air access to Chicago. Since gates for such 
flights are extremely limited at O'Hare and Midway, an airport near 
Peotone would provide downstate communities with enhanced air access to 
Chicago, as well as accommodating general aviation traffic that 
formerly utilized Meigs Field. In addition, as the world's first and 
only airport custom designed, built, and priced to attract low-cost 
carriers, it will attract air service to the Chicago area by startup 
and discount airlines currently not operating out of Chicago's existing 
airports.''
  As many of you know, the plan that I've put together for Chicago's 
third airport is precisely that. I've advocated for building this 
airport through a public-private partnership for the past 8 years. To 
quote President Obama again, he said: ``There are private construction 
companies all across America just waiting to get to work. We'll set up 
an independent fund to attract private dollars and issue loans based on 
two criteria--how badly a construction project is needed, number one; 
and how much good it will do for the economy.''
  The President knows that Chicago's two airports, O'Hare and Midway, 
have been operating at or above capacity for years, so the need is 
clearly there. In fact, the Federal Aviation Administration has been 
asking Chicago to build a new airport since 1985--for more than 25 
years. As for the President's requirement that new infrastructure be 
good for the economy, there is no greater job generator in the world 
than an airport. For proof, we need look no further than Washington, 
DC, and the Dulles Airport corridor. Once out in the middle of nowhere, 
the Dulles Airport corridor today is home to 35,000 new companies. Some 
575,000 people go

[[Page H7325]]

to work there every day, and roughly 57 percent of the world's Internet 
traffic now flows through the Dulles corridor. Most of that is possible 
due to the airport.
  As for the airport that I'm proposing for Chicago, it would create 
1,000 construction jobs immediately over the next 2 years. Once phase 1 
construction is done--which could be done as early as June of next 
year--and the airport opens for business, it would create an additional 
15,000 new permanent jobs for the local economy, again by the first day 
of operation. Those 15,000 jobs at the airport include some jobs at the 
airport like pilots and baggage handlers and air traffic controllers 
and service agents and TSA agents. But, moreover, Mr. Speaker, it 
includes jobs located outside of the airport's footprint. I'm talking 
about jobs at the new Hilton, the new Hyatt, the new Fairmont hotels 
locating near airports; jobs at UPS and Federal Express, two businesses 
that can't survive without airports; Hertz, Dollar, Alamo, Avis, and 
Enterprise; jobs at local restaurants: McDonald's and Burger King and 
Chili's and KFC, Olive Garden, White Castle, Outback Steakhouse, Steak 
'n Shake, Red Lobster, Wendy's, Applebee's, Panera Bread; convention 
centers, malls with entertainment complexes, sport complexes, 
warehouses, rail yards, all in the service industry, and corporate 
headquarters, all of which historically like to locate near airports.
  Hotels all across America must be at 80 percent occupancy in order to 
be profitable every single day. People who stay in hotels tend to get 
to those hotels by flying there. Catching a taxi from an airport, or 
even renting a car, airports are the center of the service-based 
economy. Expanding the service-based economy is the fastest way to 
employ the American people and put them, Mr. Speaker, back to work.
  And just like Dulles, which was Washington's third airport, Chicago's 
new third airport would create, over time, hundreds of thousands of new 
jobs.
  So how do we build and finance an airport in these tough economic 
times? I know someone out there in television land is actually asking 
that question.
  As the President said, the way to build new airports is through a 
public-private partnership, by getting private companies to invest 
their own capital without risk to taxpayers. In fact, Mr. Speaker, I 
learned a lot about public-private partnerships a dozen years ago when 
I began researching ways to build and finance a third airport for 
Chicago. And the President is absolutely correct. I learned right here 
in the Congress of the United States from my late colleague, 
Congressman Henry Hyde, who introduced me to a number of consultants 
who impressed upon us the need to move to public-private partnerships 
in order to handle the Nation's future infrastructure demands.
  Our research taught me that the old method for financing and building 
airports is absolutely obsolete. It doesn't work anymore. In short, the 
paradigm has shifted since 1969 when America built its last major 
airport. The old model used to work like this:
  Runways and taxiways were built and financed by cities. A city would 
then recoup its investments by collecting landing fees from airlines 
and eventually get paid back over the next 30 years. Under that same 
old model, terminals were built and financed by the airlines. That's 
why O'Hare has a United terminal and an American terminal, et cetera.
  But guess what. The old model, Mr. Speaker, does not work anymore. 
Most cities cannot afford to pay for runways and then wait 30 years to 
get reimbursed, and they're reluctant to hit up taxpayers for more 
money. Likewise, most airlines, many of whom are teetering on 
bankruptcy, can no longer afford to invest in and build massive 
terminal buildings. The new model is the public-private partnership.
  Under the public-private partnership, cities create airport 
commissions. They form participating governments who then enter into an 
intergovernmental agreement. And by entering into that 
intergovernmental agreement, they form an airport authority with the 
State; the State which owns lands, leases land or yields land to the 
airport authority who then, in turn, provides that land to the 
developers. The developers make an investment in the airfield. They 
build the airport. The income from the airfield comes to the developers 
who then pay the public entity rent.

                              {time}  2030

  And that's how the engine of our economy for a local airport begins 
to spin. And it continues to spin as the airport begins to grow and 
begins to manifest itself in the form of productivity for those who 
take advantage of the facility. If the private sector does it right, 
they reap profits that can then be shared with the communities that 
formed the airport commission. This model is exactly what has been used 
at new airport projects around the world for the last 40 years.
  The main reason this model hasn't been used in the U.S. is simple. 
During the last 40 years, we haven't built any new airports. In 
Chicago, we are following the new international model of the public-
private partnership. First, we formed the local airport commission to 
create and oversee the public-private partnership. That commission, 
formed in 2003, is comprised of 21 municipalities from three counties, 
Cook, Will and Kankakee, located near the airport site. These 
communities, who call themselves the Abraham Lincoln National Airport 
Commission, or ALNAC, work essentially as one city, and they make up 
the public side of the partnership.
  These 21 communities, again, acting as one airport commission, then 
conducted a global competition to find private developers who had the 
expertise, the experience, the wherewithal and the willingness to 
design, finance, construct, and manage a new airport. Seventeen 
companies from around the world ultimately responded to the 
commission's requests for proposals. At the conclusion of that global 
search, ALNAC, the public commission, selected two companies with 
aviation expertise, SNC Lavalin and L-COR, as its private development 
partners. These two companies have built new airports or expanded 
existing airports in countries from Europe, Africa, North America and 
from Central America to South America. They've done so with great 
success, and, more importantly, they've done it with their own money at 
no cost to the taxpayers.
  Now, for anyone who is thinking this is just a pie-in-the-sky concept 
or some airport fantasy, I must say that the Governor of Illinois has 
carefully vetted the ALNAC proposal. Governor Quinn, his lawyers, 
outside counsel, and the Illinois Department of Transportation spent 
close to a year vetting all of ALNAC's work. In the end, the Governor's 
office found that ALNAC's public-private partnership is legal, is 
viable and capable.
  And I'm proud of what this local commission has done. I'm proud of 
our private partners who want to invest $700 million in Chicago's new 
airport. And I'm proud and happy that President Obama and Illinois 
Governor Quinn have a clear understanding that public-private 
partnerships are capable, indeed, perhaps necessary in building, 
financing and operating world-class airports that will expand the 
Nation's aviation capacity and create jobs without using taxpayer 
dollars faster than any single thing that this Congress can do.
  All of us in public life, as well as many leaders in the private 
sector, are feeling the pressure to create jobs and to rebuild America, 
or as the President said, it's time for us to take off our slippers, 
put on our marching shoes, stop complaining, stop whining; we've got 
work to do.
  Now I want to take a few minutes, Mr. Speaker, to show you just how 
this plan would work and introduce you to a key concept that makes this 
financial model better than the one that exists at virtually every U.S. 
airport in the United States. The concept is called common-use gates. 
It simply means that airlines no longer build terminals; so, therefore, 
they can no longer control the gates. Instead, the gates are built and 
controlled by a private company that has expertise in running airports. 
For airlines, it means all gates can be used by any airline. And they 
pay for just the hour or so that they use to unload passengers, reload, 
and then take off. The common-use gate concept, which is used at modern 
airports everywhere outside the United States, means terminals need 
less space, which in turn means they cost less money. Ultimately, 
common-

[[Page H7326]]

use gates should save travelers time and money.
  In closing, Mr. Speaker, I'm proud to report that the Abraham Lincoln 
National Airport Commission, or ALNAC, along with its 21 municipal 
members and our private developers, have developed a fully vetted, 
cost-effective plan to update and expand our Nation's infrastructure, 
which costs taxpayers nothing but will create tens of thousands of 
jobs.
  This airport, Mr. Speaker, is bigger than just an airport in my 
congressional district and for Chicago's Southland. This airport would 
change the way we build things in the United States and will have 
national and global significance. This Republican-led Congress hasn't 
been very helpful to President Obama. In fact, this Congress is 
determined not to pass a single piece of legislation that will help him 
put the American people back to work.
  Since the President is issuing executive orders and looking for other 
ways to go around this Republican-led and dysfunctional Congress, the 
beauty of the Jackson plan to build a third airport in the Chicago area 
is that we don't need Congress or the Illinois Legislature to vote on 
or approve anything. We just need the signature of the Governor of 
Illinois on a land lease.
  So what I need you to do is call the Governor of Illinois, 312-814-
2121, that's 312-814-2121, and tell him to lease the land to the 
Abraham Lincoln National Airport Commission so we can give President 
Obama a victory and begin to put the American people back to work.
  Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Runyan). The gentleman has 29 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Fantastic, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank the 
gentleman for clarifying that for me.
  I want to spend the next 29 minutes explaining to the American people 
how modern airports will be constructed in the United States.
  This is a mockup of the facility that we seek to build in the Second 
Congressional District. It's a small airport with five simple gates 
whose basic footprint fits the local vernacular of the communities that 
it will be built in. Between the Village of Monee, University Park, 
Creek, Beecher and Peotone exist 25,000 acres of land, 25,000 acres of 
land that have been designated by the Federal Aviation Administration 
for the building of a major airfield. The light area on this map 
represents land that has been acquired by the State of Illinois for the 
purposes of building a major airport.
  So the private companies, the private developers have done, Mr. 
Speaker, an analysis to determine what is the appropriate size of the 
airport that they should build as soon as humanly possible for the 
purposes of relieving air traffic in the region. And their analysis 
showed that if the airport were built in 2007 at the low emplanement 
hours, or deplanement hours, 174 passengers would use the airport. The 
median number of passengers per hour would be 347, or the high number 
of passengers 695 passengers per hour.
  What's fascinating, Mr. Speaker, is the near perfect correlation 
between the median numbers in 2007 and the low numbers in 2008, the 
median numbers in 2008 and the low numbers in 2009--or let's fast 
forward to where we are today, the median numbers in 2010, the low 
numbers in 2011. The median numbers in 2011 compared to the out numbers 
in 2012, what you can see is that because of the number of passengers 
who use the airport every hour in succeeding years, it is possible to 
design an airport in 25,000 acres but actually scale it back to the 
size of an airport that we need to build today, in other words, a cost-
effective airport, annual emplanements by 2012, 2,200,000; 2013, 
2,700,000; 2023, 7,600,000.

                              {time}  2040

  Once, Mr. Speaker, we have determined how many passengers would use 
such an airport, we then have to right-size the airport. We have to 
determine the number of aircraft operations per hour that would have to 
exist at such a facility or be used at such a facility in order to 
determine the size of the airport that we need to build.
  And once again, the median numbers equal the low numbers in each of 
the succeeding years. Assuming an airport is built today, 31 total 
aircraft operations by 2012, 34 by 2013, 38 by 2018, and so forth, a 
near perfect correlation, suggesting that every single year from the 
moment this airport is built it will continue to expand.
  Well, Mr. Speaker, unlike using the old government model, because we 
are using a for-profit model in a public-private partnership, we should 
never build more airport than we need. We should never build more 
bridge than we need. We should never build more road than we need 
because the private sector doesn't have money to waste quite like 
government has money apparently to waste. So we have to right-size the 
airport. And as a result of the passenger emplanement and the number of 
aircraft that take off from the airport every hour, we are able to 
determine the size of an airport that we need to build by 2008, 2011, 
2013, and 2018.
  The most cost-effective airport, Greenfield Airport, starts out with 
five gates, about 1,300 parking spaces, a terminal size of about 
142,000 square feet, and an apron of about 933,000 square feet. 
Remember, Mr. Speaker, not one dollar spent by taxpayers to arrive at 
this jobs plan.
  Well, here's the key to what we're trying to build in Illinois with 
the Governor's signature--provided enough of our constituents today 
call the Governor at 312-814-2121 and tell him to sign the lease to the 
local commission. The real key to the concept and the success of this 
airport, unlike traditional airport models, is the idea of a common-use 
terminal. It's really a private sector model because we're not building 
more airport than we need. It doesn't compete with O'Hare Airport; it 
doesn't compete with Midway Airport. In fact, Mr. Speaker, how could a 
five-gate airport compete with O'Hare Airport or compete with Midway 
Airport? It simply can't. However, a five-gate airport represents 
15,000 right-now jobs for the local communities that need them the 
most.
  That's why Congressman Jackson is hanging around airports. 
Congressman, all you do is talk about airports. Yeah, because with 
airports come Hyatt Hotels and Hilton Hotels and Fairmont Hotels, and 
Avis and Hertz and Dollar and all kinds of businesses that tend to 
locate near airports. Look at Arlington, Virginia. It is developed 
because it is close to Reagan Airport. Look at the Dulles corridor, 
home to 575,000 people who work every day because of the airport. Look 
at the Baltimore-Washington corridor; it's tied to the airport.
  Look at all of the jobs and growth and economic activity out by 
O'Hare Airport. Look at the economic activity by LAX. The FAA said 20 
years ago that we need to build 10 new airports in America the size of 
O'Hare Airport to handle the aviation problem then. How many have we 
built in America while China's going to build 100 new airports? In 10 
years, how many have we built in America? Not one.
  So, what's the key, Congressman Jackson, to this airport? Well, the 
reason this airport's going to be successful is because United, 
American, and Qantas do not own gates at this airport. This airport is 
not contingent upon them assuming any debt or liability for building 
the airport. Virgin Airlines does not own a gate at this airport. The 
airport is paid for, Mr. Speaker, by the private sector. American is 
welcomed to land and use the gate. For the 1 hour that it takes them to 
let their passengers on, let their passengers off, and get back on the 
runway, that's all the amount of time that we charge American, United, 
Qantas Air or Virgin Airways.
  So when you walk into this airport, it looks like a modern facility. 
There's a big flat-screen television set behind the ticket agent, and 
it has the logo of United Airlines or some airline on it. After the 
plane boards and then takes off, guess what, Mr. Speaker. The flat-
screen television set, suddenly it has the American logo on it, the 
same gate as the American flight pulls up to that terminal and takes 
off. A much more efficient method of using gates at airports. This is 
the key concept behind making the airport successful.
  But because we are able to project well into the future, in a 
$25,000-acre footprint, the size of a future facility, we start out 
with hand drawing with a five-gate airport, but we're already 
contemplating what it would mean using the profits to build roads, to 
build the infrastructure to make the airport work.

[[Page H7327]]

  As you can see in the 10-to-25-year plan, we're contemplating a ring 
road like a modern airport, where you enter and you exit the airport, 
and if necessary you return to baggage claim or to departing passengers 
under a much broader facility.
  In the plus-25-year plan, we're already widening the processor, that 
is, the processor where ticket agents and the Transportation Security 
Administration help process passengers to global locations not only 
within the United States, but around the world.
  So because of accurate forecasting, Mr. Speaker, we build a small 
terminal in land owned by the State with a small apron of about 933,000 
square feet and one 112,000-foot runway, which is large enough to 
handle contemporary serious aircraft, including new aircraft that are 
presently coming online. As you can see, we've already contemplated a 
small cargo space.
  Remember, I said I only wanted to build with $700 million, not paid 
for by the taxpayers. I just wanted to build five gates--one, two, 
three, four, five. But very quickly, for very little money, the airport 
expands to a 13-gate airport. But for five gates, I've already employed 
15,000 Americans. A 13-gate airport employs 30,000 Americans.
  We're already focusing on phase two. We tear down the wall between 
phase one and phase two, and now the airport, Mr. Speaker, looks like 
this. Then we tear down the wall, a modest expansion of the airport for 
phase three. We build phase four. We're contemplating phase five. And 
then while this part of the airport is functioning, we then go back to 
the other side of the airport and modernize its processor without any 
disruption in customer service. What started out as a one, two, three, 
four, five-gate airport, it's now already a 40-gate airport, not paid 
for by the taxpayers, not paid for by the airlines, with common-use 
gates and expanding infrastructure.
  Very quickly, the airport, Mr. Speaker, has now moved to a modern-
looking facility, paid for by the private sector in a public-private 
partnership, including its roads. The roads that approach the top of 
the airport are for departing planes. We've already got a ring road now 
coming around the airport for arriving passengers. This 80-gate airport 
represents nearly 130,000 jobs to a local economy.
  There is absolutely nothing that Congress can do to compete with an 
airport. If there's going to be public works projects, a public works 
bill, we heard the President of the United States stand right there and 
say he refuses to accept that in America we can't build one new airport 
while China is building 100 new airports. I'm taking this time, Mr. 
Speaker, to carefully explain to my colleagues how airports can be 
built without you appropriating a single dollar.
  This is all I'm building, Mr. Speaker, one runway and five gates. But 
over time, following the model that I proposed, one runway and five 
gates quickly becomes an 80-gate airport now needing two runways. This 
80-gate airport represents more than 130,000 jobs to a local economy, 
and we need to be building 10 airports just like this to alleviate 
today's aviation and capacity demands.

                              {time}  2050

  And you can also see under our airport in our field, we're already 
looking at an expanded cargo area for UPS, Federal Express, and other 
cargo-related international trade that would be the by-product of 
building this airport.
  As I shared with you at the very outset of my presentation, Mr. 
Speaker, while we're building five gates and one runway, the airport is 
being built in a 25,000-acre footprint. O'Hare Airport is in a 7,000-
acre footprint. The footprint in my congressional district is four 
times the size of the present footprint of O'Hare International 
Airport, which is somewhere between the busiest airport in the world, 
the second busiest, or the third busiest airport in the world.
  Well, when you start talking about an airport of this magnitude in a 
25,000-acre footprint, you're obviously talking about a global 
facility. In the Midwest, it means an absolutely functioning O'Hare 
airport. It means a strong and strengthened Midway Airport. But five 
gates and one runway will eventually become this facility, four 
runways, 200-plus gates and massive cargo areas, both north and south, 
within the airport footprint.
  It's actually kind of humbling, Mr. Speaker. It's humbling to know 
that for 17 years I've by been fighting to build, without asking 
Congress for a single dollar, one runway and five gates, in land 
already owned by the State of Illinois, to build this one runway and 
five gates to create 15,000 jobs.
  It's humbling to know that I probably won't live to see this 
facility, the 25-year-plus plan. And there's almost no one in this 
Congress who's likely to be living to ever see this facility. But 
because of the size and scope and the planning of the private sector, 
we can already anticipate what the future of the airport will be, 
provided passenger forecasts and demand continue to grow.
  But I can scan and scale this very large facility, Mr. Speaker, all 
the way back to this little bitty facility that got started because 
President Barack Obama said we need to use public private partnerships 
to build airports. Why? Because airlines can't afford them anymore, and 
municipalities don't build runways anymore. They simply can't afford 
it, and so we have a model to make it happen.
  What are the public sector benefits? Job creation, 15,000. Sales and 
income taxes from businesses and individuals who live and dwell around 
the facility. Off-airport real estate taxes. People who live close to 
these things, their property values go up. The quality of their lives 
go up. And with the buffer between the last runway and the nearest 
communities being more than a mile, there's a significant noise 
reduction factor already built into the appropriate and proper planning 
of this airport.
  The net present value of the public-private joint venture, cash flow 
to participating governments estimated at nearly $230 million annually.
  Now, what do you do with $230 million? Well, as I shared with you at 
the beginning, the State of Illinois has only purchased this land, Mr. 
Speaker, just the light yellow land. But the entire footprint is the 
entire green land.
  Well, with $230 million of net present value and profit from the 
facility, which goes to the private developer and comes back to the 
commission in the form of rent, that money begins to purchase the 
remaining elements of the footprint in anticipation and with the 
expectation that the facility will expand. So when the private 
developer says it's time to expand the airport, the land has already 
been acquired by the government entity, again, not at a cost to the 
taxpayer.
  But every time this airport expands by another 10 gates, it creates 
another 15,000 jobs to a local economy. No road can do that. No bridge 
can do that.
  Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have left.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has 10 minutes remaining.
  Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. I'm really excited about that, Mr. Speaker. 
Ten more minutes, I think I can talk till tomorrow. That's what I kind 
of like about these Special Order speeches.
  What's the role of the public sector? Well, it's very limited, Mr. 
Speaker. It's not that complicated. We're a landlord.
  I've been fighting for the last 7 years back home. A lot of people 
say we want to be in control. Jackson, we like your ideas, we like your 
money, we like your developers. We want to be in control.
  Mr. Speaker, that's the old model, and they think like they're still 
participating in the old model. That's not the new model, Mr. Speaker. 
The only role that the public sector provides or plays in a public-
private partnership is they're the landlord. That's all.

  Imagine this. The city of Washington, D.C. wants to attract Target, a 
shopping center, to its city. So it has land somewhere in Washington. 
The city owns the land. It might be a vacant lot. It might be a 
dilapidated area. The city owns the land.
  So it says to Target, Target, we want to enter into a public-private 
partnership with you. We have land; you know how to run Target. If we 
give you the land, will you build Target?
  Target says, yes. And for some lease fee, some arrangement between 
the local government and Target, Target builds its own store, maybe a 
25-year lease, maybe a 99-year lease. The only role that the government 
plays is in leasing the land. That's it.

[[Page H7328]]

  Unfortunately, that's not the Illinois way. That's not the Chicago 
way. The Chicago way is we need to be telling people who are running 
their business how to run their business.
  You can't do that. If we lease the land and Target builds the store, 
Target runs their own store. The business on the public land runs their 
own business.
  What do we get from it? We get taxes. We get employed Americans. We 
get economic activity and less crime and less violence. There's a 
benefit to the society when we make the trade-off in the public-private 
partnership where there is governance over the land. There are lease 
terms, but we're not in the management and the day-to-day operation of 
that business.
  The same is true of this new airport. Most public airports, the local 
mayor, the local city council, the local politicians are all involved 
in the business, trying to get their cousins hired and get their 
friends hired.
  Not in the new model. In the new model we have the land, and we turn 
it over to the developers to make judgments about what is the most 
cost-effective way to run an airport.
  Jackson, if you would just turn the developers over to us and let 
us--no, no, no. I've been working on this too long. The way to do this 
right is for the politicians to stay out of it and turn it over to the 
private sector so that they can do their job.
  I've got to be honest with you. I ain't never ran a business before 
in my life. I came right from the seminary and right from law school to 
Congress. What kind of advice can I give an airport developer?
  What kind of advice can anyone who's never run an airport before give 
some professional who's in the airport business? Absolutely none.
  And so you need to have a hands-off approach to allowing a public-
private partnership to operate at a profit without political 
interference.
  Land, that's your public sector role. You're a landlord. You're 
responsible for getting utilities to the fence. That's what you're 
responsible for. You're responsible for regulatory permits and 
approvals. That's what the public is responsible for. You're 
responsible for highways and transit improvements, which the public-
private partnership can, in fact, help pay for because it's a for-
profit venture making a profit.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I've talked about the need to build a new airport. I 
showed you tonight that we don't need the Congress of the United States 
that does not want to help Barack Obama. We don't need Congress for 
nothing to get this model moving.
  We just need the Governor of the State of Illinois, Governor Pat 
Quinn, area code (312)814-2121, to lease the land to the governments 
that have established this commission.

                              {time}  2100

  From that we will have a national model emerge on how to put the 
American people back to work. It can start in Illinois, but it can 
spread very quickly by bringing the $2.5 trillion in private sector 
money that is sitting on the sidelines and presently not engaging the 
economy.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I stripped the idea of an airport out of this model 
of a public-private partnership. This can be any government entity.
  It then enters into an intergovernmental agreement with other 
governments with an understanding that it will have a relationship to 
the Federal Government, the State government, or local governments in 
the form of land or utilities or whatever is required in order to get 
the business started.
  We then lease the land to a developer, who then invests in the land 
to create jobs and economic opportunities for the American people. The 
profits from the activity are paid to the developer to help them 
satisfy and settle the obligations associated with the initial 
investment. And then the developer rents the land or pays rent to the 
government entity established by the local government and the profits 
can also be shared by local governments.
  Mr. Speaker, it doesn't have to be airports. Public-private 
partnerships can also build roads. They may end up being toll roads 
because if the private sector makes an investment in a toll road, in a 
road that the public is going to use, certainly they need to get their 
money back. So how do they get their money back?
  Well, after they've made the investment, it has to be a toll road. 
Public-private partnerships can work. Public-private partnerships can 
work for bridges. It may be a toll bridge. Public-private partnerships 
can work.
  Mr. Speaker, if we offer as a Congress the kinds of incentives that 
encourage public-private partnerships, we can put the American people 
to work in quick order.
  Mr. Speaker, I am particularly honored and privileged that you've 
allowed me the opportunity to share with my colleagues and with the 
American people the importance of a project in my congressional 
district. I am particularly honored that my constituents have been 
leading this charge for building new airports in the United States. We 
need to build 10 of them just like this.
  I'm hoping, Mr. Speaker, that those of us who want to see and help 
President Barack Obama be successful that we will call 312-814-2121 and 
encourage the Governor of the State of Illinois to give Barack Obama 
the victory that he needs and the victory that he deserves that can 
show us a way to put the American people to work without raising taxes, 
without borrowing more money, without passing another government 
program.
  Public-private partnerships, Mr. Speaker, can work. I'm asking my 
colleagues and those who can hear my voice to give the people of the 
Second Congressional District of Illinois a chance to get one started 
so we can show you that it works.
  I thank the Speaker, and I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________