[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 56 (Wednesday, April 13, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H1667-H1670]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TREATING SMALL AIRPORTS WITH FAIRNESS ACT OF 2016
Mr. HURD of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass
the bill (H.R. 4549) to require the Transportation Security
Administration to conduct security screening at certain airports, and
for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 4549
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Treating Small Airports with
Fairness Act of 2016''.
SEC. 2. CONDUCT OF SECURITY SCREENING BY THE TRANSPORTATION
SECURITY ADMINISTRATION AT CERTAIN AIRPORTS.
(a) In General.--The Administrator of the Transportation
Security Administration shall provide for security screening
to be conducted by the Transportation Security Administration
at, and provide all necessary staff and equipment to, any
airport--
(1) that lost commercial air service on or after January 1,
2013; and
(2) the operator of which, following the loss described in
paragraph (1), submits to the Administrator--
(A) a request for security screening to be conducted at
such airport by the Transportation Security Administration;
and
(B) written confirmation of a commitment from a commercial
air carrier--
(i) that such air carrier intends to resume commercial air
service at such airport; and
(ii) to resume such service not later than the date that is
one year after the date of the submission of the request
under subparagraph (A).
(b) Deadline.--Subject to the one-year limitation described
in subsection (a)(2)(B)(ii), the Administrator of the
Transportation Security Administration shall ensure that the
process of implementing security screening by the
Transportation Security Administration at an airport
described in subsection (a) is complete not later than the
later of--
(1) the date that is 90 days after the date on which the
operator of such airport submits to the Administrator a
request for such screening under paragraph (2)(A) of such
subsection; or
(2) the date on which the commercial air carrier that is
the subject of such a request intends to resume commercial
air service at such airport.
(c) Effects on Other Airports.--The Administrator of the
Transportation Security Administration shall carry out this
section in a manner that does not negatively affect
operations at airports not described in this section that are
otherwise provided security screening conducted by the
Transportation Security Administration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Walker). Pursuant to the rule, the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hurd) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Payne) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
General Leave
Mr. HURD of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks and include any extraneous materials on the bill under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
Mr. HURD of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
As a Representative, I love fighting for the little guy, battling the
bureaucracy on behalf of those who can't. Today I am fighting for the
little airports.
I think that the people who are dependent on small airports in order
to travel and conduct business deserve the same security that those at
larger airports get. And this isn't just about security. It is about
jobs and the economy.
In the past 3 years, nearly 30 airports across the country have lost
commercial service. This wreaks havoc on the local economy and,
ultimately, the community. In at least six of these cases, airlines
have reevaluated and sought to return at a later date.
Unfortunately, in many cases, even if it has only been several
months, TSA has already removed their resources from the airports and
have refused to return. The irony is that many of these airports have
simultaneously been awarded funding by the U.S. Department of
Transportation in order to regain and promote commercial air service.
While one Federal agency agrees to invest in getting the airport up
and going, another Federal agency is refusing to provide security
screening. This makes no sense from a budgetary standpoint and is
simply unfair.
[[Page H1668]]
These airports are located in important cities. For example, Del Rio
is home to Laughlin Air Force Base, numerous DHS facilities, and a
growing community that facilitates international trade between the U.S.
and Mexico.
Given the national and homeland security-related institutions
serviced directly by the Del Rio airport and the potential boost to the
economy, it only makes sense to provide basic screening.
Del Rio, Texas, is not alone. This is playing out across the country
from New Jersey to California. By screening these passengers at the
point of origin, we are further decreasing wait times at our larger hub
airports.
The bill is a bipartisan effort and has passed out of the Homeland
Security Committee with unanimous support. Equally bipartisan companion
legislation with the exact same language has been included in the
Senate's FAA reauthorization, which passed out of committee unanimously
as well.
We are all in agreement that this is an important step towards
achieving economic and national security. I want to thank my fellow
Members, Representatives Walden, DeFazio, Lummis, Kilmer, and Davis,
who cosponsored this piece of legislation.
I urge all Members to join me in supporting this bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PAYNE. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4549, the Treating Small
Airports with Fairness Act of 2016.
Under this act, TSA would be required to provide staffing and
screening equipment to any airport that lost commercial air service on
or after January 1, 2013, if the operator submits a request to TSA
together with a written commitment from a commercial air carrier that
such carrier intends to resume service at such airport not later than 1
year after the date on which the request is submitted.
It is my understanding that, without this legislation or alternative
measures, should commercial service return to the affected airports,
the passengers who depart the airport would fly unscreened to their
destination and be subject to security screening upon arrival if they
have to connect to another destination via commercial air flight.
The potential universe of airports that are believed to be implicated
by this legislation is over 20, but there are at least 6 airports that
are expected to pursue Federal screening operations.
{time} 1500
As a member of the Subcommittee on Transportation Security, I believe
that it is important that passengers undergo a security screening
before boarding commercial flights.
As we have heard from TSA and various media reports, this travel
season is expected to be the busiest in many years. One of the factors
contributing to the long wait times at airports across the Nation is
the lack of adequate staffing.
During consideration of this measure in committee, the committee
approved an amendment offered by the ranking member, Mr. Thompson, to
ensure that when TSA acts to implement this law and provides screening
services to new airports, they do not do so at the expense of other
airports in the system.
If TSA does this right and manages its staffing resources in a
thoughtful and holistic manner, there is no reason for other airports
to be negatively impacted.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HURD of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume
to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden), the principal author of this
legislation, a gentleman who has been fighting for small communities
and communities all over the country.
Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Congressman Hurd for his
leadership on this issue. I want to thank as well the gentleman from
New Jersey (Mr. Payne), the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson),
and the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) for helping us out on this,
and certainly Chairman Michael McCaul.
This answer by the TSA makes no sense from a security standpoint and
hurts our smaller communities that may go from time to time without air
service but clamor for air service. If you are a big airport and you
lose a carrier, you probably have several others there serving the
people of that area.
If you are a small airport and you have one carrier, as is the case
in Klamath Falls, Oregon, in June of 2014, when SkyWest pulled out,
they had no other carriers, so they immediately began to seek
additional air service. The city of Klamath Falls acted diligently.
They recruited a new partner, Peninsula Airways, in July of 2015, so
like a year later they had somebody in line and everything was working
out.
They go to TSA, and TSA says: No, we are not coming back.
Their answer was to reverse screen.
I said: Well, what is that?
Well, that means you board the 28- or 30-passenger airplane with all
your luggage, everything else, and then you fly--in this case 236 miles
north to Portland, Oregon, Oregon's largest city--then you deplane on
the tarmac, and you come back through like you had just driven up.
Well, that is an interesting way to provide security for the Nation's
communities and airplanes because that means you have flown right up
the entire length of Oregon, from the California border down here in
Klamath Falls all the way to Portland.
Now, let me put that in an East Coast perspective for you. That would
be like boarding a plane in Raleigh-Durham International Airport down
in Raleigh, North Carolina, and then you would fly all the way up to
Reagan Washington National Airport, up to DCA here. Actually, we go 4
miles farther in Oregon, but we will leave that aside for the moment,
232 miles versus 236. Then you get off the airplane here at Reagan
National, and then we will screen you. We will find out what you are
carrying, what is in your bags, and then we will put you on a
connecting flight.
Does anybody think that is good security? Does anybody think that
people who want to do us harm aren't going to figure that gaping hole
out?
Portland International Airport was willing to work with us, but it
made no sense. So we pleaded with TSA: Can't you come back? You were
here before. It won't take much.
And they basically said no. And that is what brings us here today.
For our Nation's security, for the economic security of our small
communities, we need to pass this bipartisan legislation.
On a side note, the Nation's only F-15 training unit is in Klamath
Falls at Kingsley Airfield. So our F-15 pilots have to come out now,
and rather than fly into Klamath Falls, they have to fly into an
airport that is at least, well, on a bad day probably 2 hours over the
mountains, and then come over. So we are paying all that extra
transportation cost, we are paying hotels, everything else, delaying
their access to training, and that doesn't make sense, either.
So let's be safe and secure. Let's be smart and prudent. Let's pass
this legislation and allow our communities to have the air service they
need and our country to have the security that we demand. This is
commonsense legislation that we need to pass. I thank both sides of the
aisle for their great work on this with us. Together, we are going to
do the right policy even when TSA wouldn't.
Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding me the
time and for his support of the bill. I thank the majority side also.
I don't represent the area where this airport is located, but Greg
Walden and I represent two of the largest districts, geographically
speaking, in Congress. The problems that are created by the lack of air
service to Klamath Falls, the gentleman has already well documented. It
is about a 4-hour drive to Portland, which is the nearest place where
you can get a variety of hubbed destinations out of there. Flying a
plane into the Portland metropolitan area, twin-engine, fairly heavy
plane with no screening and no security, defies common sense.
Now, unfortunately, I was principal, after 9/11, with John Mica in
creating TSA, and there are days when we have concerns and regrets, and
this is certainly one of them. It was not our intent to create an
agency that could dictate who could and couldn't have air service. That
is not within TSA's scope
[[Page H1669]]
of jurisdiction. This is outrageous that they would try to deny this.
Remember, TSA, you can't lobby Congress. But I hear they have been
lobbying in some phone calls, saying: this will cost $50 million; it
will take away service from your airport, which is why the committee
said they can't take it away.
No, these are going to be part-time screeners. Klamath Falls has even
offered to hire private screeners. TSA says no. TSA is giving away
equipment, surplusing equipment that is still perfectly functional for
an airport like Klamath Falls, so there is no cost involved there. At
worst, they are going to have a few part-time screeners and they are
going to have to move the surplus equipment there and plug it back in.
This isn't going to cost millions of dollars.
This is, plain and simple, a commonsense approach to how we will make
our entire system safer and also provide what small cities need.
Airports are a critical, critical factor in economic development and
recruitment for small cities across the western United States. When you
have a willing partner, a growing airline, PenAir, that has signed a
commitment to come back in and provide service, as they do for some
communities in my district, then it is not the place of the TSA to say,
oh, no, hold it up, sorry, can't do that. PenAir probably wouldn't even
be willing to provide the service without screening because what would
their liability be if they are flying unscreened passengers on a
commercial airline? I am not even sure what the FAA would have to say
about that.
This is absolutely outrageous, and it is just absurd that Congress
has to step in and act to rectify this misguided step by the TSA, but
by passing this bill, we will. I recommend this bill to my colleagues
on both sides of the aisle.
Mr. HURD of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Huelskamp).
Mr. HUELSKAMP. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleagues from Texas and
across the Nation who, as I have discovered with this bill, have
similar problems. In my particular case, it is the city of Salina,
Kansas, which is located only 100 miles from the closest hub, and it
has long provided valuable air service either to Kansas City or a
little bit farther to Denver. Due to circumstances beyond Salina's
control, just in January their air carrier stopped providing flights
from Salina, and TSA obviously withdrew screening services.
However, just a few weeks later--just a few weeks later--the airport
and Great Lakes Airlines reached an exciting agreement to restore air
service to and from Salina. As we have heard the same story, the
airport sent a request to TSA asking them to reinstate screening
services--again, this is just a few weeks after they had ended the
services--to begin these much-needed flights.
Shortly thereafter, without adequate explanation, TSA, of course as
we have heard, denied the request. I soon learned from other airports,
other communities across America that I wasn't alone. Other airports
located predominantly in rural communities, in nearly identical
situations, were also being denied screening services.
Perhaps most troubling to me--and I heard a lot of troubling
testimony here--was that no credible reason was given for declining the
screening services, again, just a few weeks after they were still
screening flights in Salina, Kansas, saying we can't do it now.
I believe our rural communities in Kansas and others across the
Nation are tired of being left with the short end of the stick and
Washington bureaucrats thinking they can get away with it.
In response to these lame excuses, I urge passage of our TSA Fairness
Act today. This legislation will reverse the denial by TSA and ensure
they stop discriminating against rural communities like Salina, Kansas.
The service agreement they have reached with Great Lakes Airlines will
support our region's continued economic growth. As the chairman of the
Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Tax and Capital Access, I understand
how important reliable air service is for Salina, Kansas, and our
region. It is a simple fix with this bill.
I appreciate my colleague from Texas carrying this on the floor. It
will ensure TSA continues to fulfill its mission, which is to ensure
freedom of movement for people and commerce, and again for Salina and
other rural communities across Kansas.
Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey.
I thank the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden), the sponsor of this
bill, as well as the numbers of individuals who came to the floor.
I chaired the Subcommittee on Transportation Security of the
Committee on Homeland Security some years ago and happily remain on
that committee because I do think it has a crucial and important role.
I do believe in your cause and in this legislation.
We like to think of rural America as being tranquil areas. But in
light of the recent incident in Brussels, many of us who are students
of aviation security are well aware of a number of elements of
weakness, period. Whether or not it is the perimeters of the airports
or ingress and egress of airports, whether or not it is the access of
employees, of which we make no general indictment of the hardworking
individuals who work at airports, but we know that the ingress and
egress in many of our large airports still gives us pause, and now,
obviously, the conspicuous utilization of the open space where the
terrorists did their havoc in Brussels.
We would hope that would not be the case in America, and as well in
rural airports. But certainly if a commercial airline comes back to a
rural community, they need appropriate security. As we grow in
developing our security matrix, they may need security that expands
into the outer areas, depending upon risks. But the one thing we know
is that they need to fall in the category of what we said after 9/11: a
professional, well-trained security team, the Transportation Security
Administration and TSO.
I have a lot of confidence, as I have had in previous TSA
Administrators, in their understanding of the seriousness of their
responsibilities. I have the same kind of confidence in the admiral,
along with Secretary Johnson, that they understand that we are the
front line on securing this Nation. So the airports that have a
commercial airline signed, agreed, and sealed need that kind of
security. We must leave no stone unturned as it relates to airport
security.
Now, obviously, with no security mechanism, it makes it difficult to
have a commercial structure, but more importantly, it opens up the
airport system to get into, if you will, the system of travel and, not
knowing how terrorists think, to start at one point that is more
vulnerable than others and wind up in the Nation's busiest airports.
{time} 1515
So I support this legislation. I look forward to determining and
encouraging funding for this expansion. Obviously, that would be the
concern--certainly, in the appropriations process--and I can only
imagine that there are those of us who are committed in a bipartisan
way to making sure that every aspect of the Nation's travel system,
whether you are going from rail to bus to plane or in any other manner,
is, of course, protected.
I ask my colleagues to support this legislation, and I thank Mr.
Payne and Mr. Hurd for their leadership.
Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Homeland Security Committee and a
former chair of the Subcommittee on Transportation Security and
Infrastructure Protection, I rise in support of H.R. 4549, ``Treating
Small Airports with Fairness Act of 2016'' which requires the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to restore security and
screening services to any airport that lost air services after January
1, 2013 but has a guarantee from a commercial airline to resume
service.
A number of airports in rural parts of the United States have lost
commercial air service in the past years.
Those living in rural areas without easy access by highway to other
airports have lost a vital travel option.
Once an airport receives a commitment from an airline to begin or re-
establish service it at an airport, it also must get TSA to re-
establish passenger and baggage screening, but in some cases TSA denies
the airport's request to re-establish security screening.
For example, TSA at Crater Lake-Klamath Regional Airport in southern
Oregon denied
[[Page H1670]]
the airport's request to restore security screening, citing the
unpredictability of air service in the region and the inability to
maintain consistent passenger loads.
Without TSA security screenings, airports must make alternative
security arrangements, such as having security screening of passengers
and baggage occur once the flight arrives at a large connection
airport.
Under H.R. 4549, TSA must begin security screenings at an airport
either 90 days after a request for screening is made by the airport or
when commercial air service commences, whichever is later.
This requirement would apply only to airports where the airline has
said it will resume services within a year of when the airport has
requested the restoration of TSA screening.
Small cities in 25 States have lost commercial air service and the
local economy of the cities involved suffers.
The loss of airports in these small communities results in using
small propeller-powered planes that charge fares much higher
proportionately than those of conventional airlines.
Closing airports in these cities results in lost tourist dollars and
airport revenue which benefits the community tremendously.
H.R. 4549 directs TSA to restore security and screening services to
airports that lost air service and have a guarantee from a commercial
airline to resume service.
H.R. 4549 requires restoration of TSA screening to a limited number
of airports that have a guarantee from a commercial airline including:
Klamath Falls, Oregon; Del Rio, Texas; Sheridan, Wyoming; and Salina,
Kansas.
I urge all Members to join me in voting to pass H.R. 4549.
Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would like to note the bipartisan nature
in which this measure comes to the floor today. I thank Members for
their support of this measure, and I encourage support for this
legislation. Enactment will contribute to strengthening the aviation
security system by ensuring that passengers undergo screening before
boarding commercial flights.
I had the pleasure of being in south Texas in the last week, and I
flew out of McAllen, Texas. I see the nature and size of these
airports; but, nevertheless, they should have the same support as the
larger airports.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HURD of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, today is a good day. Despite the circus atmosphere that
we often see in Washington, D.C., we are strengthening national
security and improving the communities across our Nation, and we are
doing this in a bipartisan effort.
I would like to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and,
again, urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 4549.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hurd) that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 4549, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________