[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 144 (Thursday, September 7, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H7094-H7095]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               A 21ST CENTURY AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Well, Mr. Speaker, I was just reading a message from 
Citizens for On Time Flights.
  Now, I fly a lot and I would love to be on time more. They are 
talking about our aviation system here. Air traffic control is a World 
War II relic and saying that if we only would give it over to the 
private sector, i.e., the airlines, it would work better.
  Well, let's see, a couple of things wrong with that statement. Number 
one, the greatest problem with air delays is weather. Now, actually, we 
are dealing with that technologically through a new system called 
Datacom, where, at our 55 busiest airports, the pilots and the air 
traffic controllers now can communicate by text and they don't have to 
repeat over and over on the radio the messages; many fewer 
misunderstandings, easier to reroute. This has been implemented by the 
FAA.
  What is the number two cause?
  Oh, it is airline operations and scheduling--the airlines themselves. 
They are the second greatest cause of delays, they, in themselves.
  So it turns out that Citizens for On Time Flights is actually funded 
by a group of airlines.
  Now, what is the bottom line here? Do we have a World War II relic, 
as Gary Cohn has said after he read some of this and heard this 
propaganda?
  No, actually. We have the most advanced system in the world. We could 
fly planes today closer together using GPS technology called ADS-B and 
not use the older radar system, except--the system is up and running, 
except the airlines won't pay to put the equipment in their planes. 
They say it is too expensive.
  So they are complaining about the FAA and saying they could do a 
better job, they could do it more efficiently, they could fly planes 
closer together, but they won't invest in the equipment.

[[Page H7095]]

  Now, it is very expensive. For instance, American Airlines would have 
to spend 40 percent of last year's baggage fees to equip every one of 
their planes so they could use this modern system--40 percent of their 
baggage fees. Wow, what a hit they would take for that.
  Now, what is the bottom line here?
  The bottom line is we fund the current system--the largest, most 
complex, most advanced in the world--with a tax on the tickets. It is a 
progressive tax; the more you pay for your ticket, the more you pay for 
air traffic control, 7\1/2\ percent tax.
  For years the airlines have said to me: That's our money.
  I said: What do you mean it's your money? I pay the tax when I buy a 
ticket.
  They said: No. That's our money. We should have it.
  In fact, a few years ago, when the FAA bill expired for 2 weeks 
because of a chairman named John Mica, every airline in America, except 
for one--when the 7\1/2\ percent tax went away for 2 weeks, every 
airline in America, except Alaska Airlines, raised their ticket prices 
7\1/2\ percent.
  So what is the bottom line of this bill?
  This bill--going to be pushed by the Republicans over here--would 
repeal the 7\1/2\ percent tax. That would be a $10 billion windfall for 
the aviation industry.
  And then what? How are we going to pay for it?
  Well, the private corporation will decide. Congress will have nothing 
to say about how it is paid for, and it is going to be paid for with a 
head tax. So you get on the plane; they will say: Oh, it's 50 bucks to 
sit in that seat, to use the public airspace of the United States of 
America.
  That's how the corporation is going to pay for it, with a head tax.
  So we go from a progressive tax to a regressive tax. If you buy a $50 
ticket, you are going to pay 50 bucks to sit in the seat. So it is now 
$100. Today you would have paid $3.75.
  So that is the real bottom line here. It is not about efficiency. It 
is not bringing the system up to date.
  Now, they have done a great job with this propaganda, and the 
chairman of the committee has done a great job. They talk about those 
paper strips. They use paper strips in the traffic control towers.
  Well, yeah, we do. It works real well. We replaced them in the en 
route centers, but we haven't replaced them yet in the towers. It is 
infallible. It has worked forever. It is efficient. But we are going to 
go to electronic flight strips, and we are going to do it in a way that 
actually is going to improve the efficiency of the system and dispatch 
planes better.
  Now, they say: Well, Canada has electronic flight strips.
  Yeah, they did it for billing purposes because they charge per 
flight. They don't, and are not going to, have the new system we are 
going to have, which is going to sort out all the planes by their 
future routes, everything as they depart from the airport, and it is 
going to be way more efficient.

  So, actually, the FAA is doing an excellent job. And 7 to 10 years 
ago I never would have said that. But they have got it straightened out 
over the last 7 years. Randy Babbitt and Mr. Huerta have got it 
straightened out. It is working today.
  There is a GAO report, which I am releasing today, which the 
Republicans tried to repress, which says, in fact, the system is on 
time, on budget, and, in fact, privatization will delay the 
modernization of the system.
  So the House is going to push and the Republicans are going to push 
for a bill that actually is going to set us back instead of moving us 
forward into the 21st century air traffic control system.

                          ____________________