[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 16378-16379]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. INHOFE (for himself and Mr. Harkin):
  S. 1425. A bill to give effect to the original agreement entered into 
by the cities of Dallas, Texas, and Fort Worth, Texas, to build a 
single airport to provide for the commercial air transportation needs 
of the region, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, Senator Harkin and I are introducing the 
True Competition Act which will resolve a longstanding debate about the 
status of Dallas Love Field Airport. This is a critical issue for those 
of us from States that depend on access to the Nation's air 
transportation network through hub airports in other States.
  In the late 1960s the Federal Government expressed concern that it 
was funding three airports very closely located to each other in the 
Dallas/Fort Worth area. It asked the local communities to build a 
single major airport to serve the entire region. The cities of Dallas 
and Fort Worth, in consultation with the airlines serving the local 
airports, agreed to do so only under the condition that all three local 
airports be permanently closed to all commercial airline traffic. It 
was this agreement that resulted in the construction of the Dallas/Fort 
Worth International Airport.
  The legislation I propose today would return to the original intent 
of all the parties involved in the decision to build DFW International 
by closing Love Field to commercial air traffic. If enacted, 
competition at DFW will increase significantly. This will be good for 
consumers and it will be good for communities that used DFW as their 
access to the world.
  The Federal statute that is central to this debate is the so-called 
Wright amendment. This was a law enacted in 1979 that allowed Love 
Field to stay open for limited service despite the desire of the local 
communities to have it close. It was necessary because activist judges 
in Texas had ruled against the local government's intent to consolidate 
all air traffic at DFW.
  Recently, legislation has been introduced that would completely 
reverse the agreement of the parties to limit Love Field to an airport 
serving short haul markets. This would return to the situation that was 
supposed be corrected 30 years ago. The runways of Love Field and DFW 
are 8 miles apart. To have two major, federally funded airports so 
close simply doesn't make sense.
  Moreover, if flights are transferred from DFW to Love Field--as they 
surely would be if the Wright amendment is repealed--there will be 
fewer connecting opportunities at DFW for passengers from outside the 
north Texas area.
  I understand that Southwest Airlines is lobbying strongly for repeal 
of the Wright amendment. I want to make it clear that I have the 
greatest respect for Southwest and consider myself a good customer. But 
Southwest surely does not need the continued permanent home court 
advantage that the courts gave them years ago. Southwest operates very 
successfully at some of the most congested and high volume airports in 
the country. They have the skill and the resources to compete against 
any carrier at any airport. If they moved their operations to DFW, 
consumers and communities could have the best of all worlds--intense 
head-to-head competition between carriers and even more opportunities 
to travel throughout the world.
  It is time to resolve this controversy once and for all by returning 
to the original intent of the parties.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. OBAMA:
  S. 1426. A bill to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to reauthorize 
and extend provisions relating to contaminant prevention detection, and 
response; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Drinking 
Water Security Act of 2005.

[[Page 16379]]

  This bill would reauthorize a portion of the Safe Drinking Water Act, 
first enacted in 2002, that instructs the Environmental Protection 
Agency, EPA, and the Centers for Disease Control to develop the tools 
needed by American drinking water systems to detect and respond to the 
introduction of biological, chemical, and radiological contaminants by 
terrorists. My bill also would require EPA to report on its progress in 
developing and implementing these detection and response systems since 
2002.
  Like most Americans, I want to rise in the morning, make some coffee, 
and take a shower without worrying if that water has somehow been 
tampered with overnight by terrorists. Safe drinking water is something 
we traditionally have taken for granted in this country. This bill will 
continue the good work our scientists have been doing to monitor, 
detect, and negate any chemical, biological, or radiological agents 
that terrorists could introduce into our drinking water, should they 
manage to get past our physical security measures. This bill would also 
help implement appropriate warning systems in the event of a terrorist 
attack on our water systems.
  I do not want to be an alarmist. But, September 11 changed Americans' 
views on the possibility of the improbable and turned our focus to 
preparedness. This bill is all about preparedness. It provides the 
authorization and oversight needed to continue to develop those tests 
and responses so we can stay one step ahead of potential terrorists.
  I hope all of my colleagues join me in supporting this commonsense 
bill and ensuring that our drinking water remains safe.

                          ____________________