Back to Squawk list
  • 42

Reid Announces Deal to End FAA Shutdown

Congress has reached a bipartisan compromise to end the partial shutdown of the Federal Aviation Administration that has left 74,000 transportation and construction workers idled, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Thursday. The deal would allow the Senate to approve a House bill extending the FAA’s operating authority through mid-September, including a provision that cuts $16.5 million in air service subsidies to rural communities. ( さらに...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

David Sims 0
Thank goodness, I just hope it actually happens tomorrow and isn't another political ploy.
Wayne Fox 0
Glad to see so many going back to work, Last thing we need is more unemployment.
did anyone see the dow today? kaos!
preacher1 0
Well, BHO is supposed to sign it today and they all should go back to work, but keep in mind children, it's only good thru mid September. As far as the DOW, it's all gonna depend on the jobs numbers today.
Harry was holding this bill hostage over some sort of subsidy for Ely, NV.
preacher1 0
Well, the subsidy cuts are still in there but LaHood now has waiver authority. You know he ain't gonna piss anybody off until after long term funding is in place. If you live in Nevada, you plan on going to Vegas or Reno to shop anyway, so why do we subsidize Ely. Just like you live in Greenville MS. You are going to Jackson MS or Monroe LA or Memphis TN for your shopping; flying shouldn't be any different.
Nick M 0
@Wayne: It's a public organisation therefore the cost to the public purse is reduced if they are unemployed - what you need economically is more private sector jobs and less people working in public sector jobs. That said, I would say it's a concern chopping too much from the FAA which serves a critical service.
Tom Bruce 0
what happened to the union vote issue...? that was more important than the subsidies... democrats want to change the way votes are counted in airline union elections. what happened to that? Washington Post won't mention it - look for a conservative view - the Wall Street Journal?
I don't want to start a fire or a 3rd World War but........... what is going on is the ongoing issue of Republicans want to eliminate labor unions and the Democrats wanting to save them. This been going on for decades and the Republicans are winning inch by inch. It is against the "moral fibers" of business men/women to pay their workers benefits such as: vacation time, medical or to allow them to do a group dealings with their employers. Good case in point: Check out WalMart practices on labor relations.
preacher1 0
@ Nick M and Tom Pera: I just kinda feel like that if a community can't support a private service own it's own, then the taxpayer shouldn't either. If the regional airlines can't make money on a route with their lower costs, so be it. Same thing happened to the Railroads with deregulation. Big ones spun off branch lines to short line operators and when they couldn't make it, there were abandonments.The critical part of the FAA apparently has a funding mechanism to keep essential services such as ATC going but I really think the mark was missed on the amount of money involved that would be missed from ticket tax collections and all the folks that would be added to the unemployents lines. That was politics and not reality. That being said, that union thing was a real big hangup and no, nothing has been said about that yet. That will be real interesting.
What was the loss of revenue during this political theater? $310 mill in lost user taxes? Brilliant!
preacher1 0
@erniekovacs: I kinda take issue about "against the moral fiber". I would not deny there are some companies that fall in that category and in those cases they need a union but there are others that hit the other side as well, notably Delta Airlines so it is not cut and dried. I personally own a non union company at this time of about 500 employees and there is no reason to add another layer of bureaucracy in there and smebody telling me that I can't talk to my people or vice versa. Just Sayin'.
Response to P. Hartman. If your plane crashes I am sure you want tax supported searches to look for you. If you become snow bound, I am sure you want tax supported road workers to resue you. Have you ever heard: United States of America.......... all for one and one for all? Just accept teh fact that some needs tax supported airport and quit being me, me, me
I think people should pay for what they use. EAS should only be used in alaska. And can someone explain how unions have anything to do with EAS? ALSO everyone is saying yay and such, but guess what!?! they still haven't fixed the problem, they just added a few more weeks of funding, and then what?!?
Mark Duell 0
connor: The two issues holding up the reauth were EAS and a rule about voting unions in (majority of cast or eligible votes). Unrelated to each other.
preacher1 0
And regardless of which way you feel about the unions, only a small % of registered voters ever vote in a public election anyway, letting those that took the interest and do vote dictate how things will be. I personally don't feel like a labor election or any other type of election ought to be any different. Those that vote get counted. The others don't, and by not voting, you are saying you support the majority, whichever way it comes out
In the continental united states i think the EAS should be eliminated. if they want to fly out of the EAS airports, they should be prepared to pay higher prices.
@James Stewart & Wayne Bookout:

You assume that the people using the subsidy are tourists. That is not the case. Living in Vegas, I personally work with 3 people who live in Ely that fly to Vegas daily just to go to work. They fly in on a puddlehopper, go to work, and fly home to Ely.

The same can apply anywhere. Someone could live in Prescott, AZ, and work in Phoenix, or Scottsbluff, NE, and work in Denver.

So no, Reid didn't hold this hostage because of Ely, but Ely is a prime example; the question that had to be asked, was why did the Reds single out this in Blue states? did they not realize that this would kill subsidies for their state and constituents? Wendover, UT would be affected.. Same with Rapid City, SD, Rock Springs and Gillette, WY: 3 Red states. Also, in relation to jobs, which the Reds campaigned on (remember "Where are the jobs?"), do they not realize that they would be eliminating jobs instead creating them? Ely and others similar to it in EVERY state would effectively shut down, eliminating jobs there.

So They found a way around the Red's foot-stomping and grandstanding about it, LaHood is going to negate the cuts, and all is good.. Besides.. the Reds still need to justify how adding this $16.5m cut would have been better than the $30 million+ that was lost. Or are the people in those jobs just casualties of the cut?
Tom Bruce 0
some of these cities probably need air service but, one example on TV last week - a city in Maryland only 90 minutes from Baltimore by car - has ESA and subsidizes to the tune of $1000+ per seat -
That's MY money - all of this stuff comes out on my pocket and your pockets.....
preacher1 0
@Brad Littlejohn: Find one comment I made where I said I thought these people were tourists. As with Tom Pera, some may need it, but he gives a good example of those that don't in his comment, and there are several. All any of us are saying is that somebody needs to watch the henhouse and not just sit there assuming the teat won't ever run dry. That is what Mr. LaHood and Mr. Babbit need to do. As with a lot of other crap that goes on up in DC, some will say the EAS cost don't amount to much, but pennies make $.
it's not about the subsidies! which the Republicans clearly demonstrated by ripping out 25-30M/day of ticket funding and giving a 2 week tax holiday/bonus to the Airlines.
Wayne, you certainly imply it with the following:

"If you live in Nevada, you plan on going to Vegas or Reno to shop anyway,"
"Just like you live in Greenville MS. You are going to Jackson MS or Monroe LA or Memphis TN for your shopping."

My point is that no-one is just going to use these routes for shopping or any touristy type activity, especially when there is more to it than just that.

It is at least a 4 hour drive in any direction to the closest major airport to Ely (4 to Vegas, 4 to SLC, 7 to RNO). So some places like that definitely could use it. If it is a 60 - 90 mile drive from a major airport, I agree, get your butt in a car and drive. Funnily enough, there are no subsidized flights from SMF to CIC, and that's the same amount of time.

I honestly think that the Reds didn't think about the ramifications of this addition to the bill and did it just to spite and tow the TP line of foot stomping. In some cases, it could have been better that it did go through.. then the people who voted them in would see how much of the shaft they are getting from them, and would be voted out the next election year.
preacher1 0
Brad: there is definitely one thing here that we agree on if nothing else and that was what the ramnifications, or consequences might be a better term, would be. They were haggling over a few million and had there not have been action taken, they would have lost billions, not to mention what they actually did lose. All that went under the radar.
So, Brad, if you live in Ely your going to fly to Reno, rent a car and go shopping at Walmart and COSTCO? Right..... And pay all the extra baggage fee's for your purchases.

The gov't subsidy for each passenger departing Ely is $3,700.00. Do you really think that is a good expenditure?

Do you think that Ely subsidy would exist if "Horrible Harry, Nevada's Great Embarressment" was from No. Dakota instead of Nevada?

If it's imperative you have air service at your local airport I would recommend living somewhere other than Ely. Carl.. Sparks, NV

Did I say that people were going to fly over there just to go shopping? If you read what I posted, you'd see that I didn't.

The point of my post is that people use these flights just to get to work every day of the week. In my case, my coworkers fly into LAS from ELY just to drive to work in the north/northwest side of town from 8 - 6, then fly back out to head home.

I worked for a bank in Omaha, NE, that had a branch in Scottsbluff, that people in Greeley, CO, would drive to DEN to fly up to that branch.

I am sure that people in other states have the same situation going on. And does it matter that people singled out Nevada? Nebraska is a split state, with a blue and a Red for senators. Are you saying that people should move out of Scottsbluff and not have that bank there?

Should people get out of the mining business and move out of Gillette, WY, for the same reason (WY is a completely Red state)?

Same thing applies to Coeur d'Alene, ID, even though GEG is less than an hour from there, and ID is a completely Red state.

And I say once again.. would those other Senators be completely happy with the subsidy being gone, and being responsible for the elimination of the jobs provided to those airports?

It's easy to blame one person or one party for this, when the biggest issue is the people behind the potentially eliminated jobs at the airports. Try being the person that they voted for to represent them in Congress, and telling them with an honest face that they are no longer needed, that their job is gone, preventing them from providing for their families, because you decided the subsidy wasn't worth the money.

If you would be able to do that, you have a much colder heart than I; a trait I would gladly not have.
preacher1 0
Brad: I have a question, more curious than anything, but what is so good in Ely, NV that would make your friends want to live there and fly 253 miles into Vegas to work, AND, what pays them good enough in Vegas to allow them to afford to do it, even on a subsidized fare. Like I said, no argument, just curious. were they living/working this round before EAS?
If a person chooses to live in Ely and work in Vegas then that is their choice. But if they expect the gov't to subsidize an airline one penny (let alone $3,700.00 per passenger) then there's something wrong here. If I were the person who made those decisions I would do away with ALL subsidies. Sorry about your friend but society shouldn't be forced to pay so your friend can live where he wants at gov't expense.
Tom Bruce 0
subsidies come from us - the taxpayers - it's your money and my money that pay for them - isn't it better to have them work somewhere else - that generates income instead of living off income that the government takes from us?
Let's apply the principle of opportunity costs here. Eliminate those subsidies and use the money thereby released to begin to modernize the air traffic control system.
preacher1 0
Alfred: that makes more sense than anything posted here but that is logical and totally against the ways of DC
its about time, these goobers in washington do nothing more than try to make themselves look good half the time
Check out the site. The FET authorization "reinstates retroactively" the federal excise tax! Only the feds can first forbid the ailines (and charter operators) from collecting the tax and then make the return of the taxes RETROACTIVE!!! No wonder many of them simply raised the prices - this has happened before and they suspected it would happen again. How do you collect the taxes after the fact?
ken young 0
The taxpayer funded subsidies must be eliminated.
People may reside to live where they choose.
People should not expect others to help them pay for their air fares.


アカウントをお持ちではありませんか? 今すぐ登録(無料)!機能やフライトアラート、その他様々な設定をカスタマイズできます!