Fri, Sep 30, 2011
Carriers Say Anti-Terrorism Costs Are Taxpayers'
Responsibility
The airline industry, which two years ago was an active
proponent of user fees for general aviation, now finds itself on
the defensive against an Obama administration proposal to jack up
its own user fees by 50 percent to cover bloated airport security
costs. The proposal may bring a more serious look at the
cost/benefit of what is commonly called "security theater."
The administration's expressed goal is to aid in deficit
reduction by making airline passengers pay for 75 percent of the
cost of security, up from the current 50 percent. But the airlines
argue that it's not fair to single out their industry for that
burden, any more than it would be fair to add a security fee to the
prices of boxcutters, shoes or underpants.
Steve Lott of the Air Transport Association tells the
New York Times, "No other mode of
transportation bears the cost of security like the aviation
industry and its passengers. Security should be a federal function,
and it should be funded as such."
Lott also questions oversight of security spending. "The amount
of money that the industry and its passengers have paid to fund
security has soared 50 percent since 2002. Congress has a
responsibility to scrutinize how the money is being spent."
Stephen Lord is director of homeland security issues at the
Government Accountability Office, and backs up Lott's concern. He
notes the infamous air puffer machines which had to be scrapped
because they didn't work, and the $750 million spent on training
and deploying specialized officers to conduct behavioral screening
at airports with no solid evidence the tactic was effective. He
tells the Times, "Usually you validate a concept and then you field
it, but they deployed the program and then they started validating
it, which we have some concerns about."
Bob Poole, director of transportation studies for The Reason
Foundation, says he supports the premise of shifting security costs
from taxpayers to travelers, and predicts it will bring more
attention to excesses in spending on security.
In the meantime, the airlines are on the same page with general
aviation on at least one issue - fighting the President's proposed
$100 per-takeoff user fee on flights using air traffic control
services.
More News
Runway Lead-in Light System Runway Lead-in Light System Consists of one or more series of flashing lights installed at or near ground level that provides positive visual guidance a>[...]
Aero Linx: Aviation Without Borders Aviation Without Borders uses its aviation expertise, contacts and partnerships to enable support for children and their families – at hom>[...]
Dave Juwel's Aviation Marketing Stories ITBOA BNITBOB ... what does that mean? It's not gibberish, it's a lengthy acronym for "In The Business Of Aviation ... But Not In The Busine>[...]
From 2010 (YouTube Version): Yeah.... This IS A Really Cool Job When ANN's Nathan Cremisino took over the lead of our Aero-TV teams, he knew he was in for some extra work and a lot>[...]
Also: Junkers A50 Heritage, Montaer Grows, Dynon-Advance Flight Systems, Vans' Latest Officially, the Carbon Cub UL and Rotax 916 iS is now in its 'market survey development phase'>[...]