Testimony
March 21, 2007
Statement of Dan Elwell, Assistant Administrator for Aviation Policy, Planning, and Environment
Before the House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Aviation on FAA's Finances
Chairman Costello, Congressman Petri, members of the subcommittee.
Thank you. Thank you for putting the spotlight this morning on the state of the FAA’s finances. While this is my first appearance at a congressional hearing — and it’s an honor to be here — I recognize that I’ve been invited primarily to listen to the views of others, including my fellow panelists, the DOT Inspector General, and the GAO. Their views and the views of other witnesses here today, are vital to the current debate over our legislation.
You know, I’ve spent close to two decades in one cockpit or another. I’ve flown military aircraft around the world and I’ve had the pleasure of flying lawmakers home to their districts.
No matter who or what I’ve transported, the point is to get there safely and on time. Nobody wants to be late.
Yet without the funding provided by our legislation, there will be no NextGen system in time to prevent gridlock in the skies.
Without the program flexibility, financial stability and beneficial budget treatment that our bill brings, our plans to use satellite technology to control air traffic will likely just limp along while congestion races ahead. We have to plan for the future now.
In the meantime, the FAA is making headway in reducing delays on a variety of fronts. For example, in just the last year alone, we’ve added new runways at five of our busiest airports. They include Atlanta Hartsfield, Boston Logan and St. Louis Lambert.
Together, those runways will account for thousands and thousands of additional takeoffs and landings. But pouring concrete, while important, isn’t the only answer. We have to get started on NextGen now.
Our bill will help put the infrastructure together, piece by piece. NextGen is an enormous undertaking, and it’s not just going to drop into place just like that. It’s going to take time and money to make this system of tomorrow a reality. Everyone has a stake in this endeavor, so naturally we feel everyone should help make it come about.
It’s all about fairness and balance. Yet, if you look at how the Trust Fund is structured today, and who’s paying what, you’ll find that it’s mostly one-sided. And we at the FAA don’t think that’s fair.
At last week’s hearing, it became clear that this issue of balance is very important to this subcommittee. We agree. And we believe that our proposal strikes the balance that’s been missing in aviation financing for the last three decades.
Our measure stands on two principles. First, the revenue that we collect should be tied directly to the costs of providing the services. Second, everyone who uses our services should pay their fair share. These principles come straight out of Business 101 here.
At last week’s hearing, several Members talked about the importance of equity in funding FAA. Frankly, without implementing these concepts, equity will not exist. It certainly does not exist today. Administrator Blakey has talked about how the current funding system treats the guy flying on a commercial flight in seat 22b: the passenger in the middle seat on a crowded flight at the end of a long day. We all know him. You represent him. You have been him; we have all been him. Right now that guy is subsidizing the corporate CEO flying in the company jet and, yes, the general aviation pilot flying his Cessna as well. He is the most overtaxed individual in the system. The Administrator has compared this to sitting in a restaurant and being asked to pay for the meal of the party at the next table. It doesn’t make sense in a restaurant and it shouldn’t make sense in aviation.
That’s because commercial aviation foots 95 percent of the bill, even though they use 73 percent of our services. General aviation, on the other hand, uses 16 percent, but pays just 3 percent into the Trust Fund.
This inequity becomes all the more glaring as our airspace braces for one billion passengers by 2015. Year after year, passenger numbers and General Aviation activity are rising at a record-setting pace. Last year, we had 741 million travelers. Tops so far, but it won’t be that way for long. We set another record in 2006 — delays. More than 490,000 flights didn’t takeoff or land on time. From the looks of things so far, 2007 isn’t shaping up any better.
It doesn’t have to be like this. Under our reform proposal, we’ll be able to implement our NextGen transformation efforts a lot faster than under the current system. To get there, we need everyone — commercial and GA operators — to pay for the costs that they impose on the system.
I appreciate that change is hard and the known is comfortable. But this concept of paying for what you use isn’t a new one. I think it’s even harder to justify an exception for aviation when you realize how much our nation depends on flying.
The next six months are pivotal. With the current financing structure expiring in September, we have to get this right the first time.
Once again, I appreciate this subcommittee bringing this situation to everyone’s attention, and I look forward to a fair hearing on our proposal. Thank you for inviting me to participate today. And I’ll be happy to answer your questions.
