November 2010 Archives

The outcry among air travelers and civil libertarians over the Transportation Security Administration's new backscatter imaging machines and, shall we say, intimate pat-downs has centered on whether the new policies are too invasive. But it has obscured a more important question: are they effective? The New York Times started an online discussion last week about whether the new body scanners make us safer. Let's continue that discussion here this week, also reflecting on the pat-downs. Should John Pistole, the TSA administrator, continue to defend the changes against critics? Or do we need to completely rethink airline security?

The less-noticed victims of the enhanced screening are everyday aviation and security personnel. How are their daily lives affected? Are we now asking too much of them?

At the risk of beating a dead horse, let me restate the obvious: We all know that the highway trust fund is insufficient to maintain the country's current transportation infrastructure, let alone improve it. Lawmakers would be more than happy to bolster spending for highways, railroads, and bridges if only they could make the dollars materialize out of thin air. Meanwhile, economists and transportation-related business and labor groups all seem to land at the same answer for raising the money--a fuel tax increase, either per gallon or per miles traveled. Last week, the chairmen of President Obama's bipartisan debt commission proposed a 15-cent per-gallon gas tax hike to fully fund highway infrastructure. A few days before the draft debt commission outline was released, Sens. Tom Carper, D-Del., and George Voinovich, R-Ohio, proposed a 25-cent-per-gallon gas tax increase.

Yet the idea of a fuel tax hike can't even get off the ground in Congress. Republican leaders have outright rejected it, even though they generally agree that infrastructure investment is among the more efficient ways to spur job growth.

How can this impasse be resolved? Are there ways to present a fuel tax to the public such that it doesn't seem so onerous? Can a fuel tax be packaged with other revenue raisers that are more popular with Republicans (say, unused stimulus funds) to make it go down easier? How important is the involvement of the White House in selling a fuel tax? And finally, are there other ways to pay for infrastructure that don't involve a fuel tax at all?

17 responses: Tom Madigan, Robert L. Darbelnet, Emil H. Frankel, Emil H. Frankel, Laura Barrett, Jack Kinstlinger, William Millar, Gabriel Roth, Keith Laughlin, Terry O’Sullivan, Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., Fawn Johnson, Patrick J. Natale, P.E., David A. Raymond, Greg Cohen, John Horsley, Gabriel Roth

The transportation community lost one of its policymaking giants in last week's midterm elections when House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman James Oberstar, D-Minn., was defeated by Republican challenger Chip Cravaack after 18 terms in office. An affable gentleman with almost unparalleled influence in the transportation world, Oberstar will leave a big void in talks for the next surface transportation reauthorization. "That's an earth-shaker," said next year's presumptive committee chairman, Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., when National Journal interviewed him after the election.

Oberstar was only the chairman of the committee for four years, and he never got the chance to complete the highway reauthorization process that he began with Mica over a year ago. His contributions to transportation policy over the years include, but aren't limited to, his chairmanship of the Aviation Subcommittee from 1989 to 1995 and as a powerful ranking member of the full committee after that.

As the dust settles and questions swirl about what happens next, it is an appropriate time to take a breath and look back. What role (or roles) did Oberstar play in setting transportation policy as we now know it? What unique characteristics did he bring to the table? Next year during committee talks, how will staffers and lawmakers complete this sentence: "Jim Oberstar would have ______________"?

And last but not least... who has amusing Oberstar stories?

25 responses: Fawn Johnson, Rebecca Kaplan, Theresa Poulson, Rebecca Kaplan, Rebecca Kaplan, Tom Madigan, Fawn Johnson, Rep. Jerry Costello, D-Ill., William Millar, Roger A. Wentz, CAE, Ken Orski, Emil H. Frankel, Mortimer L. Downey, Keith Laughlin, Robert L. Darbelnet, Gabriel Roth, Laura Barrett, Paul Rinaldi, James P. Hoffa, Ed Wytkind, John Horsley, Jeffrey Shane, Geraldine Knatz, Rebecca Kaplan, Jacqueline Gillan

Friday's foiled terrorist attack, in which explosive-laden packages were removed from two commercial cargo flights, put air and cargo industries in the national spotlight. Will it help or hurt?

In the "help" column, the packages were discovered during a routine cargo screening, which prompted several non-routine screens of other planes and at least one cargo truck. The system worked. In the "hurt" column, potentially dangerous incidents like this one prompt a range of inquiries from lawmakers and the public about how the industry operates. At a minimum, that means the Transportation Security Administration and companies like FedEx and United Parcel Service will have to respond, costing time and money.

When the dust settles on this story, how will the air and cargo industries be viewed by policymakers and the public? Does the increased attention create an opportunity for transportation stakeholders to push a public policy agenda with Congress and the administration? What should the industry ask lawmakers to do? What should government, air, and cargo executives avoid in responding to the crisis?

4 responses: Greg Principato, Fawn Johnson, Bob Poole, Fawn Johnson