Robert L. Crandall

The public will always focus on what is visible, accessible and fixable.

To whom do you complain about traffic congestion? What can you do about failing bridges? No one knows, letters to Congress elicit only form letters, and we all know that political deals of every ilk, involving a hundred other priorities take precedence over clear but non-compelling issues like maintaining our infrastructure.

But long waits at airport security, delayed and cancelled flights and a TSA that seems utterly unresponsive to either opinion or science are problems attributable to known players. In addition to writing our Representative and Senators, we can complain directly to the airport manager, we can grouse at the ticket agents, we can write or call our airline's CEO. Missing a meeting when the weather is perfect at both origin and destination, sitting on the tarmac for two hours when the sun is shining, vectoring for an hour and a half in clear weather -- these are soluble problems that impact travelers and commerce in meaningful ways. So we scream louder than we do about many o

This is a great question, which underscores the disconnect, common throughout society, of problems that impact a great many but have no focused constituency and problems that impact relatively few but have a closely focused constituency. The former problems tend to be ignored, while the latter get solved.

Traffic congestion is a fine illustration, as is food safety. Traffic congestion impacts almost everyone, wastes enormous amounts of energy and costs the economy vast amounts when measured by lost productive time. I think almost everyone cares deeply about food safety. But because there is no way for individual citizens to focus on how to reduce traffic congestion, and because the mechanics of how to assure food safety are not part of most people’s daily life, politicians ignore both.

These problems exist primarily because we have no integrated planning mechanism. Congress recently passed a major change to the food safety laws, which those in Congress opposed to regulation regard as overreaching. In the current climate, that has made it easy fo

Plane subsidies vs. buses – are you kidding?

This week’s question is one of the world’s true no brainers.

Yes, bus service will take a bit longer than a flight – but that’s before figuring into the math the time to get through TSA security and the time required to get to the airport early to be sure that today is not the day there is some crisis which will cause you to miss the plane.

The nation decided, back in 1978, that it prefers lower prices on most flights to supporting an integrated pattern of equivalent service under the terms of which long haul flights subsidiz underutilized short haul flights in the name of ubiquitous service. While the public’s opinion is quite clear, politicians have refused to recognize that judgment. Instead, they have raised all sorts of nonsensical arguments to the effect that service to small airports somehow essential to the American dream and have perpetuated subsidies for those services. The reality is that subsidies for service to small and remote airports is nothing

On September 30, unless Congress acts to extend it, the 18.4 cent Federal gasoline tax will expire. It’s hard to imagine an overt act more immediately damaging to our economy or more inconsistent with our long term economic needs.

The tax, which has not been raised since 1983, is clearly inadequate. In 2008, the Highway Trust fund – which is the fund intended to support transportation improvements in the U. S. – ran out of money. Spending from the Trust Fund has exceeded revenues since 2002. Although Congress has plugged the gap with revenues from the General fund, it has failed to come up with an integrated plan – and a funding program –to assure adequate maintenance of our existing assets and provide the improvements needed to assure competitive capabilities in the years ahead.

Allowing the gasoline tax to lapse would, among other things:

· Encourage people to drive more, thus worsening the already severe congestion that irritates us all – and costs more than $100 billion annually in extra fuel costs.

&mi

The FAA’s plight – and that of the 4,000 people now without incomes, as well as that of passengers and airlines inconvenienced and out of pocket due to the Congressional failure to act – is another commentary on the unhappy triumph of ideology over common sense.

Hopefully, everyone outside the beltway that understands the situation – and they are probably few, since there is little if any of either truth or explanation in press reports – knows that the reason FAA does not have the funds it needs to function has nothing whatever to do with the FAA and everything to do with ideological positions regarding unions and support for service to small communities.

The largest point of contention, apparently, is the recent decision by the National Mediation Board to change the way in which votes are counted in elections to determine whether a union should be certified. For decades prior to 2010, unions were required to get at least 50% of the total population to vote in favor of unionization; non-voters, were, in effect, counted as “no&