Contributing Editors

Jerome Lyle Rappaport

Jerome Lyle Rappaport
Founder and Board Member
Read Bio

Edward Glaeser

Edward Glaeser
Professor of Economics at Harvard University
Read Bio

Stephen P. Johnson

Stephen P. Johnson
Executive Director of Phyllis and Jerome Lyle Rappaport Foundation
Read Bio

Greg Massing

Greg Massing
Executive Director for the Rappaport Center for Law and Public Service
Read Bio

Alasdair Roberts

Alasdair Roberts
Professor of Law and Public Policy at Suffolk University Law School
Read Bio

Joseph Curtatone

Joseph Curtatone
Mayor, City of Somerville
Read Bio

Tim H. Davis

Tim H. Davis
Independent Research Consultant
Read Bio

Scott Harshbarger

Scott Harshbarger
Senior Counsel, Proskauer Rose LLP
Read Bio

Vivien Li

Vivien Li
Executive Director of The Boston Harbor Association
Read Bio

Guest contributors

Monika Bandyopadhyay
Suffolk University Law Student

David Barron
Harvard Law School and former Deputy Counsel for the Office of Legal Counsel in the US Department of Justice

Linda Bilmes
Senior lecturer in public policy at the Harvard Kennedy School. Assistant Secretary of Commerce during the Clinton Administration.

Brandy H.M. Brooks
Director, Rudy Bruner Award for Urban Excellence, Bruner Foundation

Felicia Cote
Rappaport Fellow, Harvard Law School/Harvard Kennedy School.

Amanda Eden
Suffolk University Law School student

Sara Farnum
Student, Suffolk Univ. Law School

Kristin Faucette
Student at Suffolk University Law School

Benjamin Forman
Research Director, MassINC

Arthur Hardy-Doubleday
JD/MBA student at Suffolk University Law School and the Sawyer School of Business

Theodore Kalivas
Boston Green Blog, Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy

David Linhart
Student, Boston University School of Law

Antoniya Owens
Research Analyst, Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.

Susan Prosnitz
Senior Advisor, TSA, Washington, DC

Ben Thomas
Boston Green Blog, Dukakis Center for Urban & Regional Policy

Matthew Todaro
Student at Boston College Law School

Alexander von Hoffman
Senior Researcher, Joint Center for Housing Studies

Brett Walker
Student, Boston College Law School

Margarita Warren
Student at Suffolk University Law School

Free the FAA: Accident Prevention & Safety Should Be the Agency’s Only Job

Friday, August 12th, 2011
By Edward Glaeser

Reprinted from The Boston Globe 8.11.2011

The Federal Aviation Administration does a fine job at its main duty - making air travel safe. But it’s is also involved with a lot of things it shouldn’t be, from disputes about unionization to subsidies for rural airports. If Americans want to keep flying safely, Congress must free the FAA from obligations unrelated to preventing accidents.

The agency got back to work recently after a two-week, politically charged shutdown that had nothing to do with safety. To continue some operations related to planning and maintaining airports, the FAA needed new authorization from Congress. But the Senate initially balked at a House plan that also capped “essential air service’’ subsidies to rural airports at $1,000 per passenger. Some Senate Democrats also opposed a House plan that, by reversing a pro-union ruling last year by the National Mediation Board, would make it harder for workers on airport projects to organize.

As a policy matter, lawmakers should limit subsidies; anyone who worries about carbon emissions should be apoplectic that the government is bribing people over $1,000 each to take another flight. It’s also legitimate for Congress to question rulings by the National Mediation Board. Yet neither issue is relevant to air traffic safety, and FAA reauthorization should never be tied to such matters.

Most air travel is quite safe. Fatal accidents in air carriers now occur once in every 10 million flight hours - less than a third of the rate 20 years ago. The death rate is about 100 times higher in general aviation, which includes private planes. (Lowering that death rate would require tougher restrictions on recreational flying.) But air safety in all its forms might be compromised by a Washington donnybrook over unrelated matters. We can avoid that if the FAA becomes only a safety regulator, whose funding and operations are uncoupled from other issues of air travel.

What would a dedicated Federal Air Safety Administration look like? Like today’s FAA, it would have plenty of inspectors, who would oversee the construction and maintenance of infrastructure and equipment. It would continue to run the air traffic control system, and develop programs like NextGen, which uses new technologies to improve air safety.

But unlike today’s FAA, a safety-only agency would not subsidize airports or flying. The current budget requests over $3.5 billion in grants to individual airports. That’s unwise; let airports charge their users enough to pay their own costs. Furthermore, a safety-dedicated agency would not punish airlines for flight delays. If we want to punish airlines for bad service, let some other arm of the Department of Transportation handle that. Nor would this agency help design so-called “Aerotropolises’’ - big commercial clusters around major airports. Today, the FAA does this by helping to connect highways and airports. Let local authorities handle such planning.

The FAA also needs a new way to pay for its operations: a fee based on the cost of regulating airlines, rather than the current ticket tax. A Southwest flight creates the same risks as a flight by a more expensive carrier. Why should that discount airline pay less for safety? Instead, the FAA could charge flight fees that differ by distance, airplane size, and other factors that determine risk and cost.

Before 1978, when the Civil Aeronautics Board kept prices uniform, a ticket tax was essentially the same thing as a flight-based safety fee. But today, when there are vast differences in ticket prices along similar routes, it makes little sense to charge low-price carriers less for their safety costs. Moreover, since the ticket tax is more like a standard tax than a user fee, it encourages Congress and the public to think the FAA should, like other tax-funded agencies, do everything it can to serve the general welfare. If the FAA is funded exclusively by a cost-based safety fee, it won’t be seen as having pot of money that can be used to subsidize pet causes.

The FAA shutdown, like the near default of the United States, is a crisis that calls for institutional reforms to create a more professional, more effective government. One such reform is eliminating unnecessary distractions from the FAA, and giving it one focus - air safety - and a more stable, more sensible source of money.



Comments

No comments have been added.

(required, but never shown publicly)

» Show all posts

Arianna Huffington and Alan Khazei speaking at the Rappaport Center
Gov. Deval Patrick speaking at the Rappaport Center's Gubernatorial Speakers Series
Triumph of the City: Ed Glaeser talks about his new book on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Mayor Menino attends Marshall-Brennan Constitutional Literacy Course for high school students
Former Lt. Governor Kerry Healey speaks about political parity at the Rappaport Center
Statnet panel of current and former heads of local performance management programs including Stephanie Hirsch (far right), former head of SomerStat and Devin Lyons-Quirk, third from right.
U.S. Representative Barney Frank speaking at the Harvard Kennedy School, cosponsored by the Rappaport Institute.
 MA Attorney General Martha Coakley Hearing on Sexual Exploitation Online
HKS Professor Jeffrey Liebman (left) spoke about new ways to spur policy innovation at a State House briefing sponsored by State Representative (and former Rappaport Urban Scholar) Charles Murphy (right).

News and Events


Add your Event

Word Cloud