Administration Proposes Privatization of Air Traffic Control to Kick Off ‘Infrastructure Week’

The administration has declared this "Infrastructure Week" and first on their list is a proposal to privatize air traffic control.

The idea of privatizing air traffic control is not a new one. The Washington Post notes that the airline industry has been pushing for privatization since the 1980’s. Under the Clinton administration the idea of spinning air traffic operations off from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to a government corporation was raised, but was killed by congressional opposition.

More recently, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Bill Shuster (R-PA) proposed legislation last year to privatize air traffic control similar to the model in Canada. According to the Post:

"Many countries have created government-owned corporations, independent government agencies or quasi-governmental entities. Canada is the only country to create what is clearly a private nonprofit air-traffic corporation. NavCanada can raise private capital, make long-term financial commitments, and it recently lowered the fees it charges airlines.”

Schuster’s legislation met lukewarm support in the House, not even managing to make it to a floor vote. There was stronger opposition in the Senate. The administration, however, has pointed to Schuster’s legislation as "a starting point for their efforts".

Supporters of privatization point to budgetary concerns and a lack of flexibility to stay on pace with emerging technologies. They want to remove air traffic operations from annual federal budget wrangling, which makes it difficult to acquire adequate capital for system upgrades and makes air traffic controllers subject to furloughs along with other federal employees in the event of a government shutdown.

The National Air Traffic Controllers Association endorsed Shuster’s legislation after securing assurances that wages, benefits and collective bargaining rights would be protected.

Opponents of the legislation say there’s no evidence that a private corporation, which would be run primarily by airlines, would provide any better service. Major U.S. airlines have suffered major computer outages in recent years that have brought air travel to a standstill, grounding thousands of flights and stranding tens of thousands of passengers.

The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service published a report last month asserting there was no significant difference between the various models for organizing air traffic control operations- government-run, quasi-governmental corporation or private entity, in terms of productivity, cost-effectiveness, service quality, and safety and security.

The FAA’s program to update air traffic technology, called NextGen, has been in progress for a more than a decade. It was originally proposed to be completed by 2025, though now officials refer to the effort as "ongoing". Privatization supporters seek greater speed and flexibility to incorporate constantly evolving technology.

But the Post points to FAA Administrator Michael Huerta who recently noted "tremendous progress", with the department poised to switch from ground-based radar to GPS surveillance. The switch is expected to save time and fuel and lower greenhouse gas emissions. Huerta has predicted $13 billion in benefits to the government and aircraft operators by 2020, with greater gains after that.

Even consistent NextGen critics, like Calvin Scovel, the Transportation Department’s inspector general, agree that the system as it stands is not broken. So it comes down to whether or not lawmakers believe this essential part of U.S. infrastructure should be privatized. If it is, it would be one of the largest transfers of government assets in history- 300 towers and other flight tracking centers and about 35,000 workers would be part of the deal.

Should air traffic control operations be privatized? Us the Take Action button to tell your reps what you think!

Take Action

— Asha Sanaker

(Photo Credit: Wikimedia / Creative Commons)