The Nov. 24 editorial “Privatize air traffic control” did not mention the troubling realities about the flaws in other countries’ privatized air traffic control models.
For example, the International Civil Aviation Organization found that Canada’s safety oversight of its privatized system, NAV Canada, has been significantly degraded since 2005 and now ranks below most other Group of Seven countries in key safety categories.
Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy has proposed a better alternative with bipartisan support in Congress to modernize air traffic control. It would add thousands of new controllers and invest in facilities and equipment, including new fiber, cellular and satellite communication systems.
This plan, combined with bipartisan legislation gaining momentum in Congress that would shield the Federal Aviation Administration from future funding lapses, is the best path forward. A bill that allows the agency to draw from funds already paid into the system by aviation users would provide the funding stability the agency needs to preserve safety, maintain operational integrity and ensure that critical aviation functions continue without disruption.
In short, modernization combined with funding continuity will usher in a new era of air transportation, ensuring that America’s aviation system remains the gold standard in decades to come.
Ed Bolen, Nick Daniels and David Spero, Washington
Ed Bolen is president and CEO of the National Business Aviation Association. Nick Daniels is president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. David Spero is president of the Professional Aviation Safety Specialists.
Unpacking a ‘sleepy’ case
Alaska Attorney General Stephen J. Cox’s Nov. 26 op-ed, “This ‘sleepy’ Supreme Court case could change Americans’ lives,” argued that lawsuits filed by several Louisiana parishes against oil companies are “an attempt to reshape national policy through state courts.” They are nothing of the kind. The only policy question at issue is whether oil companies are above the law or must obey it.
The substantive issue is the industry’s role in Louisiana’s loss of more than 2,000 square miles of land between 1932 and 2016. Though this loss has multiple causes, the industry’s own studies concede they have caused much of it. Consultants to the American Petroleum Institute ascribed 34 percent of the land loss in the mid-1970s to oil companies, and a study by the Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association, the trade association for major oil companies, concluded in 1989 that canals dredged by industry were “the overwhelming cause” of land loss at the sites studied. The Louisiana lawsuits are specific and limited to such sites.
The only question is whether the companies are liable for the damage they caused: Not only did the companies injure property, but they also routinely ignored restrictions that permits placed on them. For example, internal company documents warned executives that company operations were “flagrant violations of the law.”
The cases are simple. They were filed in state courts under state causes of action. The Federal District Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, the most conservative and oil-friendly in the country, agreed the case under consideration should remain in state court. The only national issue that these lawsuits raise is the principle that no one is above the law.
John M. Barry, New Orleans
The writer served on Louisiana’s Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority and the Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Authority.
Alaska Attorney General Stephen J. Cox warned that Louisiana’s lawsuit against energy companies has “nationwide implications” and must move to federal court. His warning, however, seems to apply only when Alaska isn’t the one suing.
Cox fears that “a handful of activists” will destroy the national energy sector using state courts. Yet for 15 years, Alaska itself fought a massive royalty dispute, Amerada Hess Pipeline v. Alaska, in state court. That case focused on oil from Prudhoe Bay, a critical national resource, and resulted in a $600 million settlement that hugely affected oil companies. By Cox’s own definition, this case had a profound nationwide impact. Yet Alaska fought hard to keep it local.
The oil producers tried to move the case to federal court, arguing that Alaska’s state court would be biased because the massive settlement would directly boost Alaskan residents’ annual Permanent Fund dividends. Alaska successfully blocked that effort.
Now, Cox says other states should be stopped from using their own courts the same way to sue companies over environmental damage.
He argues that major energy projects won’t “get financed” if they can be financially ruined by a state court decision. But the Amerada Hess case proved that Alaskan state courts are perfectly able to slap energy producers with staggering financial penalties.
The rule should be consistent: Either all states can use their own courts for major energy battles or none can. Alaska doesn’t get to play by different rules.
Matthew Tushman, Oak Park, Illinois
Cheers to the Juliets
I’m 73, so I read the Nov. 29 front-page article “For active minds, age may be just a number” with interest. Here’s my strategy. Every night, I handwrite my diary in cursive. I also drive a manual transmission car. Belonging to a stimulating book club no doubt helps my brain. We call ourselves the Juliets (Just Us Ladies Intellectually Engaged Together). So far, so good.
Carol Goodloe, Arlington
The post U.S. needs to modernize air traffic control. Here’s how. appeared first on Washington Post.
