I haven't followed this story very closely, because it made no sense to me. It still doesn't, but I am going to try to figure it out.
The Daily Caller posted an article yesterday explaining what is going on with the Federal Aviation.Administration. The article explains that some Washington lawmakers are refusing to extend the Federal Aviation Administration's authorization because they want subsidies to empty airports to continue at their current rate. It is an incredible coincidence that some of these small airports receiving the subsidies are the very airports some of the Congressmen use to commute between Washington and their home districts. For example, taxpayers have been spending over $3,700 per passenger for the 471 passengers who used Ely airport (Nevada).
The House of Representatives has already passed an extension which includes capping the subsidy at no more than $1,000 per passenger. That change to the law will result in millions of dollars of savings each year.
Originally the authorization bill was held up due to union opposition. The unions were opposed to this bill because it undoes a change made by President Obams's National Mediation Board (NMB) that said that the majority of workers in a company were not needed to form a union--all that was needed was a majority of the people voting. This rule was changed to make it easier to unionize, undoing a law that has been in place since FDR. The House of Representatives passed an FAA authorization bill which returned union voting to what it has been since FDR. The unions objected.
The article at the Daily Caller concludes:
"The rational approach starts with passing the extension with spending cuts. Congress should then come together, pass the reauthorization legislation and reverse the NMB's unfair rule change so airline and railroad workers aren't forced into unions they otherwise would not freely join."
I am not totally convinced that Congress is capable of rational.
Leave a comment