O'Hare's Airport expansion bill, The National Aviation Expansion Act, HR. 3479, turned out to be no "slam dunk" after all. Falling short of a two-thirds majority needed to pass, the 247 to 143 defeat caught supporters of the bill off guard..

Opponents, conservative, Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL) and liberal Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-IL) thought there was too much complacency at the other end of the court; though proponents of the expansion exclaimed a temporary loss will have no impact. The bill can still rebound on the floor for future approval.

The game plan from the seemingly mismatched dissenters was not to get beat at the boards by their opponents fast-tracking the controversial bill. Hyde and Jackson's on-floor strategy of proclaiming procedural bungling worked in the short term.

Hyde, whose district abuts O'Hare, exerted considerable clout in swaying the outcome of the House vote. He believes jamming will increase the numbers of flights into O'Hare, even with new runways, it won't solve the overcrowding problem at O'Hare-- but only delay inevitable congestion. Hyde supports the creation of a third suburban airport in Peotone; this option was dropped from the current bill in order to make it palatable to a ranking member of the Transportation n Committee.

Hyde contends that nearby communities act as a "buffer" for O'Hare's toxic pollutants. He says that an increase in numbers of flights reduces the margin of safety for both passengers and the residents of surrounding communities, as well as destroying possibly more than 1,500 homes of residents who surround the airport.

Hyde foresees serious accidents with overcrowded airspace; he also contends that a larger airport that's not locked in by development would be less expensive to build, safer, with more competition and more traveler choices.

A bill that preempts states rights to control and develop airports by political subdivisions, is according to Hyde unconstitutional. A bill that doesn't benefit air travelers, proposes an environmentally flawed plan, disregards a margin of safety for passengers and residents, and sets federal precedent for other states, is a bill that benefits the airlines and big business only.

According to a May 2002 article in Aviation Week's, Aviation Daily, United Airlines CEO, Jack Creighton, lobbied U.S. senators for the passage of the Chicago O'Hare expansion bill. United employees filled the office of Sen. Peter Fitzgerald (R-Ill.) with tens of thousands of e-mails and faxes supporting O'Hare's "modernization." United and American Airlines monopolize O'Hare traffic with restricted routes and higher airfares. The GAO estimates $623 million in fare overcharges to Chicago area travelers each year. Is this a set up to subsidize American and United?

If the bill passes, the National Environmental Policy Act that protects our environment would be violated because the bill mandates airport expansion and excludes environmental procedures and alternative plans. Passage would also require the City of Chicago agree to a federal takeover, would assign land, rights-of-way, easements, and other property to make the expansion at O'Hare possible. State jurisdiction would then pass into the hands of the federal government, a tactic that will completely eliminate local leadership and control.

Game's on. Opponents of expansion are blocking/filibustering business dominance, which is playing its dirtiest game. When their usual style won't rack up points, convention and rules are insurrected, and the bench is ill-matched like the "fortress hub practices of major airlines" vying for monopolization of routes and territory, the game's out-of-control. With the perceptual momentum now in the state's court, can they retain the exclusivity of their constitutional power?

Media Contact:
Vicki Pellar-Price
www.talktrans.com
transportationtalk@yahoo.com

Bigger O'Hare Bill means precedent setting elimination of environmental and local control for thousands of communities with airports
Press Release--July 15, 2002--For Immediate Release

Without question, it is the hope of all Americans that our national representatives approach broad reaching national issues with home-town regard and responsibility. Runways backing up to our yards, destruction of thousands of homes, neighborhoods and businesses to fulfill capacity in an uncertain climate of aviation decline, doesn't exactly denote home-grown accountability.

HR 3479 is being considered on the House floor today, Monday, July 15, 2002. The question is did you know about it? The answer is probably not. Is it important enough for every community to vote on it? You bet.

Backers of the bill who support expansion at O'Hare International Airport are a contingency including: a Republican governor, a Democratic Chicago Mayor and Democratic and Republican leaders in the Illinois state legislature; they say it will be an easy victory today in the U.S. House.

The National Aviation Capacity Expansion Act of 2002, Senate bill, S. 2039, and House companion bill HR 3479 will "obliterate" normal permitting and regulatory hurdles according to Illinois Sen. Peter Fitzgerald (R) who vows to filibuster the bill.

Resisting passage, Reps. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.), Phil Crane (R-Ill.) and Rep. Jerry Weller (R-ILL) argue that the legislation would interfere with states' rights and set a precedent for Congress to intervene in local disputes over airport development across the nation.

This afternoon Rep. Jerry Weller strongly urged his colleagues to vote against HR 3479 because it interferes with states' rights. Rep. Weller also pointed out the danger of trying to land planes while pouring concrete. Adding, or even just maintaining, the enormous number of flights coming into O'Hare while constructing newly designed runways is an accident in the making. Yet, the glaring problem has not been fully addressed. Instead, this Congress is holding its breath hoping a worst case scenario will not happen on their watch.

Minnesota's own, Jim Oberstar, was sent in to pinch hit for the bill on the House floor today, saying O'hare will double flights and how the entire nation depends on O'hare expanding. According to Oberstar, this is now an International issue. He said the economic benefits will outweigh the costs. Though he couldn't and wouldn't address the real costs, health or environmental concerns.

All that touting, in spite of uncertainties in airline security, investment shortfalls, a jittery economy, tourism in descent and the snub of rail, expansion prevails and aviation continues to fast track through ceremonious political rigmarole.

The Illinois community has implored local legislators to go a lesser course and not expedite environmental reviews-- but instead take a more responsible approach to fulfilling efficiency when considering numbers of operations are down and predictions are undeterminable. Yet their pleas have fallen on deaf ears and a quick passage procedure, that fast-tracks supposed non-controversial measures, is supported by the leadership of both political parties in the House. This procedure limits debate, but requires only a two-thirds vote in favor of the legislation to pass the bill.

The results for other local communities around the nation with airports are obvious. What's also obvious is that local community leaders who have co-sponsored and signed on to these bills, have ultimately brought on a likely outcome, that includes obtrusive ramifications on local controls to their own constituencies. The bill harkens less local control, more government intervention, fewer transportation choices, and negative environmental and public health consequences to thousands of communities.

In the present political and business climate of unaccountability, our votes, which in national polls indicate a preference toward alternative transportation choices, are not being heeded, like our investments and retirement security are not being safeguarded. While the airlines, CEOs and mega corporations are salivating over their billions, Amtrak and public bank accounts are parched for spare change. Our current fiscal woes are the by-product of irresponsible management, greed and disingenuous corporate and government interference in the public realm. What elected leaders need is a slackened leash, less licking face and more voter approval on issues with such far-reaching and ingressive consequences.

The Bill of Rights, Amendment X, says, " The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. The National Aviation Capacity Expansion Act of 2002 would prevent future Illinois governors from using their authority to veto airport developments and block future expansion plans setting a precedent for the entire nation.

It's no wonder confidence in government officials is so low, even with political prognosticators and analysts, because government is as scandalous as corporate America with disposable and interchangeable ethics and merchandisable and commerceable outcomes benefiting the few.

Senator Daschle and Rep. Gephardt have said that "Congress should be by the people, for the people." This byline was espoused during the Enron hearings. However, upholding this most democratic of ideals seems to elude all elected officials, regardless of party affiliation, when it comes to perserving economic domination over community quality-of-life issues.

Let the states and the people speak.

Media Contact:
Vicki Pellar-Price
www.talktrans.com
transportationtalk@yahoo.com

Commentary--July 19, 2002
Fly Us.

With a bumpier than expected takeoff, HR. 3479, The National Aviation Capacity Expansion Act, belly-landed on the House floor Monday when it was voted down 247 to 143. Soon to be cleared for final approach, Minnesota's congressional delegates will fly bi-partisan support by unanimously voting yes on the National Aviation Capacity Expansion Act, HR. 3479 and Senate bill 2039.

The Senate and House bills sponsored by Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Representative William Lipinski (D-IL) jettison the agreement reached by Governor Ryan and Mayor Daley to expand and modernize O'Hare. Also onboard are aviation proponents, the Chicago Chamber of Commerce, Midwest Aviation, United and American Airlines, and even national environmental groups who have sold out in exchange for a hands-off policy regarding other environmental battles.

At the local controls, Gutknecht, (R.) Ramstad, (R) Sabo, (D) Luther, (D.) McCollum, (D.) Kennedy, (R.) Oberstar, (D.) Peterson, (D.) Dayton (D.) and Wellstone (D.) are all flying blind on this bill, under the influence of Northwest Airlines, globalization and a regional holding pattern that maintains Northwest's domination.

Without consideration of future impacts to MSP and our regional aviation system, they are positioning us for a tailspin, of which, we may never come out. That's because the bill, which sets a national precedent for removing state's rights from planning and environmental procedures related to airport expansion, has spin-off potential, which Northwest can use to its advantage when MSP is at capacity.

According to a speech made by John Creighton, CEO of United Airlines, at their annual board mtg 5/16/02, the reason for fewer delays is due to better performance, not more runways. This statement negates his prior allegation that delays are only due to congestion caused by too few runways and airports and that expansion is the only solution. According to Creighton it appears that better performance and more efficiency is what's needed to alleviate congestion, not airport expansion. United is currently in the process of trying to secure a $2 billion loan from the federal government, while Amtrak's stand-by status puts them last in line for federal funding.

Passage of this bill will result in expansions nation-wide that tear down entire communities, close businesses, shut down schools, increase noise, environmental pollution and public health problems: coming soon to an airport near you-- landing right in your own backyard-- and there's nothing you, or anyone can do about it, except by appealing now to our national representatives who can vote responsibly in the best interests of the public, not corporate conglomerates.

What Northwest will gain from this congressional support, is total right-of-way that's fast-tracked in order to avoid state or community interference. In our case, it removes our transportation phobic legislature and the Metropolitan Airports Commission from any actions that would impede Northwest's ability to suppress competition from other airlines. It will ensure Northwest's fiscal and territorial stability, but travelers, neighborhoods, air and noise quality will get short shrift.

What's worse, the bill does not support, or integrate, alternative methods of travel that are more sustainable and less polluting. The bill represents the worst of both our national and regional policies concerning the environment, renewable fuel sources and alternative transportation because it supports expansion of an unsustainable and environmentally unregulated source of toxic pollutants from an industry.

Aviation's thrust supports globalization, free trade, multinational corporations: powerful entities, that disregard both environmental and human considerations. A WWF, World Wildlife Fund report just out, warned, the richest nations are responsible for the exploitation and depletion of our natural environmental wealth, perpetuating crowded roads and skies, and pollution, and applying the most pressure on the environment with a larger than life contribution of carbon dioxide emissions.

Fly with them, and our national legislators, who represent our voices, will take us through some dangerous aerobatics, leaving us zero visibility-- with Northwest on automatic pilot in a ditch and dive maneuver-- no chance for fare and route choices, no investment in improved air quality and no local control.

And, there won't be any interest, or functionality in a back-up, alternative system like rail, as we all witnessed when air travel came to an abrupt standstill after 9-11. Fly with these elected representatives and there will be more runways and more planes replacing any likelihood of multi-modal options that are more cost and fuel efficient; fly with them and the unknowns of insufficient security to handle hundreds more operations daily, out-of-date air traffic control systems, untrained and poorly paid and regulated baggage checkers, inefficient technology, could result in more tragedies...