news

Statement
of
Ranking Member Nydia Velázquez
House Committee on Small Business
For hearing entitled:
User Fees in the Aviation Industry: Turbulence Ahead
September 12, 2012

The U.S. economy is as complex as it is vibrant, requiring frequent travel throughout the nation. For small businessmen and women, this may mean traveling at the last minute or to remote areas that are not served regularly by commercial airlines. As a result, general aviation – and the flexibility it provides – plays a key role in our nation's growth. In fact, general aviation directly generated $22.1 billion in 2009 and had an overall impact of $76.5 billion, employing nearly half a million workers. This contribution will no doubt grow as the economy continues to recover.

With this important role in mind, it is critical that we carefully examine any potential policy that could impact this industry and the workers it employs. One such policy is the Administration's proposal to levy a $100 fee on take-offs and landings for commercial airplanes and corporate jets. While all piston and emergency aircraft would be exempt, this new fee structure could create new burdens for the aviation community, while requiring a new bureaucracy to monitor compliance. As a result, it is important to carefully consider whether the benefits of a new user fee system outweigh the costs of its implementation.

While it is sensible to talk about this user fee proposal, doing so really misses the elephant in the room today. And that elephant is sequestration and the across the board-cuts on all federal spending that will take effect in January. Estimates show that the FAA stands to lose $1 billion in funding as a result. According to a study by the Aerospace Industry Association, this could force the layoff of almost 1,500 air traffic controllers — nearly 10 percent of the total — and the closing of more than 240 airport control towers around the country.

Many of these closing would likely occur at smaller airports that handle less traffic – those that are most used by the general aviation community. Additionally, passenger traffic could drop by 10 percent causing aircraft manufacturing to fall, costing the economy another 11,000 to 22,000 jobs. So, while it is important to discuss the imposition of user fees, it is equally if not more important to talk about the effects of fiscal belt-tightening on the general aviation industry.

This issue is not unique to the FAA or aviation, but it will have to be addressed jointly by the government and the private citizens that rely on these specific services. Whether it is crop insurance for farmers, loans for small businesses, entrances fees at national parks, or traffic control services for pilots and their passengers, reduced federal funding creates difficult choices. Tough decisions will have to be made – and hearings like we are having today can help us determine what the best solution is.

Ensuring that the general aviation industry remains strong in light of these current fiscal challenges is a priority for this Committee. It plays an important role in the U.S. economy, particularly for areas that lack other transportation infrastructure and is poised to grow stronger over the next 20 years. Through its presence, it not only creates jobs, but also serves as an economic anchor for many rural communities. I thank the distinguished panel of witnesses for traveling here today and look forward to their testimony.

Thank you and I yield back.

###