Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Identix (IDNX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hockeyfan who wrote (13006)	4/13/1999 10:51:00 AM
From: David	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26039

The shape of FAA funding . . . Excerpts from a story in the April 8, 1999, Dayton Daily News: "The House Transportation Committee has proposed an enormous airport improvement program similar to last year's controversial highway bill, which raises annual construction at airports from $2 billion to $5 billion each year through 2004. "Like the highway bill, the Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century seeks to move a large trust fund created with user fees off the federal budget so it can't be spent on non-aviation needs. The aviation fund now has $18 billion, which comes from such things as airline ticket surcharges and airplane fuel taxes. "But unlike the highway bill, which was widely criticized for being packed with local road projects, the $90 billion five-year airport bill won't specify projects. After the budget framework is settled in this bill, the details of where the money goes will be approved in annual spending bills. "'In the highway bill, if you were not in it, you missed a six-year window for funding,' said Michael Gessel, an aide to U.S. Rep. Tony Hall, D-Dayton. 'The aviation bill doesn't work that way.' "[T]he five-year construction project that has been introduced in the House . . . already has drawn fire from the Senate, which doesn't want the aviation trust fund separated from the rest of the federal budget. "'That is the principal source of funding for airport construction in the U.S.,' Gessel said." ============================== In other words, there is a lot of money in this bill for things like the O'Hare cargo security pilot being taken nationwide. However, we are not going to see legislative language on our pet project, and deals may just be done in back rooms out of our sight. Further, this bill is hung up on fiscal and political issues. One side issue, for instance, is Senator McCain's insistence, over intense local opposition, that convenient Washington National Airport be further loaded up with flights (at the expense of a larger airport 45 minutes out of town). McCain is the committee chairman in charge in the Senate. He wants nonstops from National to his home state of Arizona. And, of course, how you describe the budget these days is always a major fight. Whatever the merits of the FAA cargo security initiative, there are no sure things in politics.