Securing Growth and Robust Leadership in American Aviation Act
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I have offered this amendment many times over the last 15 years because until we can cut this poster child for government waste, I despair of us ever being able to bring Federal spending under control.
They call it Essential Air Service, but it is the least essential program in the entire U.S. Government. This is a direct subsidy paid to airline companies to fly empty and near-empty planes from small airports to regional hubs.
This was supposed to be a temporary program to allow local communities and airports to adjust to airline deregulation in 1978, 45 years ago. Instead, it has grown to include 111 airports in a program that has doubled in cost in the last decade.
I emphasize that this program has nothing to do with emergency medical evacuations. It solely subsidizes regular, scheduled, commercial service that is so seldom used that it cannot support itself. Why can't it? Because in many cases, the small airports in the program are less than an hour's drive from regional airports.
Essential Air Service flights are flown out of Merced Airport near my district in the Sierra Nevada of California, yet Merced is less than an hour's drive from Fresno Airport, offering scheduled flights throughout the West.
Subsidized service is available from Lancaster, Pennsylvania, just 31 miles from Harrisburg International Airport. Subsidized flights from Pueblo, Colorado, are just a 45-minute drive from Colorado Springs Airport, and on and on.
There is supposed to be a $200 cap on the subsidy and a minimum of 10 passengers per day, yet 55 airports are able to waive these requirements, and they have all been granted. Per-passenger subsidies on some flights are now nearly $1,000 per passenger. By comparison, you can charter a small plane for around $150 to $200 an hour. Currently, 42 of the 111 flights subsidized are for flights of 9 people or less. These flights of 9 or less are still costing the taxpayers over $120 million in fiscal year 2023.
Over the next few years, this program will cost taxpayers over a billion dollars in direct appropriations, which this amendment would cease. The program is receiving $390 million in subsidies this year.
If a route cannot generate enough passengers to support its costs, the passengers themselves are telling us it is not worth the money to them. Maybe we should listen to them.
Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry).
Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Smucker).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Graves promised us reforms. Well, we have been hearing those promises for the last 15 years that I have been bringing these amendments up, and they never happen.
My Republican colleagues love to campaign for economies in government. Yet, when the easiest possible economy in government is presented to them, they can't bear it.
I would pose this question: Why should the taxpayers of every community in America pay for the tickets for their subsidized air service when those airports are often less than an hour's drive from a regional airport?
If their customers aren't willing to pay for those tickets, why should the people of our districts be required to pay for them through their taxes?
It is time that Republicans kept their promises and started making the fundamental reforms that are necessary to bring spending under control before we bankrupt this government.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. Chair, I would inquire how much time remains in opposition.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source