• What's elliott?
• About elliott
• Contact us

t o p i c s

• Business
• Commentary
• Destinations
• Help
• Leisure
• Technology
• Vault

Copyright Elliott Publishing. All rights reserved. For more information, call (305) 453-4781 or send e-mail to us.

Please, Not Another Airline Bailout
Opinion · September 20, 2002

Is anyone surprised that the troubled airline industry is asking for more government help? After weeks of behind-the-scenes lobbying, the carriers are now expected to formally request billions of dollars in additional tax breaks and subsidies at a Congressional hearing. That's on top of an unprecedented $15 billion federal bailout approved by our legislators last year.

No, the fact that our carriers are looking for another handout doesn't come as any revelation. The industry may well lose close to $10 billion in 2002, which would make it the worst year in the history of commercial aviation.

It's the quietness with which the airline chiefs and their handsomely-paid lobbyists are petitioning our elected representatives that is troubling.

They are doing it with the kind of openness normally reserved for a corporate merger: discreet, at times even secretive. Those tactics served them well the last time they were awarded federal handouts following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. By the time the discussions on that that bailout package got underway, they were already a done deal.

But this time should be different. This is the time for a vigorous public debate about whether we ought to continue subsidizing a failing industry. With mid-term elections only a few weeks away, here's an opportunity for voters to find out where candidates stand on our government's utterly discredited policy of propping up America's worst-run businesses.

We owe it to ourselves to turn this election into a de-facto referendum on the airline bailout.

Will it happen? Don't count on it. The American electorate seems more fascinated with a possible sequel to Desert Storm than to the Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act. Our politicians know they can acquiesce to the airline industry's new demands without suffering much damage. The airline executives behind these efforts are not doubt well aware that this is a good time to ask for more money, too.

It would take a groundswell of public anger similar to the kind that forced Congress to pressure the airline industry into adopting "Customers First" plans in 1999 - a halfhearted effort to offer air travelers better service - to provoke the kind of debate that this issue deserves. And that kind of public fury can only come after years of sky-high fares and mediocre service. For now, airfares remain low and complaints about airline service are scarce, largely because fewer people are flying.

In order for Congress to turn a deaf ear to the polished pleas of the airline lobbyists our representatives must not only believe that their chances of being re-elected would be boosted by turning down the latest airline industry requests. They must also be convinced that this issue is central to their campaign. A tall order? Sure, but to pretend otherwise is to underestimate the power and effectiveness of the airline lobby.

It isn't just the future of the bankrupt airline industry that's at stake here, but also the destiny of our transportation infrastructure.

If we allow market forces to reshape the airline business into a more efficient, sustainable industry, then we will ultimately benefit by having healthier airlines. If, on the other hand, our representatives take the easy road and say "yes" to these self-serving requests for more corporate welfare, then we choose a difficult path that may lead to even more requests, followed by the inevitable collapse of the airline industry as we know it.

Christopher Elliott is a travel commentator based in Key Largo, Fla. All e-mailed questions may be edited, condensed or republished at the site's discretion.