• 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.

Something for Nothing
Opinion · June 26, 2002

United Airlines wants $1.8 billion. US Airways is asking for $900 million and Amtrak needs $100 million.

And who are they hitting up? You.

The airlines are going to the Air Transportation Stabilization Board while the National Railroad Passenger Corporation is requesting the money from Congress, but the bottom line is: that money could come out of your pocket when you pay your taxes.

And here's a question that's gone unasked in the debate over whether the government ought to salvage these carriers. What's in it for us? What are United, US Airways and Amtrak doing in exchange for our help?

Apparently nothing.

Consider United Airlines, which just last week applied for a $1.8 billion federal loan guarantee. Why does it deserve the money? "We're now burdened by short-term financing needs that are driven by the aftermath of September 11 and aggravated by the weak economic recovery," says United's Chairman Jack Creighton.

Huh? The taxpayers who will underwrite the United Airlines loan want to hear something else. Like what Creighton intends to do if he gets the help he's asking for. He could start by promising to improve service (United was recently the most complained-about airline, according to the Transportation Department) or reform its unfair pricing that bilks its best customers with sky-high airfares.

US Airways' reasons aren't much better. Asked to defend its loan guarantee application, the carrier's chief executive, Dave Siegel, said, "No airline has felt the impact of the steep drop in consumer demand for travel more than US Airways."

So what? Passengers really want to know what Siegel intends to do about the lost baggage - almost three per thousand passengers, say the latest counts. Or its dismal on-time record (almost 20 percent of its flights are not on-time, according to the government). The numbers aren't the worst in the industry, but US Airways could certainly do better.

And that brings us to Amtrak, a company so accustomed to being on the dole that it often doesn't even bother justifying the expense to the American taxpayer. Take the joint statement issued by Amtrak Chairman Mayor John Robert Smith and its president, David Gunn, after word that the carrier was low on money and might shut down. "Amtrak is running out of cash and no agreement of how to provide a loan guarantee or appropriation that will continue train service to the end of the fiscal year," they said.

That's all. No pledges to fix the system, to shut down unprofitable routes - maybe, God forbid, to even make the Acela a high-speed train instead of just a train that makes fewer stops and has better seats than the old Metroliner.

The folks running our transportation companies believe they are entitled to a form of corporate welfare, and they're so confident of their success that they couldn't be bothered to explain to us, in plain English, why they deserve the help they're asking for. They're unwilling to entertain the possibility that we'd still find a way to get around if United Airlines, US Airways or Amtrak disappeared tomorrow.

Truth is, we would. It might not be easy at first. But it would happen: rail carriers would spring up to serve profitable inter-city routes. No frills airlines like Southwest and JetBlue would fill the void left by US Airways, and airlines like American and Delta would begin serving United Airlines' old routes. Life would go on.

The carriers asking for federal loan guarantees should make a strong case to the people who will foot the bill - their customers, the taxpayers - about why they need to be saved. Make no mistake, this is your money. Take a close look at the terms of the agreement and you'll find that your government is ultimately responsible for paying it back.

We may not be able to approve these loans, but we can certainly affect the outcome of the next election. And we will. Because there's no such thing as something for nothing.

Note: This commentary has been revised to reflect two minor clarifications. In an earlier version, I did not fully explain under which circumstances taxpayer money would be used to cover the loan guarantees. I also implied that US Airways' baggage and on-time records were the worst in the industry. In fact, its numbers are about average.

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.