The Shuster Plan: Atc Privatization And The Constitution

Former House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Bill Shuster's plan to privatize air traffic control (ATC) functions of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has faced significant opposition and constitutional concerns. Shuster introduced the 21st Century AIRR Act (H.R. 2997), which aimed to transfer ATC operations to a private corporate board dominated by major airlines. While Shuster presented it as a way to modernize the system and transfer power to private hands, critics argue that it fails to achieve true privatization. The bill faced bipartisan opposition, with concerns raised about its potential impact on consumers, government oversight, and budgetary implications. Despite support from former President Trump, Shuster ultimately dropped his push for ATC privatization in 2018 due to a lack of consensus and the Senate's preference for keeping ATC under government control. The constitutionality of the plan remains a subject of debate, with some arguing that it may violate the U.S. Constitution.

Explore related products

Code-Name Downfall: The Secret Plan to Invade Japan-And Why Truman Dropped the Bomb

$11 $25

The 10:10 Plan: Your ideal weight the healthy way

$10.07 $14.95

Concept Mapping: A Critical-Thinking Approach to Care Planning by Pamela McHugh Schuster RN PhD (September 17,2015)

$94.72

The Testosterone Advantage Plan

$16.53 $24.95

The Best-Laid Plans of Jonah Twist

$13.99

Plan B: How to Hatch a Second Plan That's Always Better Than Your First

$13.99 $18

H.R. 2997, the 21st Century AIRR Act

The proposed corporation would be overseen by a 13-member board of directors representing various aviation stakeholder groups. It would be authorized to charge fees to users of air traffic services and to issue debt to finance its operations. The Secretary of Transportation would manage the transition, which was initially scheduled for October 1, 2020.

The 21st Century AIRR Act also includes provisions for airport planning and development, noise compatibility planning, facilities and equipment, FAA operations, funding adjustments, consumer protection, and various other aviation-related matters.

The Act faced strong bipartisan opposition, particularly due to the privatization of ATC functions. Critics argued that privatization may jeopardize modernization efforts, harm consumers, and potentially violate the U.S. Constitution. Despite the opposition, the Act passed out of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on June 27, 2017.

Former Representative Shuster was a proponent of ATC privatization but was unable to get the concept passed while in Congress. The budgetary impact of H.R. 2997 was estimated to result in increased net direct spending, net revenues, and net deficits over the 2018-2027 period. However, the ultimate impact would depend on future legislation.

Bipartisan opposition

The Shuster plan to privatize ATC faced strong bipartisan opposition. The proposal, H.R. 2997 or the "21st Century AIRR Act", aimed to privatize the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) air traffic control (ATC) systems. However, critics argued that it fell short of true privatization and failed to address key concerns.

One of the main objections to the plan was the continued involvement of the federal government. Under the bill, the U.S. Secretary of Transportation would have the power to approve fees and decide on employee composition, with the Board of Directors including government-appointed directors. This contradicted the principle of transferring control from public to private hands and raised questions about the independence of the new entity.

The bill also faced criticism for its potential impact on taxpayers. As the proposed new entity would be a non-profit controlled by the federal government, taxpayers could be left liable for any future financial burdens. This was seen as a significant deviation from privatization best practices, as outlined by the American Conservative Union Foundation's (ACUF) Seven Principles of Privatization.

The plan also faced opposition from Democrats, who stood in near-unanimous opposition to the proposal. They argued that privatization would jeopardize modernization efforts and was not in the best interests of consumers. Additionally, some Republicans and outside organizations also voiced their disapproval, expressing concerns about the bill's effectiveness and its potential impact on the industry.

The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, which initially introduced the bill, also witnessed bipartisan opposition within its ranks. Despite the support of Chairman Bill Shuster, the proposal faced resistance from Democratic leaders of authorizing, appropriations, and revenue committees. This internal division highlighted the lack of consensus and the challenges faced by the plan.

Failure to transfer power from public to private

The Shuster Plan, or H.R. 2997, also known as the "21st Century AIRR Act", aimed to privatize the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) air traffic control (ATC) systems. The bill was introduced by Transportation Chairman Bill Shuster, along with Aviation Subcommittee Chairman Frank LoBiondo.

Despite being pitched as a transfer of power from public to private hands, the bill faced criticism for failing to achieve this objective. The proposed legislation fell short of true privatization, as the federal government would still play a dominant role in the new entity's operations and governance.

One of the key issues was the involvement of the U.S. Secretary of Transportation, who retained significant authority over the new entity. This included the power to approve fees for funding and make decisions regarding employee composition. Additionally, the Board of Directors was required to include government-appointed directors, and unaffiliated private citizens were excluded from the board appointment process.

The bill also faced opposition due to its structure as a non-profit corporate entity controlled by the federal government. This structure raised concerns about taxpayers' future liability and went against the principles of privatization, which emphasize shielding taxpayers from such responsibilities.

The Shuster Plan encountered strong bipartisan opposition and was criticized by government watchdogs. It ultimately failed to gain sufficient support, leading Chairman Shuster to withdraw his efforts to privatize air traffic control.

Explore related products

Bernard Claytons New Complete Book of Breads

$35.08

By Dr Pamela Schuster: Concept Mapping: A Critical-Thinking Approach to Care Planning Second (2nd) Edition

$48.59

Concept Mapping: A Critical-Thinking Approach to Care Planning (Edition 3) by Schuster, Dr Pamela [Paperback(2011£©]

$48.59

The 17 Day Plan to Stop Aging

$17.99 $14.95

The Spark: The Revolutionary 3-Week Fitness Plan That Changes Everything You Know About Exercise, Weight Control, and Health

$8.91 $22

War Plan Red

$8.99

Violation of the US Constitution

The Shuster Plan, or H.R. 2997, also known as the 21st Century AIRR Act, was introduced by Transportation Chairman Bill Shuster in June 2017. The bill aimed to privatize the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) air traffic control (ATC) systems, transferring power from public to private hands. While Shuster presented the plan as a way to modernize the aging ATC systems, it faced significant opposition and was criticized for not achieving true privatization.

The plan faced bipartisan opposition and was criticized for potentially violating the U.S. Constitution. Here are some key points regarding how the Shuster Plan may violate the U.S. Constitution:

• Failure to Achieve True Privatization: The plan fell short of achieving true privatization, as the federal government would still play a leading role in the new entity. The U.S. Secretary of Transportation would have the power to approve fees and decide on employee composition, and the Board of Directors would include government-appointed directors. This level of government involvement contradicts the principle of privatization and may violate constitutional provisions on government intervention in private enterprises.
• Lack of Competition and Free Market Principles: The plan did not allow for private entities to compete for ownership of the new nonprofit entity. By its nature as a government-controlled, non-profit corporate entity, the plan inhibited free market competition and failed to align with privatization principles.
• Inability to Shield Taxpayers from Liability: Due to the structure of the new entity, taxpayers could potentially be exposed to future liability. This aspect contradicts the principle of privatization, which aims to protect taxpayers from bearing the burden of government-controlled enterprises.
• Opposition from Government Watchdogs and Experts: Government watchdogs and experts from organizations like the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the Congressional Research Service (CRS) refuted the arguments for ATC privatization. They highlighted the risks and potential negative consequences, including modernization challenges and increased costs for consumers.
• National Security Concerns: Privatizing ATC functions could potentially raise national security concerns. Handing over control of public airways to private interests may create vulnerabilities and expose critical infrastructure to unnecessary risks.
• Impact on Consumers: Critics argued that privatizing ATC could harm consumers. It could result in higher costs for the flying public and potentially compromise safety, as private corporations might prioritize profits over maintenance and safety standards.

In conclusion, the Shuster Plan to privatize ATC faced significant opposition and concerns over its constitutionality. Critics argued that it failed to achieve true privatization, infringed on free market principles, and potentially exposed taxpayers to liability. The plan also faced pushback from government watchdogs, experts, and lawmakers who raised concerns about modernization efforts, consumer welfare, and national security. As a result, Chairman Shuster eventually dropped his push for ATC privatization in February 2018.

Support from President Trump

President Donald Trump has expressed support for the privatization of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the nation's air traffic control system. Trump characterized the current ATC system as "an ancient, broken, horrible system that doesn't work," stating that it is "stuck painfully in the past." He proposed transferring day-to-day management of air traffic control to an independent, nonprofit organization, citing the need to save money and modernize the system. Trump's plan includes eliminating a $283 million annual subsidy for commercial airlines serving smaller markets.

Trump's proposal is based on legislation introduced by Representative Bill Shuster, who believes that the ATC system needs modernization. Shuster, a strong proponent of ATC privatization, has suggested moving forward with a reform proposal. He previously sponsored legislation to turn over the air traffic control system to a private, nonprofit entity overseen by a 13-member board.

Trump's plan has faced opposition from various groups and individuals, including the National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE), which argues that privatization would give big airlines a monopoly over the aviation market and the power to cut funding to the ATC system and raise fees on consumers without congressional oversight. Opponents also argue that the privatization of ATC would drive up ticket costs, create national security risks, and sidetrack technology upgrades during the setup of the private entity.

Despite the resistance and concerns, Trump has continued to advocate for the privatization of the FAA and ATC, emphasizing the need for reform and modernization.

Frequently asked questions