Here’s just one more example of why we have trillion-dollar deficits:
…the EAS program has mushroomed into a airline routing program based on political favors. And the subsidy doesn’t go to the traveling public; it goes to the air carriers. The $3,700 per passenger subsidy, for example, has been championed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), who fought and won the earmark for keeping open air service for Ely, Nevada (population: 4,000).
How inefficient is the EAS program? While the Feds pay out $3,700 per passenger to airlines to fly from Ely to Las Vegas, Southwest Airlines sells tickets for Las Vegas to Chicago nonstop for as little as $153 one-way — about 10 cents per mile.
And no matter how much they claim to be in favor of small government, you can always find someone who will defend their own pet program:
Faye Malarkey Black, a vice president for the Regional Airline Association, said she believes few federal programs are worth it.
“They call it essential for a reason,” she told the Associated Press. She said her industry group supports “common sense adjustments” for eligibility, but added that rural communities already face many struggles to keep people from leaving.”If you take away air service, who wants to live in those communities?” she asked.
How and when did it become the responsibility of the federal taxpayer to ensure that rural communities don’t die? The American west is dotted with towns that came, and then, when there was no longer any economic justification for them, went. What is the benefit to someone in Florida to make sure that Muskegon, Michigan has air service, or that it exist at all (not that Muskegon is likely to go away for the lack of it — as the article notes, it’s only forty miles from Grand Rapids)? If we are going to solve our fiscal problems, we need to completely rethink the role of the federal government. That is the core of what next year’s election, now barely thirteen months away, should be about.
Personally I agree that all subsidies, either for air service as well as space services should be ended. Let the market decide and if it says No, then it should be no.
Well, that explains why Matula didn’t vote for Harry Reid. Glad to know Matula has standards.
Oh wait…
They must have taken away Detroit’s airport back in the 80s.
yet this is entirely funded on a user based fee with no funds coming your tax dollars or mine. SO this does add a single cent to the trillion dollar defecit…
Unfortunately the EAS program is the wrong program to be looking at cutting. $170 million is NOTHING when compared to other expenses in the government.
There are ways to change & fix EAS, but it does provide an economic engine to some of these smaller communities; and comparing a small town to a Las Vegas to Chicago flight is not the same – there are over 1,600 people a day flying from Vegas to Chicago and maybe only 10 out of Ely… major difference in economy of scale. (But there has to be a better way for Ely to have air service)
EAS is an indefensible (and bipartisan*) handout, but it’s pretty small compared to the subsidies that go to general aviation in general. The FAA uses revenue from ticket taxes to subsidize hundreds of airports that have little or no scheduled service (and therefore create no ticket tax revenue). This benefits people (like me) who want to fly small planes for recreation, and businesses and rich folks who can afford private air travel — a tiny, but politically influential sliver of the population.
Obama has proposed user fees to capture some revenue from private jets, but of course the general aviation industry is pushing back, so I’ll be surprised if anything comes of it. The Venn diagram of “big political donor” and “consumer of private air travel” is pretty much a circle.
* My local airport (KLEB) is an EAS recipient, and on top of that we have a staffed control tower and handful of TSA employees, all for 6 daily flights of a 9-passenger Cessna 402 (I’ve never been on a flight with more than 2 other passengers). The people who fly up in Gulfstreams for Dartmouth reunions and to drop their kids at camp love it, and our Republican Congressman and Senator agree that EAS must not be cut.
I also fly a small airplane for recreation and get the priviledge of paying about 40 cents per gallon of taxes for the priviledge. My small airport (KFLY) has several hundred planes but is uncontrolled. We get some of the money back through the General Aviation Trust Fund.
When the government is running deficits of more than a trillion dollars a year, EAS is small. However, there are thousands of programs like EAS in the budget and they add up to substancial amounts of funding. We simply can no longer afford to keep doing these things. It’s as simple as that. This falls into the “nice to have” category, not essential.
And to me, it doesn’t matter if the funding comes from a fee or a tax. It still is something we can no longer afford.
Leland,
As I noted before, I voted for Senator Reid because he wasn’t Sharon Angle. If you lived in Nevada you would understand why.
I want my baggage fees back.
Yes, I’ve heard that claim of yours. Harry Reid has said we need to raise taxes for other subsidies, most famously Cowboy Poetry. And despite the fact that Harry Reid brags about the pork subsidies he brings home to Nevada, you voted for him and brag about it.
Yet Harry is asking for $3.8 million for UNR to develop a heat pump, and another $3.8 million for UNLV to develop a DC powered Air Conditioner. Then there is the $7 million he requested for ex-prisoner half-way houses, with no say in how many former inmates that will house, but apparently $13 million will pay for a county to build a 160 unit county prison. I didn’t even go through the list of energy and water subsidies going to multiple Nevada state colleges, which includes $1.5 million to GBC to build a geo-thermal demonstrator. Oh and there’s $600,000 to GBC just to teach.
For comparison, EAS has a total budget of about $170 million across about 150 airports. It was initially meant as a means to reach very rural areas, where it was cost efficient to move goods by air rather than say build bridges. Certainly it is bloated now, as Jim doesn’t need anymore subsidies, but it still is a defensible budget item as compared to federal funding of county prisons, state bridges and colleges, or providing universal healthcare.
So, I find your sincerity lacking; other than you voted for the Democrat because he was not the Republican.
Leland,
Nope, I, like the majority in the state voted for him because he wasn’t a Tea Party wacko.
If you don’t like me voting Democrat then don’t encourage the Tea Party wackos into hi-jacking the party primaries.
BTW the Republican party in Nevada has been successful in purging the Tea Party outsiders and ran a normal Republican for Rep. Heller’s old seat, the former state chairman. He won by a landslide (58% to 36%) and Yes I voted for him.
Sharon Angle by contrast was promoting the American Independent Party candidate for the election, he even appeared with her on the Tea Party Express on its way through the state. He only got 2% of the vote, a measure of just how many actually support the Tea Party when they are not pretending to be Republicans and show their true colors.
EAS is a much abused program, but places like Ely, NV are the best argument for it. Ely is a very remote place it doesn’t even have a bus station, yet it is the largest commercial center for hundreds of miles. There is an important mining district there and so people will need to live there far into the future.
Now lots of other EAS recipients are just idiotic. My local airport of Moscow-Pullman PUW is a great example. I fly a couple times a month but have never flown out of it. Spolane GEG is 90 minutes away by car so I drive there instead, of all the people I know in Moscow-Pullman I know only three people who have ever used PUW for a non university charter.
If a city is within 100 miles, or 2 hours drive, of a mid size airport it shouldn’t be subsidized. People living in Galveston don’t seem to have trouble driving to IAH in Houston, which is an equivalent distance, yet EAS often supports exactly this kind of airport.
Jim, KLEB is a perfect example of this sort of waste, it is what an hour drive from Manchester and two from Boston Logan? That is not “essential” air service that is a silly luxury. I was looking at the list of EAS recipients on wikipedia and in the lower 48 the airports I can see justified are:
Crescent City, CA
Garden City or Dodge City KS
Grand Island & Scottsbluff, NE
Alpena & Sault Ste Marie MI
Miles City & Lewiston, MT
Carlsbad NM
Moab, UT
Ely, NV
I am sure there are a couple I missed, but look at that list and try to justify the others.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essential_air_service
I know Ely well as it’s one of the locations that GBC has facilities at and I drive there about once a month. It’s a four hour drive from Las Vegas with one section of NV318 of 100 miles with no gas station. But the air traffic is interesting. Often you see drones flying overhead enroute to training areas and the road signs warn of low flying aircraft 🙂
Personally I agree that all subsidies, either for air service as well as space services should be ended.
Do you want government-funded manned spaceflight to end as well?
If you are going to bar the feds from subsidizing air service to remote areas, you also need to bar cities from subsidizing air service to the large airports that help keep them dominant economically in their regions.
Why? Shouldn’t cities be allowed to spend money to benefit their local economies? Not that I believe it is necessary, but that’s a matter between a city council and its citizens, not between a city and its surrounding areas.
Matula, I don’t care if you want to be a Democrat. The evidence to me is that is your preference. Again, I say you lack sincerity in your suggestions that you care about subsidies. As an example, you response complains about Sharon Angle, the TEA party, Republicans, and me; but you entirely missed my point. Harry Reid is pushing for a large number of additional subsidies that you claimed your against. Yet, not one negative word about Reid is written by you. So apparently, more government subsidies doesn’t bother you that much. Hence, I find your sincerity lacking.
Another hint, I have zero effect on Nevada politics. But if you expect Nevada politicians to change, you might start by complaining to them when they do something you don’t like. You got a good start on Sharon Angle. Still, you seem to have nothing bad to say about Harry Reid. It’s apparent he’s your man, not just the lesser of the bad options. Otherwise, you’d complain about him, at least when it comes to subsidies. If you think I have an effect, because I could try and persuade you; that would require you being an honest broker. Again, I find your sincerity lacking.
Leland,
That is right, your Tea Party no longer has an impact on Nevada. By associating itself with a fringe candidate like Sharon Angle it lost all creditability. Unfortunately, it will probably take getting stuck with President Obama for another four years by nominating a similar unelectable kook as the Republican candidate before that happens.
MPM,
My opposition to government subsidized HSF programs like COTS, CCDev or whatever they will call it next is on record.
Its the folks complaining about government subsidized air service while advocating government subsidized HSF that are being inconsistent.
You didn’t answer my question: do you want government-funded manned spaceflight to end?
MPM, Matula is more interested in bashing political parties than standing up for any particular principle. He makes his original claim, and not once does he back it up when pressed. Rather, he complains about other people. The term empty suit comes to mind.
As for me, I think government should be limited, by limiting their intake. The federal government is subsidizing things that serve no federal purpose. For instance, why is the federal government giving money for a county prison? If the federal government took in less, tax happy Nevada could take the money and buy the prison itself. That would still be a subsidy, but it would be from the people getting the benefit of the subsidy. Since those people have an interest in the program, they are more likely to run it better. There’s a greater chance at success. So, I’m not against all subsidies. I’m for limited government and fewer subsidies. I do think there are times when risk is better taken at the governmental level, which ever level that is appropriate. Space is more federal. Education is more local. A county prison is at highest, a state concern, but the “county” part is a big identifier. Same thing with a “state” or “community” college.
As for EAS, if the federal or state governments want the benefit of natural resources in remote locations; then there needs to be a way to reach those locations (note, this is true Keynesian economics rather than redistribution). Sometimes air service is cheaper than building a road. But with too much power comes corruption, and I think there’s a large part of EAS that should be defunded. Not across the board, but rather like BRAC: close a few down. KLEB is a good place to start.
Sharon Angle won in all counties but the two largest. She was winning there as well until Harry Reid had his Casino cronies march their employees into the booths. Angle was not a good speaker but her ideas were sound. I would like to see amateurs get a shot at governing because the professionals have done such a great job of it. /sarc
MPM,
[[[You didn’t answer my question: do you want government-funded manned spaceflight to end?]]]
In the U.S. the only government funded HSF left are the NASA subsidy programs for New Space and the government funded flights on Soyuz, which is basically subsidizing their space program at the expense of the American aerospace industry. Both should end.
In other words, yes.
Ken,
Two points.
First, most of Nevada’s population (2.3 million out of 2.7 million) live in those two counties. The rest are mostly empty. So those two counties are the only one that matter when it comes to a state wide election.
The rural counties you are referring to are considered to be automatic Republican counties in any state election and neither Democrat or Republican candidates spend much time campaigning in them for that reason. In many of them there is no effective Democrat Party. Instead, in terms of local and state legislature offices, the Republicans candidates are considered to be the “liberals” in contrast to the American Independent Party candidates which are to the far right of them.
You should learn something about the state instead of just repeating Tea Party talking points.
[[[I would like to see amateurs get a shot at governing because the professionals have done such a great job of it.]]]
They are not amateurs… She is a career politician married to a federal government employee. Sharon Angle has been involved in Nevada government for decades. Her husband spent his career before retirement with the BLM telling ranchers what they could and couldn’t do with their land. Nevadans know their history, which is also why she didn’t win the election.
In the general election folks were not voting for her, they were voting against Senator Reid in the general election. She only won the primary because two popular real republicans split the ballot. She only received 70,000 votes out of the 175,000 voting in the primary. And afterwards none of the major Republicans in the race campaigned for her.
MPM,
Yes. Except of course for the military when it decides it needs to start flying crewed space missions for national security.
And yes, this is in contrast to the many so called “commercial Space” advocates here demand government subsidized HSF flight.
Leland,
[[[tax happy Nevada]]]
What planet are you on? Nevadans are one of the least taxed states in the county, both in terms of personal and business taxes. The only taxes they favor are the gambling and lodging ones that clean out the pockets of visitors to Las Vegas and Reno. The fastest way to get unelected is to propose a new tax.
But once again you show your ignorance of the real world. No wonder you support the Tea Party.
Also, in terms of the EAS. I expect the majority flying into Ely are probably government employees, for the NPS (Great Basin Park is HQ there),EPA, Justice Department and Department of the Interior. The locals usually just drive to SLC or LV because of the cost even with EAS support. So without EAS the government employee will probably just switch to using government aircraft to fly in.
But, wait, isn’t that is like using NASA spacecraft to service the Shuttle, a no-no in the crony capitalism world of New Space. So perhaps its also time to cut out government owned aircraft for non-military/national security uses.
Hmmm, guess that leaves driving which might cut down on their visits…
So tell me Leland, if you are against EAS why are you not against the space equivalent, CCDev?
And no the observation above is not in contrast to my post for MPM, because I am on record of getting rid of the ISS. No ISS, no need for government employees to visit it. No need for government funding of HSF or new government HSF projects. And no unfair government competition to private space stations like Bigelows.
So ISS and SLS should be cancelled too and the astronaut corps disbanded?
No wonder you support the Tea Party.
So tell me Leland, if you are against EAS why are you not against the space equivalent, CCDev?
Matula, you suck at reading comprehension, and I think it is because you lack skills in logic. I’ll try and help.
The TEA Party stands for Taxed Enough Already. I doesn’t require support to understand that they are against more taxes rather new or rising rates. it doesn’t matter that I do not support them; you disagree with them and claim many Nevadans disagree with them, while also pushing this notion: “ The fastest way to get unelected is to propose a new tax.
” Apparently it didn’t stop you from voting for Harry Reid, so again, I find your sincerity lacking.
I just can’t bring myself to repeat my EAS stance. It’s clearly written in the very last paragraph of my previous comment. If Boeing wants to build CCDev and sell seats to NASA, it sounds like a hell of a cheaper deal than
CEVMPCV.And no unfair government competition to private space stations like Bigelows.
Oh please, Bigelow developed its inflatable habitation module under the ISS program. By your measure, they are worse than CCDev and SpaceX.
Leland,
If the only thing the Tea Party focused on was taxes they wouldn’t be so bad, it’s the rest of the radical right baggage that goes with their tax views combined with their attempts to apply early 19th Century economic paradigms to a complex 21st Century global economy. And you don’t have to buy into the rest of the Tea Party baggage to support the idea of a “Fair Tax”.
Gee, you don’t know much about Bigelow Aerospace’s history either.
Bigelow licensed the technology from NASA and then invested $180 million to develop it for his markets. He didn’t develop it for them. That is the exact opposite of being a government contractor who is supply goods and services to the government.
Bigelow licensed the technology from NASA which owned the IP. He then invested $180 million his money to develop it for commercial. This is the exact opposite of a government contractor providing goods and services to government.
Interesting, only a single paragraph was showing when I submitted it.
Trans Hab was initially developed under the ISS program. Bigelow purchased the patents, but his initial R&D was paid for by NASA. Matula, you are trying to pretend that subsidy on the front end is perfectly fine, while subsidy on the back end is totally dishonest. Yet, you claim to want to end all subsidies. I say again, your sincerity is lacking.
I think what Bigelow is doing a great job. I also know he wants CCDev to succeed as well, since he teamed with Boeing on CST-100. So since Bigelow stands to benefit from CCDev; I’m still trying to figure out why you categorize them differently than SpaceX. The best I can figure is they are a Nevada based company, and your just a partisan hack that will say anything to support your side. There’s that lacking sincerity again.
As for your first paragraph in the last comment, I agree if the TEA Party movement focused on taxes, it would be fine. Oddly enough, that’s the name of the movement and what they do. They not a political party, but members of other political parties have agreed with the movement, and those people bring along other agendas. What you are against is those other agendas, which tend to be Republican in nature. So again, I’m not surprised that you’d vote for the Democrat over the Republican.
BTW, Harry Reid is ready to shutdown the government unless Republicans agree to more spending and taxes. Uncle Sugar is working it for GBC.
Leland,
Since you have two separate and different thoughts, one on topic and the other off topic, I will answer you in two separate posts.
[[[Trans Hab was initially developed under the ISS program. Bigelow purchased the patents, but his initial R&D was paid for by NASA. Matula, you are trying to pretend that subsidy on the front end is perfectly fine, while subsidy on the back end is totally dishonest. Yet, you claim to want to end all subsidies.]]]
Interesting, so you think American firms shouldn’t make use of the technology developed by funding from American taxpayers. And I have no problem with NASA doing basic R&D. That is part of the NACA roots and should be their core function. Its their subsidies of individual firms, picking winners in the market place, and competition with those firms with its own projects that is at issue.
There is one huge difference between Bigelow Aerospace’s use of NASA Trans Hab technology and COTS/CCDev. Bigelow’s Aerospace Trans Hab license is not an exclusive license. Other firms and individuals may also license the technology NASA developed for Trans Hab. It’s only the technology that Bigelow Aerospace developed with its own funds that belong to it. This is in stark contrast to COTS and CCDev. Although RpK, Orbital Sciences and SpaceX had their private development funds reimbursed by taxpayers, the technology they developed is still their private property. Other American firms or individuals are not able to license it from NASA even though NASA reimbursed them with the taxes paid by American taxpayers. This is why it’s a government subsidy, and why it distorts free markets, The key economic reason for eliminating government subsidies. To bring it around to EAS again, how do we know that the presence of EAS, and its distortion of the market, is preventing some private individual from starting a bus firm to serve Ely and other rural communities in Nevada?
And I will leave you with a philosophical question to consider. The New Spacers were all upset when NASA insisted on operating its own zero-g plane instead of contracting with ZERO-G for their aircraft. How is NASA funding its own Space Station instead of buying services from Bigelow any different? This assumes of course that NASA needs to have a space station in the first place, which I do not agree with. I feel NASA would best serve space commerce by returning to its NACA roots and leaving space exploration to an expanded NSF. But as a philosophical exercise, explain to me the difference between the Zero-G debate and the ISS? The only difference to me appears to be the billions of dollars of subsidies flowing into New Space firms from ISS…
[[[BTW, Harry Reid is ready to shutdown the government unless Republicans agree to more spending and taxes. Uncle Sugar is working it for GBC.]]]
Nice try at Tea Party spin. And I am puzzled on the GBC angle since Federal Student Loans were privatized in 2002 and the 2011 budget year Pell Grant funds have already been given to students. But then it shows once again the limits of your real world knowledge. You claim to work for NASA, but I wonder if you aren’t actually some unemployed 30 something dropout living with his/her parents. Its hard to tell when you hide your identify.
But back to the topic. Actually its Speaker Boehner and the Tea Party leaning House of Representatives that are being derelict in their duty by going on vacation before the Senate approved their CR.
Speaker Boehner doesn’t seem to care about the Constitution he took an Oath to defend very much. The Founding Fathers never intended political power to be concentrated in any single institution which is why the Senate, insulated from the “passing public passions” of the House of Representatives, must also accept any budgets, including a CR. By allowing the House of Representatives to first pass a CR with a bunch of radical right wing baggage and then going on vacation before the CR was approved by the Senate, Speaker Boehner violated the spirit of the Constitution he claims to support. If you study the Constitution Convention you will see the key reason the Constitution separated the different institutions, including creating both a House of Representative and a Senate, was to prevent any single institution from dedicating government policy. Speaker Boehner, like most of the Tea Party supporters, seems to have missed that day in his civics class.
One has to wonder how the Tea Party will govern America if elected given their “selective” interpretation of the Constitution . The recent jeers of the American soldier and cheers for letting folks without money to die rather then being admitted to Emergencies Rooms when injured, as illustrated by audience in the recent Republican debate is probably a good taste of what a Tea Party would look like…
Yea, the Tea Party being just against taxes is a pretty good a spin but the majority of Americans are on to that deception.
The way I see it, its Senator Reid and the Senate are in the right by defending the U.S. Constitution and not allowing Speaker Boehner to trample on it and dictate government policy from the House of Representatives. The majority of Americans recognize this and the blame for a shutdown will fall on Speaker Boehner and the Tea Party, not Senator Reid, no matter how folks like you try to spin it. Yes, it will make great ads for the 2012 election showing the Tea Party members of Congress on vacation while the government is shutdown. I see Speakers Boehner’s government shutdown just increasing the rate the Tea Party is purged from politics by enlightening even more Americans about who they really are.
So knows? We may not even have to wait until 2012. I keep hearing rumors of moderate Republican members getting so fed up with the Tea Party dominance of the GOP they are thinking of changing parties…
In any case, the faster the public turns against the Tea Party, the better the chances for the Republicans to salvage the 2012 election from the Tea Party. With a “Tea Party free” Mick Romney as President and a Democratic Congress it might just be possible to pull this nation out of the double-dip recession the Tea Party is set on creating for their agenda.
the Senate, insulated from the “passing public passions” of the House of Representatives
So the 17th amendment never happened?
Reid is asking for $600,000 in appropriations for GBC because, “there is a great need for qualified employees in these fields across rural Nevada. Great Basin College would use these funds to support academic and career and technical education in these high-need fields.” Actually, GBC is asking for the subsidy via Reid, which explains the tone of the writing. I could say “nice try at the spin”, but actually it sucked. I linked to it earlier and mentioned it several times.
As for the rest of your comment, I think it says enough about you all on its own.
Sounds like the STEM folks begging for government money again, as usual. But that has nothing to do with the business department. Since I took over I reduced the budget by 25% while increasing enrollments by a similar amount.
Ken,
It would be better if it wasn’t passed, but with 6 year terms there is still a degree of isolation from public fads.