Free market solutions are for consumers, not executives
Introducing a flexible market solution called “congestion pricing” is the better action. The FAA could auction landing time slots at busy airports, setting capacity limits aimed at avoiding delays. Airlines then could sell or buy slots as passenger demand changes under a classic cap-and-trade system.
This is an incredibly common sense market solution to the use of a scarce resource that needs to be controlled by the government. But, it probably won’t happen because of the objections of some of the most ardent supporters of the free market.
The general aviation industry, especially the corporate jet crowd, is putting up a stiff fight against a congestion-pricing policy, however. Small aircraft pay low fees now because of the low number of passengers on corporate jets. Their landing fees would rise dramatically under a congestion-pricing scheme, Butler explained.
The people most able to pay for this change, corporate executives, are the ones who are posing the biggest stumbling block. They don’t want to give up their subsidized private travel. Talk about corporate welfare.
Never mind that this would help the airlines bottom line, develop regional airports for less “commercial” flying, and let people pay for the privilege of a convenient flight time. But it’s “a public resource,” they’ll whine. We don’t make cars pay more than buses on the highways. Well, actually, we do if you look at toll roads and the cost per axle per passenger. Further more, the car isn’t taking up just as much space on the highway as a bus, now is it? Now who do you think has more clout with the politicians involved with this: the passengers on a six hour flight delay or the business executives who can afford private jet travel and probably deduct it as a business expense?
Technorati Tags: airline delays, congestion pricing, peak pricing, corporate jets, David Hendricks
Filed under: David Hendricks, airline delays, congestion pricing, corporate jets, peak pricing
