Posted on 07/18/2006 12:47:35 PM PDT by cope85
THE NEW WORLD DISORDER Foreign ownership of U.S. airlines? Bush ready to defy Congress' ban despite pilots' fears of another Dubai ports deal
The Department of Transportation, acting under President Bush's orders, is preparing to issue an administrative ruling that would open U.S. airlines up to foreign ownership, despite specific prohibitions and warnings from Congress, as well as predictions by pilots that another Dubai ports controversy is in the offing.
The proposed ruling puts the Air Line Pilots Association, or ALPA – the largest airline pilot union in the world representing 61,000 pilots who fly for 40 U.S. and Canadian airlines – at odds with the Bush administration.
The administration is determined to comply with European Union demands presented in the November 2005 "open skies" negotiations. (So-called "open skies" agreements are bilateral or multilateral agreements that liberalize the rules for international aviation markets and minimize government intervention.)
The EU is threatening to delay the signing of an open skies treaty unless the U.S. changes restrictions on the percentage of a U.S. airline that can be foreign-owned. The U.S. currently has 74 bilateral open skies agreements, none of which require any rule changes on the foreign ownership of U.S. airlines.
The Bush administration continues to advocate the EU position, arguing that the Department of Transportation should issue new administrative rules, if necessary, even in direct defiance of Congress.
U.S. pilots have provided WND with copies of draft letters the Air Line Pilots Association has organized.
ALPA is encouraging pilots to write letters and e-mails of protest to Congress, newspapers and national television and radio outlets.
"Do not underestimate the seriousness of this issue!" ALPA has advised, "This is do-or-die, sink-or-swim time."
Some U.S. pilots who have spoken with WND on condition of anonymity expressed concern about job reprisals.
The pilots have argued another Dubai Ports World-type controversy is brewing in which the "Bush administration does not care about selling out key U.S. assets to foreigners." ALPA calls for action echo the alarm:
The writing is clearly on the wall! This Administration wants foreign investors, airlines or otherwise, to pay for the costs of our aviation infrastructure, while risking hundreds of thousands of aviation jobs, the Civil Reserve Air Fleet program (CRAF), and the safety and security of our national airspace. Forty percent of all Air Force Reserve and National Guard pilots are also airline pilots. ALPA believes the foreign-ownership issue is a fight for survival:
The time to act is now! Together, with every pilot across this country participating in this effort, we can stop this rogue attack on our profession and our industry. There is no issue more important than preventing this NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) from moving forward. If the White House is successful in changing the foreign ownership rules through DOT affirmative action, within just a few short years our industry will mirror the maritime industry. Our jobs will no longer exist, our country's ability to militarily act abroad will be handicapped, and our families may no longer be safe in our own airspace! The ALPA concern concludes with this: "Our country already has a dependence upon foreign oil. Are we going to allow the DOT to make air travel dependent on foreign airlines, too?"
On June 14, in an official statement of administration policy, the Office of Management and Budget in the executive office of the president put out a notice that the Department of Transportation intended to change the foreign ownership rule by issuing a new administrative rule:
The Administration understands that an amendment may be offered to prohibit the use of funds to implement a final rule regarding foreign investment in U.S. airlines. The proposed rule would facilitate a landmark agreement with the European Union that would provide significant benefit to consumers as well as the domestic passenger and cargo airline industry. The Administration has worked with Congress to address concerns with the final rule and recently extended the final comment period by an additional 60 days. The Administration strongly opposes any amendment that would prevent the Department of Transportation from finalizing its rule. To counter the Bush administration, five congressmen wrote a letter eight days later, June 22, to DOT Secretary Norman Mineta on U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure stationary.
In citing specific congressional prohibitions, the letter noted Congress had taken two specific actions to put the White House on notice that "a major change to the current law regarding foreign ownership of U.S. airlines should be accomplished only by congressional action, not unilaterally imposed by the executive branch."
The letter cited the following congressional prohibitions:
First, the Conference Report on H.R. 4939, Making Emergency Supplementary Appropriations for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2006, includes 'language preventing the Secretary from issuing a final rule regarding foreign control of U.S. airlines for 120 days.' Second, during consideration of H.R. 5576 – the Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, the District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (TTHUD appropriations), the House adopted, by an overwhelming vote of 291 to 137, an amendment prohibiting the department from finalizing or implementing the policy proposed in the rulemaking during the next fiscal year. The letter concluded by reminding Mineta, "the courts have ruled that an executive branch agency does not have authority to interpret a law in a manner inconsistent with the plain meaning of the words of the law."
Signing the letter were Reps. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif.; chairman of the Armed Services Committee; Frank A. LoBiondo, R-N.J.; chairman on the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Subcommittee; Ted Poe, R-Texas; James L. Oberstar. D-Minn., ranking Democratic member on the Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee; and Jerry F. Costello, D-Ill., ranking Democratic member of the Subcommittee on Aviation.
A major proponent of the rule change has been Under Secretary of Transportation Jeffery Shane, who was quoted on a government Web site in April suggesting Mineta remains "committed to completing this important rulemaking procedure."
We're selling or will be soon selling control of pieces of the nation's infrastructure to foreign companies, why stop there?
This is NOT the finest government money can buy.
G-8 agrees to subsidy cuts for WTO's success
The world's top eight industrial nations on Monday appeared to have climbed down from a tough position on farm subsidies, reviving hopes of resumption of the collasped WTO talks.
"The Doha Round should deliver real cuts in tariffs, effective cuts in subsidies and real new trade flows," a statement issued at the G-8 Summit in St Petersburg said emphasising, it is "fully committed to the development dimension of ongoing WTO talks."
Regretting that the talks in Geneva failed early this month, the heads of government of US, UK, France, Japan, Canada, Italy, Russia and Germany said, "We commit ourselves to substantial improvement for market access in trade in both agriculture and industrial products and expanding opportunities in trade in services."
The WTO talks in Geneva collasped after the US stuck to its position and refused to move forward in cutting farm subsidies and desired by developing countries, including India.
"In agriculture we are committed to substantially reducing trade-distorting domestic support and to the parallel elimination by the end of 2013 of all forms of export subsidies a well as establishment of effective disciplines on all export measures with equivalent effect as agreed in Hong Kong," the statement said.
"We urge all parties to work with utmost urgency for conclusion of the round by 2006-end to strengthen multilateral trading system," it added.
Earlier at WTO talks at Geneva, while the European Union had agreed to match the cuts in import tariff for farm produts that developing countries led by India and Brazil had asked for, the US was reluctant to move on farm subsidies.
With the US adamant on the issue of subsidies, there was no negotiating space for developing countries, Commerce Minister Kamal Nath had said on his return from the collasped talks.
The statement, which has revived hopes of resuming the stalled talks, said the Doha Round is a historic opportunity to generate economic growth, create potential for development and raise living standards across the world.
Asking WTO Chief Pascal Lamy to work towards agreement on modalities in agriculture and industrial tariffs within a month, the statement called up on all countries to commit to taking necessary action for successful completion of Doha round.
Only seven of the G-8 countries are WTO members while Russia is negotiating its entry in to it.
On the issue of Russia's entry in to WTO, the statement said the G-8 supported its expeditious accession to the WTO in accordance with the rules that apply to all its members.
The G-8 nations also renewed its commitment to pursue a high level of ambition in all areas of Doha Development Agenda with a view of reaching a meaningful and balanced outcome.
The G-8 said it was committed to the development dimension of Doha round and need to improve the participation of developing countries, including through South-south trade and enhanced regional integration.
Appreciating the problems of least developed countries to integrate in to the global trading system, the G-8 said it would continue to ensure that this was reflected in appropriate flexibility in the negotiations.
9/11
What a load of xenophobic rubbish. I don't know what some people think the consequences of foreign ownership of ports and airports will be. These airlines will still have to employ americans at the airports and comply with US regulations on safety and border control, so I doubt they'll be able to smuggle in whole armies to take over america or whatever cr*p it is they think will happen.
Welcome to the free market....
O.K. The whole Dubai Ports World argument was a fantastic exercise in amazingly hysterical absurdist ignorance...but I'm gonna have to think about this one. ...At the least because those arguing against it are using the DPW thing as a reference, thereby casting doubt upon their representation of the issue.
I look forward to flying an airline that feeds me...If Air France can fly cheaper from Ny to Los Angeles--they should. Competition is a good thing.
If Corsi and the Union are against it, I'm for it.
IBTZ?
Rubbish. I would certainly hope that policy is not driven by such carefully crafted delusions and specious reasoning.
Yep, can just see the ads in the middle east: "Notice to all terrorists. You want Americans at your mercy. Fly the friendly islamic-owned skies and eat the Americans for breakfast, lunch and dinner."
No one has proposed allowing foreign to totally control U.S. airlines. What is being proposed is either allowing them to buy up to 49% or actually exercise their voting rights under the current 25% ownership rule.
I think he is playing to the far right fringe and trying to get as much out of them as he can. After all, some politicians have made millions playing on fears of the globalist bogyman so I guess Corsi thinks it is his turn.
So does this mean that foreign companies could comply with US airline rules and regulations with hundreds of thousands fewer DEADWOOD, TICKET PRICE INFLATING, union jobs? Good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.