Posted on 08/02/2006 10:24:57 AM PDT by SwinneySwitch
WASHINGTON- Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, trying to preserve a hard-fought compromise on the Wright Amendment, wants U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to back off any review of the agreement that would eventually repeal restrictions at Dallas Love Field.
Hutchison sent a terse letter to Gonzales on Tuesday asking him to recuse the department from any input on a bill she sponsored. The bill contains the agreement forged by Dallas and Fort Worth officials, American Airlines, Southwest Airlines and Dallas Fort Worth International Airport.
Her letter was triggered by a Justice Department staff memo circulated on Capitol Hill last week that said certain restrictions in the agreement "would be hard-core, per se violations" of federal antitrust laws, which protect marketplace competition.
"Allowing the Justice Department to review this matter would be equivalent to sending one to trial after the court had announced the verdict," Hutchison, R-Texas, said in the letter.
The department did not have a comment Tuesday.
The Wright Amendment, named for its author, former House Speaker Jim Wright, restricts long-haul flights from Love Field to eight nearby states. Love is the home to discount carrier Southwest Airlines, which has long sought repeal of the law. Rival American has fought to keep it in place.
The agreement reached by local officials would repeal the 1979 Wright Amendment in eight years and reduce gates at Love Field from 32 to 20. Other airlines have objected to the gate reduction, saying it limits their ability to establish service at Love Field.
Much of Hutchison's outrage in her letter focused on the leak of the memo. She said it was faulty and inaccurate. She questioned why she and other members of the Senate Conference Committee did not get a copy.
"I think what the Justice Department did in leaking a memo that was anonymous that was not professional and not legalistic and not correct on its facts ... I think it's something that disqualifies them from any further action on this bill," Hutchison said.
The Justice Department said last week it does not have a position on the agreement, but also said it was discussing with Congress ways to maximize competition. The agency is responsible for enforcing antitrust laws.
Hutchison said the agreement should be reviewed instead by the Department of Transportation, which she said has jurisdiction over issues of aviation law and policy, including airport use limitations.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, had previously raised concerns about antitrust violations when the agreement was added to the transpiration spending bill.
"I just want to make sure that were not making a blanket exemption of antitrust laws on an appropriations bill when nobody's had any chance to even look into what the ramifications might be for a whole lot of other industries," Leahy said.
The department memo sent last week said the agreement seeks blanket immunity from antitrust laws.
Leahy was unaware of Hutchison's request, but said: "I don't take my orders from the Justice Department anyway."
Also Tuesday, Hutchison and Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, met with Sen. Arlen Specter, Judiciary Committee chairman, about the Wright Amendment agreement, hoping to persuade him to allow the agreement to move forward. Specter's committee could slow the bill with hearings.
"Sen. Hutchison and Sen. Cornyn are interested in getting a bill moved forward. I'm concerned about exemption from the antitrust laws, which, while not unprecedented, is unusual," he said.
Antitrust concerns also were previously raised by Sen. John D. Rockefeller, D-W.Va., but he said he is "at peace" with the agreement now after Hutchison's staff removed things from the bill he objected to most.
He said Hutchison agreed to eliminate provisions that would have limited Federal Aviation Administration and Department of Transportation authority. Also he worked out an agreement prohibiting the parties from using airport improvement program money or revenue from passenger fees on tickets to pay for demolishing gates. Other types of revenue could be used.
In the House, Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., also has questioned the agreement's effect on competition.
___
The Senate bill is S.3661
___
We need to close Love Field to commercial aviation traffic. This has nothing to do with "competition" and everything to do with protecting Southwest Airlines little taxpayer subsidized private airport. DFW airport is a 15 minute drive away and does not have anywhere near the negative impact commercial aviation traffoc has flying into and out of Dallas Love Field.
Wright is Right!
Sorry, Wright is wrong. DFW has enjoyed monopoly status on long-haul flights for entirely too long. The service sucks, they charge monopoly rates for landing and gates, and *any* new carrier that sets up a presence there that even remotely challenges AA will promptly be crushed by DFW's management assessing new "fees" and raising old ones.
You do know that Dallas turns a *profit* off of Love, right?
Also, the airport was there FIRST. If you have a problem with that, you need to move.
15 minutes!
How fast you driving?
"15 minute drive away"
You must never drive to DFW during the hours of 5AM Monday to 7PM Friday.
"the airport was there FIRST"
DING DING DING (not to be confused with the Southwest DING!)
I've never understood how people can build houses at the end of an active airport runway and then complain that the planes are too loud!
Note that he also doesn't talk about the fact that you have to PAY MONEY just to enter the airport.
Er. at DFW.
Well if American or Delta would open up some gates at DFW for Southwest. They have gates they are not using and will not sell, because they don't want Southwest to get them and put them to use. Oh, and DFW is not taxpayer subsidized, too. Airline ticket prices at DFW are among the highest in the nation because of the Wright amendment.
The fastest time I've made between Love and DFW is about 22 minutes. When I wasn't stuck in traffic, I had the throttle firewalled on the Jaguar and was way, way, way beyond the speed limit - or even "reasonable and prudent". (Client told me he was arriving at Love, and he was wrong.)
I love SWA Ding Fares. Just got 4 BWI to MCO R/T for 42 each way. Less than 400 for the whole family to go to Disney World.
Actually, Delta has released almost all of their gates at DFW.
Last year, Delta pulled out of DFW. SWA went to DFW and said that they would pick up *all*, that's right *all* of the unused gates there *if* DFW would cut them the same deal they have with AA. (AA gets preferential pricing on everything at DFW.) DFW told them that they'd have to pay the highest rates instead and that there would never be a deal.
That's when SWA got annoyed and really started agitating for the Wright amendment to go away.
I'm told that a fairly large number of influential people from the Park Cities and uptown Dallas had a come-to-Jesus meeting with her on the matter.
The threat of SWA moving *everything* to Phoenix and taking all their jobs with them didn't hurt, either.
Also, IIRC without SWA, Love Field becomes a ghost town and Dallas' budget goes into the red.
AA contributes almost nothing to the actual Dallas tax base, since they're in Tarrant County.
The good people of the DFW Metroplex are being forced to support a failed business - American Airlines. Air fares out of DFW are much higher than other airports in the country and the real reason to keep the areas largest employer out of bankruptcy court.
I live within a Tiger Woods' driver length (not literally) from DFW and am familiar with traffic around here. I can make it from DFW to Love in 15 minutes, assuming traffic isn't worse than normal and construction is not an issue. It does depend on how you go, though, and I will conceed 15 minutes is probably the minimum. But its easily do-able.
Want to meet up with me between 8-11am or 4-6pm and prove that? :-P
I live in Phoenix. The city is actively courting SWA to move their HQ here. USAir/AmericaWorst is also HQ'd here.
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.