Aviation Campaign Guide
What Clinton & Trump Have Stated on Aviation Issues
Ed Bolen, President and CEO of NBAA, recently spoke at the JETNET iQ Global Business Aviation Summit, held last week in New York City. He cited an interesting study that found that 50% of the respondents indicated that user fees “could potentially lead to the disposal of their business aircraft.” That disturbing statistic was a premise to Bolen’s call for his members to be advocates on these issues.
In the context of the 2016 Presidential conflict, it seemed worthwhile to see what, if anything, the two major party candidates have stated on aviation issues like
- the need for NextGen,
- ATC privatization/corporatization,
- user fees,
- unfair international competition from the Arab carriers,
- DRONES (civilian) policy,
- the October 2016 ICAO CO2 emissions convocation,
- US domestic airplane noise standards,
- aircraft tax depreciation,
- the promotion of US aviation interests,
- the authorizing of Norwegian International flights to the US,
- Airport infrastructure spending (PFCs), and
- the ExIm Bank.
Members of the House and Senate have to fly on commercial airlines; so they seem to feel qualified to quickly enunciate opinions on aviation matters. However, with the exception of the last three issues listed, neither Secretary Clinton nor Mr. Trump (by inference, he has demonstrated positions on two issues) has offered any position papers (at least have posted then on the standard intent sources for such information).
→ Not only have their planes avoided each other (TCAS), they have avoided the issue. This is not unusual in the annals of Presidential Campaigns.
1. Both the Republican and Democratic candidates have expressed their opposition to the approval of the Norwegian International’s multi-national airline (Norway-Ireland-Singapore-Thailand-US) for service to the US.
2. While neither spoke directly to AIP and PFCs, their general proposals on infrastructure are quite general and shaky:
- “The Democratic presidential nominee has proposed spending $275 billion over five years, including $25 billion on starting up a national infrastructure bank. The only potential source of money Clinton has provided for her plan is ‘business tax reform.’ But, as Kathryn points out, a tax code overhaul would be no easy battle to win. As for Clinton’s pitch to create an infrastructure bank, President Barack Obama has included the idea in nearly every one of his budget proposals — and it’s never gained significant traction. Campaign spokeswoman Julie Wood said Clinton has “put rigorous thought into [her policy proposals] — consulting experts, hammering out the details and figuring out ways to pay for them.”
- “The real estate mogul has said he would spend at least double what Clinton has suggested and indicated that he would finance it through debt. But lawmakers probably wouldn’t embrace that idea, as they’ve shown a lack of interest in large-scale bonding for infrastructure projects. The Trump campaign didn’t return a request for comment.”
3. According to Economics21.org, “Hillary Clinton favors the [ExIm] reauthorization, during a Democratic debate in Flint… In contrast to Clinton, Donald Trump opposes the Ex-Im Bank. In an interview last summer, he said, ‘I don’t like it because I don’t think it’s necessary. It’s a one-way street also. It’s sort of a feather bedding for politicians and others, and a few companies. And these are companies that can do very well without it. So I don’t like it. I think it’s a lot of excess baggage. I think it’s unnecessary.’”
On a couple of matters one candidate has expressed a position without visible contradiction:
- Unfair international competition from the Arab carriers—America’s Biggest Airlines Echo Trump’s Trade Rhetoric.
- Several of President Bill Clinton’s, as well as President Barak Obama’s, budgets have included user fees; it seems fair to assume that if elected the Secretary would continue that trend. [See introductory paragraph for GA/BA’s likely result; A4A supports this proposal.]
Two commentaries have been published finding fault with Mr. Trump’s candidacy:
Secretary Clinton has issued her Vision of America, there she states:
Invest in building world-class American airports and modernize our national airspace system. These investments will reduce carbon emissions and save travelers and airlines an estimated $100 billion in avoided delays over the next 15 years.
There may be more aviation related statements, but the file is huge; so other proposals may be included.
The Trump-Pence campaign has a similar site, but the nine positions posted there do not appear to address aviation specifically.
ProCon.org is an independent site which attempts to match candidates on specific issues.
In past years, aviation has sought to deliver its views to the candidates. For the 2016 campaign, only AIA has publically announced that it has met with both campaigns. [Others may have had such briefings but have not posted such action on their websites.]
The links on issues and PACs will allow you to examine each organization’s specific goals and the Members of Congress whom they believe to be allies. INTERESTING READING!!!
This review has attempted to cover a lot of territory and the radar for finding all of the information is not up to NextGen standards. SO…… PLEASE INCLUDE any position papers by the candidates or policy positions IN THE BELOW COMMENT SECTION.
Equally importantly, please take the time to be involved in the campaign(s) of whichever candidate(s) reflect your views.