Senate Sets Aside Rancor to Pass Aviation Bill

WASHINGTON (March 24) -- It was Monday night, and Capitol Hill was consumed with partisan acrimony. A day earlier, a deeply divided House of Representatives had narrowly approved the president's signature health care overhaul.

Republicans were declaring war. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told a radio station that there would be "no cooperation" with Democrats for the rest of the year.

It seemed, then, the unlikeliest of times for the Senate to approve a major piece of legislation -- unanimously. But that's exactly what happened Monday, when 93 senators advanced a $35 billion aviation bill that creates a new "passenger bill of rights," tightens standards for pilot training and helps revamp the nation's air traffic control system.

The legislation is a long-delayed reauthorization measure for the Federal Aviation Administration, which has been funded only by temporary extensions for the last three years, to the consternation of the air travel industry. The House passed a similar version last year, and now the two chambers must reconcile the bills before sending the legislation to President Barack Obama.

At a time when even minor bills and noncontroversial nominations have provoked partisan battles, the lack of any opposition to the aviation bill came as a surprise to some industry insiders. One congressional aide suggested that a "fatigue factor" was at play, after months of negotiations on the aviation bill and bickering over other issues. "Everybody's pretty war weary at this point," said Jim Berard, spokesman for the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

For passengers, the legislation could mean better-trained pilots, fewer delays and less chance of the kind of nightmare scenario faced by JetBlue passengers who sat on a runway for more than 10 hours in 2007.

Provisions in the legislation respond to high-profile incidents in the last few years. The tougher training standards aim to prevent tragedies like the Colgan Air crash in Buffalo, N.Y., in 2009, which was blamed on pilot error. And a "passenger bill of rights" would require airlines to keep a minimum amount of food and water on board in case of delays and would limit to three hours the amount of time an airplane could sit on a runway without allowing passengers to deplane.

"After so many years of delay, this bill takes significant steps to improve safety and modernize our air transportation system, while supporting jobs and stimulating our economy," said Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., the chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee and a chief sponsor of the bill.

Industry officials said that one reason the legislation passed so smoothly out of the Senate was because lawmakers there stripped out a few of the more disputed provisions that were included in the House bill -- suggesting that a battle over the proposal has been deferred but not avoided.

At the top of the list is a labor measure that would subject shipping giant FedEx to the National Labor Relations Act and make it easier for its employees to unionize. FedEx has launched a fierce lobbying campaign against the change, claiming it amounts to a "bailout" for its top rival, UPS, which is already subject to the labor law. That campaign includes the creation of a Web site, BrownBailout.com.

Supporters of the provision say it would level the playing field between the two companies by ending an unfair exemption for FedEx.

Another key difference between the House and Senate bills involves a fee that airports can charge passengers. The House version allows airports to charge up to $7 per ticket, up from the $4.50 currently allowed. The Senate bill includes only a pilot program allowing six airports to charge a higher fee.

"There are some pretty huge differences in philosophy," said David Castelveter, spokesman for the Air Transport Association, which represents airlines. The association's president, James C. May, has called the Senate bill a "vast improvement" over the House version, since it does not include the higher passenger fee, among other provisions.

Congressional leaders have not set a timetable for completing the bill, but industry officials said they are hopeful it could be done within the next few months.

The most significant portion of new funding in the bill goes to the NextGen initiative, which is aimed at replacing the air traffic control system's World War II-era technology with modern navigation systems that will make air travel safer and reduce nightmarish delays that have increasingly clogged airspace and airports.

"NextGen is the biggest thing in both bills," said Jane Calderwood, the U.S. vice president of governmental and political affairs at the Airports Council International. "They go as far as some of us would if we could write our own bill. Nothing's perfect, but they covered all the important things."

And what explains the relative lack of partisan fighting over aviation? For many Washington lawmakers, it could be their own personal stake in the issue; after all, they are some of the nation's most frequent air travelers. "They fly almost every weekend," Calderwood said. "They may have a better appreciation than a lot of the general public does."