(The following column by Tom Belden appeared on the Philadelphia Inquirer website on November 10.)
PHILADELPHIA — My inbox filled up quickly last week with analyses and opinions about how the travel business might be affected in a Barack Obama administration. Sorting out the prognostications has been a little time consuming but not really difficult if you’re familiar with the president-elect’s campaign platform.
Neither candidate talked with much specificity during the campaign about air travel or ground transportation. But there are striking differences in what Obama and John McCain said, according to their campaign Web sites, regarding energy and transportation policies.
McCain’s platform focused heavily on seeking more domestic energy sources and making cars and trucks more fuel efficient, with a bow to seeking alternative energy sources.
Obama’s platform was more wide-ranging and detailed, calling for rebuilding the transportation infrastructure, research and development into using alternative energy, greater use of rail, better management and labor relations at the Federal Aviation Administration, frustration with the state of air travel, support for an airline passengers’ bill of rights and efforts to draw more international visitors.
That last topic could be among the first addressed by the new leadership. It was the subject of my Sept. 15 column (http://go.philly.com/wing), which reported on the Travel Promotion Act, legislation that both Obama and McCain supported.
The bill subsequently passed the House unanimously and may be included in economic-stimulus legislation that will be considered by Congress in a lame-duck session this month or in January, according to the Travel Industries Association. The group represents 1,700 public and private organizations that have a stake in the travel industry’s health.
The promotion act would create a fund, using a $10-per-person exit fee on foreign visitors who don’t already pay for a U.S. visa, matched by contributions from the private sector, to promote the country abroad. A portion of the fund would be used to help educate international visitors on how to comply with our cumbersome immigration rules.
Roger Dow, the travel association’s president, says the promotion fund should be seen as an investment in stimulating the economy by creating more tourism-related jobs. “We’re hopeful that it can be part of the economic-stimulus package,” he said. “This is one thing . . . that will greatly enhance the number of international visitors.”
Trying to make the FAA work better, and work more collegially with its unionized air-traffic controllers, is likely to be more contentious than advertising the country overseas. But at the least, Congress and the new administration are expected to settle on legislation, postponed for two years, to reauthorize the FAA and develop the next generation of air-traffic technology to make the system more efficient and less congested.
Labor groups are especially optimistic that an Obama administration will be make it easier for airline and other transportation employees to join unions and exercise collective-bargaining rights. In addition, Obama supports keeping in place laws that prevent foreign control of U.S. airlines, something unions also favor.
The new administration might also pay more attention to airlines’ increasing use of foreign repair shops to maintain aircraft, a practice that critics say can compromise safety because the FAA doesn’t monitor the work carefully enough.
In several ways, the credit crisis and the dismal state of the economy have dealt a big setback to the idea that complete deregulation and unwavering support for the marketplace are always best for the consumer, said Kevin Mitchell, chairman of the Business Travel Coalition. The Radnor-based organization for corporate travel managers endorsed Obama the week before the election.
“Just as Obama is coming in, the notion that the market always works has been blown to smithereens,” Mitchell said. “We can now talk about regulation and funding the FAA to levels that are appropriate.”
At the same time, Mitchell acknowledged that making the air-transport system more efficient and safer will wind up costing airline passengers in the form of higher fares. “If you want the gold standard in aircraft maintenance, you can’t have $78 one-way fares between Philadelphia and Miami,” he said.
Of all the changes an Obama administration might bring, none is likely to be greater than the White House’s view of Amtrak, high-speed passenger-rail projects and mass transit.
I have reported on and written about Amtrak for more than 30 years. For most of that time, Republican presidents and congressional leaders have defied the wishes of the public and most of their colleagues in Congress, contending that Amtrak should be left to die if it can’t operate without taxpayer support.
McCain has generally favored that position for years. Obama and especially Vice President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. have supported investment in Amtrak and other public transportation.
Perhaps now, when a puny economy, higher fuel costs, rising air fares and fewer airline flights have helped push up rail ridership to record levels, we can concentrate on the long list of other issues and quit harassing Amtrak.