tv Washington Journal Tanya Synder Discusses the U.S. Air Traffic Control... CSPAN June 6, 2017 9:06am-9:33am EDT
>> they are placed in a tricky position when they cannot invite this because they want to speak because there will be violence. you get into threats of , you are allowing me violent agitators to be , even before they landed punch. that is a dangerous precedent to threat. let's hillary clinton talks about the 2016 election and her book. know -- you may think you know what happened, but i am going to tell you how i saw it and what i thought. you cannot make up what happened. >> c-span programs are available
on c-span.org, our homepage, and by searching the c-span library. the whitep asked house to announce and initiative to put privatization in the air traffic control system. we will turn it over to a self financing, nonprofit organization. this entity will not need taxpayer money. plan, the faa will focus on what it does best, safety. a separate entity would be charged with ensuring route efficiency, timely service, and a reduction in delays. joining us, tonya snyder
from politico. what brought us to this announcement? been failuresave on the faa's part in bringing next gen technology into implementation. this is a transition everyone agrees need to be made, from radar-based and radio communications to a satellite-based system for navigation. the faa has been slow, gone over budget. there is a feeling and needs to be turned over to the private sector to manage the transition. there have been efforts since separate air traffic control from the federal
government. about 60 other countries have done something similar. what is slowing the process down and what could be different or so different that a private entity could do a better job? guest: depends who you ask. if you ask democrats with a slowing it down, it is underfunding from congress. what could be different about the private sector, it is ideological. the private sector will be able to move faster, more efficiently. the airlines are pushing for this. this is something may want to happen. the idea is they can also self not be so they will
subject to the appropriations process, sequesters, the debt shutdown.vernment host: if you want to find out , we have divided the lines differently today. flyer,are a frequent (202) 748-8000. if you work in the air traffic control system, (202) 748-8001. all others, (202) 748-8002. tweet your thoughts @cspanwj. oversight? oversight has failed the faa. no one disputes that.
congress would also oversee it. entityroot, the new would have its own board. the makeup of that sort has been heavily contested. been that board has heavily contested. how much of a role government would have on that board. trump's board and representative this proposalrd started with him last year. the makeup of the board is slightly different, but not radically. the air traffic controllers themselves have a seat at the table. this is the statement the union put out.
what do you see behind the statement? host: they have been in favor of bill shuster. his plan is a good foundation that could use some tinkering. the air traffic control union is waiting to see what the tinkering will look like and make sure that there -- they have been promised they will maintain federal benefits. that federal benefits remain, that their pay remains. host: dfa -- the faa says the traffic controllers and control centers, do the numbers go down with the work force behind those who watch it day in and day out?
guest: i don't know about the number of towers. that has been a point of debate. airports would get the attention from air traffic control that they need. been reticentve to go along with this plan because they are afraid they will be left behind. there is a little -- a amount oft participation. host: they are ensuring the same
numbers will take place. why the large amount of numbers? because of the work requirement or shift requirement? why do we see so many onboard? guest: i am not sure i can answer that. i don't know if that is something people -- i have not heard lawmakers take aim specifically at the size of the workforce. perhaps because they are trying to get nafta on board. i have not heard that being discussed. what people are talking about when they say there needs to be a change, it is about the implementation of the gen. host: frequent flyers, (202) 748-8000. air traffic controllers, (202) 748-8001. all others, (202) 748-8002.
i oppose this idea people'st chews up the sovereignty. that belongs to all of the people and not to the airlines or a few corporations that will gain from this privatization. aivatization is always question of crony capitalism. there is no other way to put it. inallow this to have to without adequate and sufficient debate is wrong. that is my opinion. goodbye. guest: that is the opinion of many democrats that have talked about this proposal, including the top democrat on the house transportation committee and
bill nelson. selloff of assets , more than $50 billion worth. would be held assets given to this new corporation. the ideas that taxpayers have already paid for those assets and that they would have to pay for it again if this corporation would need to acquire that technology new. a large constituency that agrees this takes away andreignty from government gives it to commercial airlines that have their own interest and
their own financial interest at heart. commercial airlines charge taxes to raise capital. under this system, do we still see taxes or would there be another financing system? those the airlines hate taxes. they say it is their money, money that takes -- that is taken out of what they think they can charge for ticket costs . the idea those taxes would be if the airlines think about it as their money, they would not necessarily lower rates. the corporation would be funded by a user fee. that would be on the aircraft itself. this is one of the reasons private pilots are nervous. that cost is not spread among passengers.
it is by the pilot or whoever is on the plane. would be by operation. airlines are saying it is a fee they are going to pay. unclear how that would be passed down to passengers. it is also unclear on how that fee would change and who would change it. just because the president wants to push the pattern, what is congress's role? this is a congressional issue? -- this is a congressional issue. they tried last year when they were reauthorizing the program, bill shuster proposed the same -- it never got
to the house for. the senate did not want much to do with it. they passed a short-term reauthorization for the aviation program because of that. program and took care of the security issues they needed to take care of. bill shuster is trying to bring it back. it has not seemed to change the congressional dynamics at this point. republicans on the senate side are not warm to this idea. is alsoblican chairman on the appropriations committee. feel it takes power away from them, away from congress.
republicans are worried about it, worried that general aviation and rural airports are going to get left behind. congressional -- is still very challenging. io, go ahead. when our taxes don't and services those taxes pay for [indiscernible] host: i apologize. you are breaking up. , see ifk and try again
you can get a better connection. we will hear from ben, south carolina. gps and new technology will let the airlines land much quicker. they would not have to circle. it would be much better. we would need to have oversight of the peopleies running it to make sure they are not -- you know. it is not for so that would be easy to do. on how gpsou expand would expand when it comes to air traffic control? gent: no one debates next
would be a huge improvement. at this point, when planes are ascending and descending, they go to a certain level and plateau and up again and plateau. ascend andbe able to descend and a smoother glide, which would save fuel, reduce emissions, and be a faster, more comfortable flight. planes can also fly closer with radar-based -- fly closer together than they can with radar-based technology. it would reduce airport delays. talknents of the plan about benefits of the plan to
separate air traffic control separate -- they are on track to finish next gen, finish the first major phase of the next gen implementation by 2020. this plan to renew corporate non-profit entity would take place in october 2019. it is unclear whether the private sector could speed up or slow itntation down. host: elenor, washington, d.c., go ahead. caller: i was wondering about the nonprofit tang. it doesn't always mean the people running it don't profit, but the company itself is not
profiting. how would this affect prices for people flying? flying is already expensive. guest: we don't know how the user fee will affect ticket prices. we don't know how airlines will pass the fees along to customers. customers won't see those fees on ticket prices. as for the nonprofit status, it the idea would be there would not be shareholders that make money off of this. who is controlling the way these policies are set?
the fear is that it would be run to the financial interest of the arlines and there has been great deal of conversation about how much power the airlines would have on this governing board. it is not necessarily that anyone would profit directly from this company, but airlines could profit from the way this new structure is run. canadahe president cited about how this is run. -- as an example about how this is run. countries have a similar structure as to how this is run. no one wants to talk about the u.k. because they went bankrupt a few years ago. theunited states has busiest, most diverse, most complex airspace in the world and the safest. are saying this
is the solution in search of a problem. this system is not broken and we are trying to fix it. there is a problem with the gen implementation, but this is the solution for that. host: why did the u.k. go bankrupt? think it was after 9/11 and the reduction in air travel. considered politico safety in the skies? a shift of responsibility in case there is a failure of d conflicts in -- failure of deconfliction. if they want to have an airliner ratherf that we would have not, you could have a huge disaster. guest: the idea of safety is
paramount here. it is the primary goal of this that it would improve safety as it improves navigation. feel u.s.people who itspace, being as large as is with the safety record as good as it is, is something you don't want to mess with. there are a lot of different opinions about that. gen, no far as next power is operating under this system. that is my understanding. for arlines have asked delay in the implementation as
it is said to be rolled out, even under the faa. aircraft won't be ready for it by 2020, by the implementation deadline the faa has set. host: how long has the effort been made? guest: a long time. next jan has been underway and has been a long stretch. in faa is over budget implementing it. ohio, dave, on our line for others. caller: i heard you talk about you were not sure about staffing. i was in the marine corps air 12,hing and everyone worked 16, 18 hours a day, whatever was needed. werenly people who did not air traffic controllers.
anyone ad not give break, except for air traffic controllers. shifts, longt breaks. a private corporation would not be that careful. that is all i have to say. thank you. would not be careful enough to give breaks to air traffic controllers as needed? think safety in the skies is paramount to everyone. i don't think they would suddenly be worked to the bone. that is not something that has been an issue that has been talked about. far as the timeline, where do we go from here? guest: mrs. trump throwing his support behind congressional initiative. re-authorize the faa program as it is, or they can thatthis radical change
would take about 75% of the faa away from it and put it under the and put it under a separate government entity. like i said, the dynamics and the politics around it are not settled and are not necessarily favor, butident's having his support is meaningful and will be meaningful for some congressional republicans who until now have been hesitant to join on with this plan. said, the president is also a very polarizing figure, and the politics of supporting the president -- on any issue -- a pretty start for members of the republican party. host: tanya snyder joining us of politico,, politico.com. thanks for your time. guest: thank you for having me. host: we will do open phones until 10:00. for republicans,
for democrats, (202) 748-8002 for independents, posted video on twitter if you want, and facebook.com/cspan is how you can reach us on facebook. we will take those in just a moment. ♪ "afteray night on words," new american president and ceo anne-marie slaughter explores global networking in the digital age in her book "the chessboard in the web: strategies of connection in a network world." ms. slaughter is interviewed by dennis madonna, former -- dennis is mcdounough, former chief of staff for the white house.
e-marie: the world of state to state relations is still very important, and i think of it as world because it is the world of how do we essentially be our adversaries, and we think about a move and we try to anticipate what moves they are going to make, and that world is there, and it is very important, but equally important is what i call the world of the web, that world of criminal networks, including terrorists but also armed traffickers and drug traffickers, the world of business, increasingly great network supply chance, local corporations, and the world of nongovernmental organizations. i think of all those actors as well actors as increasingly important actors, but we don't have strategies for how to bring them together. words," son and i and i don'tlike p.m. eastern on c-span2's --