With a major election on Tuesday, the political science side
of my brain is in overdrive. I went to school in Washington ,
DC
A few days ago, a question popped into my head. Do us, frequent travelers, have anything to worry about in the upcoming election? Will
the election of one candidate over another have dramatic effects on the
frequent flyer community?
Chris and I are on the opposite ends of the political
spectrum. So I posed him the question and between the two of us, we came up
with a list of topics that are important to the community.
Neither candidate has made any direct comments about frequent
flyers or air travel in general. Except for Governor Romney’s questioning, in
early September, why airplanes don’t have windows that open, after his wife’s
plan filled with smoke. Therefore, the following analysis is only a
hypothetical guess of what might occur.
The Issues
The first issue is government regulations of airlines. Over
the past year, the frequent flyer community has had new regulations come into
effect that have changed the “game” for the positive:
- Ability to cancel airline tickets within 24 hours of booking them
- Advertised price must included all taxes and fees
- Airlines can not raise fares after they have been booked (ie fare mistakes)
- Limited amount of time airplanes can be on the tarmac
The frequent flyer community loves the inability of airlines
to raise prices or cancel tickets due to a fare mistake. Similarly, the ability
to purchase a fare mistake and cancel within 24 hours later is a game changer.
Now one has no reason not to book a fare mistake. Book the fare mistake, check
to see if you can take time off and cancel later if it does not work out.
Obama: Since these regulations were issued by the Department
of Transportation under his administration, one can assume that he is very
unlikely to roll them back. If anything, one can expect more regulations. The
DOT press release announcing the new rules mentions, “the Department is looking at other airline consumer protection
measures for a possible future rulemaking, including requiring that all airline
optional fees be disclosed wherever consumers can book a flight, strengthening
disclosure of code-share flights, and requiring additional carriers to file
on-time performance reports.”
Romney: The Governor
has been very vocal on the need to roll-back government regulations especially
those issued over the past four years. Romeny’s webpage on regulations states,
“a Romney administration
will act swiftly to tear down the vast edifice of regulations the Obama
administration has imposed on the economy. It will also seek to make structural
changes to the federal bureaucracy that ensures economic growth remains front
and center when regulatory decisions are made.” However, during the First Presidential Debate, Governor Romney stated, “Regulation is essential. You can't have a free market work if
you don't have regulation. As a businessperson, I had to have -- I need to know
the regulations. I needed them there. You couldn't have people opening up banks
in their -- in their garage and making loans. I mean, you have to have
regulations so that you can have an economy work. Every free economy has good
regulation. At the same time, regulation can become excessive.” With this
statement, one can be certain that the Romney Administration would not
roll back every regulation that the Obama Administration has issued.
With this in
mind, the regulations that a Romney Administration might roll back is those
that are expensive to businesses. Of the four mentioned above, the one
regulation that the airlines complain most about is the tarmac rule. A domestic
airplane that is on the tarmac with passengers for more than 3 hours can be
fined up to $27,500 per passenger. The number of tarmac delays has dropped
drastically, but the number of cancelled flights to avoid tarmac delays has
gone up. Consumers like the regulations, so a roll back of this specific
regulation is unlikely. Similarly, the other three regulations mentioned above
are not as well know, but are very consumer friendly; therefore, a roll back,
is again unlikely.
The second
issue is taxes. Benjamin Franklin once said, “In
this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” The
purchase of airplane tickets or the redemption of airline points for a ticket
always comes with a tax. At the very least, each ticket comes $2.50 tax for
each leg of a journey that
requires them to board a plane, which goes toward financing the TSA's staff,
operations and screening equipment -- like those new body scanners. Similarly, depending on which
airports one flies through, one may get a passenger facility fee.
Romney: The
Romney platform does not specifically discuss the 9-11 Passenger Security Tax.
However, Romney’s running mate House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan’s 2012 Budget
Blueprint had a provision to raise the tax from $2.50 per leg to a $5.00 flat
one way tax. One can assume that if Ryan placed it in his “Path to Prosperity,”
that it will show up again in a future Romney Budget.
Obama: Obama’s
2012 budget blue print supports the raised of the passenger security tax. Page22 states, “The Administration proposes both to raise the fee and change the
manner in which it is collected” The Administration proposal makes three
changes 1) replace the current “per-enplanement” fee structure to a flat one
way fee, 2) remove the statutory fee limit and replace it with a statutory fee
minimum of $5.00, with an annual incremental increase of $0.50 from 2013 to
2017 resulting in 2017 of a fee of $7.50, and 3) allow the Secretary of
Homeland Security to adjust the fee up, but not down per his/her discretion.
Neither
candidate is proposing getting rid of the 9-11 Passenger Security Tax, but both
candidates have proposals to increase the taxes from its current limit.
The third issue
is our friends at TSA. The TSA is one of the biggest hotbed issues and the
media loves to
talk about it. TSA was created after 9-11 and controls the security at most
airports throughout the country. Many frequent flyers love TSA-Pre Check, which
allows for faster passing through TSA check points. A proposal has floating
around to allow more airports to get rid of TSA and hire private companies to
handle the security. Will TSA Pre-Check go away with private security firms?
Romney: The
platform adopted at the Republican National Convention had specific language in
regarding the privatization of TSA:
While the aftermath of the 2001 terrorist attacks
brought about a greater need for homeland security, the American people have
already delivered their verdict on the Transportation Security Administration:
its procedures – and much of its personnel – need to be changed.
It is now a massive bureaucracy of 65,000 employees
who seem to be accountable to no one for the way they treat travelers. We call
for the private sector to take over airport screening wherever feasible and
look toward the development of security systems that can replace the personal
violation of frisking.
Obama: The Democratic Platform did not
include such language regarding the TSA. Actually, the Platform did not
included a mention of the TSA at all. However, President Obama signed into law
that would make it easier for airports to transfer to private security. TSA
Administrator John Pistole commented on the new law as saying "It's changing the burden, if you will, on the
discretion I have in terms of making that decision, which is [based on] the
taxpayers' best interest in terms of cost, but obviously the bottom line is who
provides the best security," he said. "So if I'm required to accept
something unless I can prove affirmatively that it does not meet that criteria,
it obliviously changes the standard.” He went on to say, “that privatized screening
at airports that participate in the SPP have in the past cost between
three percent and nine percent more than if the TSA had operated screening
services at those airports.” Due to
Pistole’s statements, one can assume the Obama Administration is not in favor
of complete removal of the TSA, but not against some airports switching to
private companies handling security.
Again another issue with slight differences between Obama
and Romney: both candidates support the privatization of security at airports,
abet with different criteria. In regards
to the effect of private security companies taking over security at airports
and programs like TSA Pre-Check, the case is still out. Currently, 16 airports
have private screeners and not one allows TSA Pre-Check. A big test will be Orlando ’s Airport’s application to switch private security and their
ability to keep TSA Pre-Check.
Conclusion Part 1:
The three examples, regulations, taxes and TSA, show that
both candidates share similar beliefs. There are slight differences, but
nothing earth shattering. The raising of the 9/11 Passenger Security tax is disturbing and effect each of our's travel budgets. This is an issue we all must watch carefully. Giving the ability to the Secretary of Homeland Security to raise the fee unilateral is dangerous.
My goal in this post and tomorrow’s post is not to change anyone’s
mind on who to vote for on Tuesday. The issues that we are talking about a minuscule compared to other issues facing our country. However, I believe that the community needs to be more aware of the effect of elections on our hobby. Our community is quick to be loud and use the government when the result might be in our favor (ie the United 4 Mile Asia Award Trip). We must be equally loud and tell the government, when we feel that they are encroaching on our hobby. Our hobby is not unlike others who are politically active. Sportsmen, in particular, hunters are acutely aware of the effects of an candidates stances on the Second Amendment. Similarly, professional poker players pay attention to changing gambling laws and tax deductions for gambling losses.
Yes, the election is two days away. I hope this post starts a conversation within the community, no for this election, but for the one coming in 2014 and 2016.
Until tomorrow~
No comments:
Post a Comment