Senate Committee Hearing On Wright Amendment 11/10!

[corl737]

From the Fort Worth Star-Telegram:

Arpey, Kelleher showdown nears over Wright Amendment
By MARIA RECIO

Star-Telegram Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON - Gerard Arpey, American Airlines’ chairman and chief executive, will square off with Herb Kelleher, Southwest Airlines’ chairman and founder, during Senate hearings Thursday over the Wright Amendment, a law that has shaped both of their companies.

The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation’s Aviation Subcommittee Monday announced its witness list for the hearings, which is about evenly divided between supporters and opponents of the law that limits service from Dallas Love Field to Texas and seven nearby states.

Arpey and Kelleher will appear alongside Kevin Cox, chief operating officer and senior executive vice president of Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport on the first panel of witnesses.

Arpey and Cox support the law, which was designed to protect D/FW. Kelleher is at the forefront of Love Field-based Southwest’s effort to repeal the law that limits the carrier’s ability to fly non-stop to and from Dallas.

The second panel of witnesses consists of citizens on opposite sides of the issue: Sam Coats, former chairman of the North Dallas Chamber of Commerce; Lori Palmer of the Love Field Citizens Action Committee; and two consultants, authors of dueling studies on the impact of repeal: Brian Campbell, chairman of the Campbell-Hill Aviation Group, Inc., and Bill Swelbar, managing partner of Eclat Consulting.

Coats, a former executive at Southwest, is an outspoken proponent of repeal, which he sees as giving a boost to the flying public with cheaper fares. Palmer, on the other hand, maintains that the local community will be harmed by noise, pollution and congestion from a busier Love Field.

Campbell’s widely quoted study, paid for by Southwest, concluded that repeal would save North Texas fliers $688 million in cheaper airfares. Swelbar’s study, paid for by American, determined that 185 of American’s daily D/FW flights to smaller cities would be lost as American moved flights to Love Field to compete with Southwest.

In addition to the announced witnesses, Sens. Kit Bond, R-Mo., and James Inhofe, R-Okla., are expected to make statements to the panel.

Bond, who earlier this year attached an amendment to a spending bill to exempt Missouri from the Wright Amendment, is an advocate of repeal. Inhofe introduced a bill to close down Love Field to commercial flights.

The panel is considering a repeal bill introduced by Sens. John Ensign, R-Nev., and John McCain, R-Ariz., who are on the committee. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, who does not support repeal, is also a member of the panel.

The hearing will be at 9 a.m. CDT in Room 562 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. It will be video-streamed at http://commerce.senate.gov and can be accessed through a "live webcast" link. The video will also be archived after the hearing for later viewing.

 

[9epnsrip]

I hear repeal the Wright Amendment. Why SWA does not fly DAL to BHM (ALABAMA)
or DAL to JAN. (Mississippi) Both are Legal Routes TODAY!!!!!! With the Wright Amendment..
Start flying these routes and pick up four Senators and a few house delegates to boot.

 

[bwipilot]

If the Wright Amendment went away there would be a much bigger probability of service since LUV could sell through tickets: DAL-JAN-BWI, or DAL-BHM-MCO, etc. Heck, get rid of the limitation on through ticketing, add MO, TN, FL, and AZ and things would be reasonable--even if the remaining restrictions were ridiculous.

 

[mga707]

If the Wright Amendment went away there would be a much bigger probability of service since LUV could sell through tickets: DAL-JAN-BWI, or DAL-BHM-MCO, etc. Heck, get rid of the limitation on through ticketing, add MO, TN, FL, and AZ and things would be reasonable--even if the remaining restrictions were ridiculous.

Agree totally--and add CO as well, since DEN is coming! I opined long ago that I thought a reasonable compromise would be to allow service to all states that border states bordering TX--FL would be icing on the cake!

 

[corl737]

More fuel for the fire ...
(Now there are 7 to retain, 5 to repeal.)
From the Dallas Morning News:

Wright hearing to add witnesses

5 lawmakers to offer testimony in Senate panel's airport talks

12:00 AM CST on Wednesday, November 9, 2005

From staff reports

The witness list for the Wright amendment hearings in Congress this week was expanded Tuesday to include five lawmakers who have staked out positions on lifting flight restrictions at Dallas Love Field.

According to the revised list, the first panel will include:

• Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., who opposes repealing Wright and has proposed closing Love Field to all commercial traffic, saying the city airport was never intended to continue hosting such flights.

• Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond, R-Mo., a Wright amendment foe who has backed allowing carriers to sell connecting tickets to distant cities out of Love, as well as a separate provision that would add Missouri to the list of seven states that can be served with interstate service from Love.

• Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Dallas, whose district includes Love Field. She has suggested the airport be closed to commercial traffic if proponents insist on lifting Wright restrictions.

• Rep. Kay Granger, R-Fort Worth, a former mayor of Fort Worth who wants to keep the Wright restrictions in place.

• Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Dallas, who introduced legislation to repeal Wright, the "Right to Fly Act," aimed at bringing greater competition and lower fares to North Texas.

The previously announced witnesses include American Airlines Inc. chairman Gerard Arpey; Southwest Airlines Co. chairman Herb Kelleher; and Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport's chief operating officer, Kevin Cox.

Representatives of the North Dallas Chamber of Commerce, which backs repeal, and the Love Field Citizens Action committee, which opposes it, will also testify, as will consultants hired by Southwest and American.

Southwest advocates lifting Wright so it can fly throughout its nationwide network from its home airport.

D/FW and American vigorously oppose changing the federal law, saying Southwest should fly from the larger regional airport if it wants to offer long-haul service from the Dallas area.

The hearing before the aviation subcommittee of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee is scheduled to begin Thursday at 9 a.m. Dallas time.

E-mail [email protected]

 

[AirLUVer]

More fuel for the fire ...
(Now there are 7 to retain, 5 to repeal.)
From the Dallas Morning News:

Wright hearing to add witnesses

5 lawmakers to offer testimony in Senate panel's airport talks

12:00 AM CST on Wednesday, November 9, 2005

From staff reports

The witness list for the Wright amendment hearings in Congress this week was expanded Tuesday to include five lawmakers who have staked out positions on lifting flight restrictions at Dallas Love Field.

According to the revised list, the first panel will include:

• Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., who opposes repealing Wright and has proposed closing Love Field to all commercial traffic, saying the city airport was never intended to continue hosting such flights.

• Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond, R-Mo., a Wright amendment foe who has backed allowing carriers to sell connecting tickets to distant cities out of Love, as well as a separate provision that would add Missouri to the list of seven states that can be served with interstate service from Love.

• Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Dallas, whose district includes Love Field. She has suggested the airport be closed to commercial traffic if proponents insist on lifting Wright restrictions.

• Rep. Kay Granger, R-Fort Worth, a former mayor of Fort Worth who wants to keep the Wright restrictions in place.

• Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Dallas, who introduced legislation to repeal Wright, the "Right to Fly Act," aimed at bringing greater competition and lower fares to North Texas.

The previously announced witnesses include American Airlines Inc. chairman Gerard Arpey; Southwest Airlines Co. chairman Herb Kelleher; and Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport's chief operating officer, Kevin Cox.

Representatives of the North Dallas Chamber of Commerce, which backs repeal, and the Love Field Citizens Action committee, which opposes it, will also testify, as will consultants hired by Southwest and American.

Southwest advocates lifting Wright so it can fly throughout its nationwide network from its home airport.

D/FW and American vigorously oppose changing the federal law, saying Southwest should fly from the larger regional airport if it wants to offer long-haul service from the Dallas area.

The hearing before the aviation subcommittee of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee is scheduled to begin Thursday at 9 a.m. Dallas time.

E-mail [email protected]

Per posting on www.flyertalk.com, the meeting is now scheduled to begin at 0830 CST, due to the additional panel members.

 

[corl737]

Per posting on www.flyertalk.com, the meeting is now scheduled to begin at 0830 CST, due to the additional panel members.

Watch it live via webcast beginning at 9:30 am EST here:

http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/witnesslist.cfm?id=1653

 

[swflyer]

I'll admit it, I was sitting here watching the Senate procedings.

Overall, fascinating. Some pretty good lobs were sent to the panelist the Senator liked and, of course, John McCain got pushy w/Gerald Arpy. It was fun watching Kevin Cox get busted for using only a portion of a quote from Herb, only to have Kay Bailey Hutchinson put a band aid on Kevin.

This won't surprise anyone, given my name and avatar, but I thought Herb was great. He used his leverage, as the only person present during the Wright genesis, to an advantage. He also had numbers to back up his arguments, which I didn't hear in the testimony of the other panelists.

I also thought Gerald Arpy did a great job. He looked like an effective leader, unbowed by the proceeding or company. He only tried the "noise and pollution" argument once and realized it wouldn't fly. He was also effective in referencing his fellow panelists during his answers. I wish I could remember one question where he was just shut down, forced to answer with a simple, "no".

I am no fan of Kevin Cox, found him to still be whiny, and the panel would have been better balanced between the two airline chairmen, who did a better job of arguing "on the same playing field".

It's going to be interesting to see if this goes anywhere.

 

[corl737]

I'll admit it, I was sitting here watching the Senate procedings.

Ok, me too! Fascinating bit of posturing, and some good information occasionally, too!

The best point IMHO was the historical evidence of AA's lack of dehubbing and increased number of regional destinations at ORD in the face of increasing LCC traffic at Midway. If airport competition was the true evil monster they claim AA/DFW would have gone out of their way to highlight where it is happening. Alas, their actions belie their words.

I was disheartened that no one asked this question to the Love Field Citizens Committee: When an aircraft takes off from Love Field, can you tell what its destination is? This would shoot the entire "noise limit by destination" argument out the window. A 737-700 fully loaded has much better performance and is much quieter than even a lightly loaded 737-200, an aircraft no longer in the SWA fleet.

Now I need to go back and look at the archives so I can see the first part of the hearing. I just didn't have the will power to get up for the 6:30 am PST start!

 

[CruelSummer]

I'll admit it, I was sitting here watching the Senate procedings.

Overall, fascinating. Some pretty good lobs were sent to the panelist the Senator liked and, of course, John McCain got pushy w/Gerald Arpy. It was fun watching Kevin Cox get busted for using only a portion of a quote from Herb, only to have Kay Bailey Hutchinson put a band aid on Kevin.

This won't surprise anyone, given my name and avatar, but I thought Herb was great. He used his leverage, as the only person present during the Wright genesis, to an advantage. He also had numbers to back up his arguments, which I didn't hear in the testimony of the other panelists.

I also thought Gerald Arpy did a great job. He looked like an effective leader, unbowed by the proceeding or company. He only tried the "noise and pollution" argument once and realized it wouldn't fly. He was also effective in referencing his fellow panelists during his answers. I wish I could remember one question where he was just shut down, forced to answer with a simple, "no".

I am no fan of Kevin Cox, found him to still be whiny, and the panel would have been better balanced between the two airline chairmen, who did a better job of arguing "on the same playing field".

It's going to be interesting to see if this goes anywhere.

swfly, I saw your comment in the AA thread - I found it to be fascinating, too. Everyone spoke very passionately about their concerns. What did you think about Sen. Inhofe's comment that a repeal would cost DFW over 200 flights a day? Seemed to me like a good point in favor of retaining Wright.

 

[AirLUVer]

Keep in mind that they only mentioned Eagle's expansion at ORD which has been at the expense of mainline expansion. Talk to your fellow TWU'ers at AA about Eagle taking over of mainline flying.

 

[Ch. 12]

Keep in mind that they only mentioned Eagle's expansion at ORD which has been at the expense of mainline expansion. Talk to your fellow TWU'ers at AA about Eagle taking over of mainline flying.

For the sake of this issue, it is AA expansion. Who cares if it is mainline or beagle? The WA debate is already contentious w/o trying to add union issues (that aren't even pertinant) to it!

 

[corl737]

Keep in mind that they only mentioned Eagle's expansion at ORD which has been at the expense of mainline expansion. Talk to your fellow TWU'ers at AA about Eagle taking over of mainline flying.

Let's please leave union egos out of this thread and keep to the issue of "Air Service". While Arpy is the president/CEO of AA, he is also the President, CEO, and Chairman of the AMR Corporation. As long as it's in the best interest of AMR (the whole) it doesn't matter to him whether the $ comes from AA or AE. (Learn about AMR's corporate structure.) If a market can't support an MD80 but can support an RJ then it makes economic sense to use the most appropriate aircraft. The net result is that the community retains air service to the hub and the airline makes a profit.

During the past several years, a period of significant low-cost competition growth at MDW, AMR (AA & AE) increased the number of destinations served from ORD and did so without dehubbing ORD or moving significant operations to MDW.

Why should we expect AMR's DFW operations to respond any differently with increased competition from the smaller Love Field? (Other than the obvious counter-logical "it isn't about business, this is personal" argument!)

 

[AirLUVer]

Let's leave union egos out of this thread and keep to the issue of "Air Service". If a market can't support an MD80 but can support an RJ then it makes economic sense to use the most appropriate aircraft. The net result is that the community retains air service to the hub.

During the past several years, a period of significant low-cost competition growth at MDW, AMR (AA & AE) increased the number of destinations served from ORD and did so without dehubbing ORD or moving significant operations to MDW.

Why should we expect AMR's DFW operations to respond any differently with increased competition from the smaller Love Field? (Other than the obvious counter-logical "it isn't about business, this is personal" argument!)

1. Because Chicago is probably twice the size of the Dallas/Fort Worth marketplace.
2a. ORD and MDW have limited growth opportunities and ORD is slot restricted again.
2b. DFW is unrestricted and underutilized, DAL has artifically restricted growth opportunities due to the Master Plan.
3. 60% of local DFW users live closer to DAL than to DFW.
4. In my previous post I addressed loss of mainline service to markets and replacing with Eagle service. The little bit of mainline increase in ORD is in international flights not domestic.

 

[corl737]

1. Because Chicago is probably twice the size of the Dallas/Fort Worth marketplace.

Your population estimate is pretty good!
From 2003 US Census Bureau estimates:
3 Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL-IN-WI..... 9,334,000
5 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX ......... 5,590,000

But considering the amount of air traffic the two primary airports in these metro areas are amazingly similar:
From the FAA Administrator's Fact Book, August 2005 (CY 2004 totals)
Ohare ...... 992,000
Midway .... 240,000
Chicago 1,232,000 movements

DFW ........ 814,000
Love ....... 249,000
D/FW 1,063,000 movements

2a. ORD and MDW have limited growth opportunities and ORD is slot restricted again.

Hmmm. Can't a master plan be an effective method of creating locally-controlled "slot restrictions"?

2b. DFW is unrestricted and underutilized, DAL has artifically restricted growth opportunities due to the Master Plan.

Sounds like the Love Field Master Plan is a way to help DFW. By physically restricting the amount of traffic at Love Field, DFW will be the beneficiary of any further commercial air traffic growth simply by being the only game in town. (Unless, of course, Fort Worth insists on expanding Alliance further!)

3. 60% of local DFW users live closer to DAL than to DFW.

Therefore, 60% of DFW users choose to drive past a closer Love field to fly from the international hub. This is obviously not a concern for AA as it doesn't even offer a single flight from DAL to the majority of its passengers who you say live closer to Love Field than DFW. I think we discussed earlier that the Legend startup was an attack on AA's premium yield customers and thus warranted a response. The "coach class" folks must not be of that much interest to AA.

The Boyd Study offers projections based on DFW metroplex demographics that by remaining at Love Field, SWA is actually becoming farther from the population base as the primary growth is away from central Dallas toward Tarrant county.

4. In my previous post I addressed loss of mainline service to markets and replacing with Eagle service. The little bit of mainline increase in ORD is in international flights not domestic.

I recall your post. It was informative, thanks!

I think we'll probably agree to disagree on whether or not the Wright Amendment repeal is a good thing. I really do appreciate learning your views, however, as my first-hand airline experience is limited to SWA. (I have a lot of GA and military background, too, but that really doesn't help on this issue!)