Obama Signs Measure to Extend FAA and Highway Funding

President Obama has signed the bill extending Federal Aviation Administration and highway funding.

The FAA narrowly escaped its second partial shutdown Thursday night when Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., agreed to withdraw his objections to the bill that would extend both FAA and federal highway aid at their current spending levels.

Coburn put a hold on the bill that prevented Senate action. He objected to a provision that mandates states spend 10% of their federal funding on bike paths, landscaping and pedestrian safety.

Under the deal with Senate leaders, Coburn will be allowed to insert language removing the mandate from the Senate version of the long-term highway bill expected next year. States could opt out.

The cliffhanger “is another example of why ACI-NA has been calling for a two-year extension,” said Greg Principato, president of the Airports Council International-North America. “The continued short-term funding of the FAA, which has been going on since 2007, leaves airports, construction workers and the FAA itself held hostage to the whims of one or two members. This isn’t the way to run a railroad, let alone the national aviation system.”

House and Senate leaders from both parties had approved the temporary extension of FAA funding for four months and highway spending for six months. The Republican-controlled House passed the extension bill, including the mandate, earlier in the week.

The earlier two-week FAA shutdown began in July led to the furlough of 4,000 workers, work stoppages on construction projects and the loss of more than $300 million in airline ticket tax revenue.

There was a strong political backlash and neither party wanted to go through that again.

The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials also pointed to preserving jobs.

“The six-month extension of federal highway and transit programs approved by Congress today ensures the continuation of thousands of job-creating infrastructure projects in every state,” said John Horsley, AASHTO executive director.”

Both chambers have passed long-term aviation bills, but with significant differences.

The House bill would spend about $15 billion a year for four years, while the Senate bill would average about $17 billion a year for two years.

The four-month extension is meant to allow time for resolving the differences. The squabbles include union organizing rules, subsidies for flights to rural airports, and how many flights to be added at Reagan National Airport in Washington, D.C.

There are no formal highway bills in either house, but the outlines of possible legislation made public by House and Senate committee chairs with jurisdiction over transportation are even more divergent than on the FAA.

A bipartisan agreement among leaders of the Environment and Public Works Committee chaired by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., would spend about $109 billion over two years.

The proposal from House Transportation Committee chairman Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., limits spending to expected gasoline tax revenue, about $35 billion a year for six years.

Removing the 10% of federal funding used to finance bike paths, landscaping and pedestrian safety is part of the Mica proposal.

Transportation advocates are anxious for a resolution.

“The longer it takes to pass a multi-year bill, the more expensive the problems are to solve. Conditions get worse; land, labor and materials get more expensive,” warned Janet Kavinoky, vice president of the Americans for Transportation Mobility Coalition.

For reprint and licensing requests for this article, click here.
Transportation industry Washington
MORE FROM BOND BUYER