John Mica: “we are winding up the general debate on this bill, and it is a good bill. It is a good bill in its present form, and the…”

“we are winding up the general debate on this bill, and it is a good bill. It is a good bill in its present form, and the present form allows for fairness. We have heard some things said by the other side in opposition to the current form of this legislation, and most of it deals with the question of reimbursement. First of all, one must understand that there are some people in Congress who think that Washington knows best, that Washington must dictate exactly what every local government, every local entity, should do. Now, we are talking about funds here that these communities and airports would be entitled to, and we set certain parameters. We have set certain parameters in the past as to what projects would be eligible. Towers were not eligible. We are today, with the passage of this legislation, changing those rules. We told them in the past, you build a tower, and we will man the tower. At that time you could not use AIP funds for construction of those towers. We are changing that rule now. No, I do not want to participate in ``gotcha'' legislation. This is not fair. It is just a question of fairness. There are 22 airports that could benefit from the reimbursement provision. There are 48 airports that will benefit by us changing the rule and allowing AIP funds to be used for construction of towers. We today are changing the rule.”