So far, the costs that this bill will impose on the local airports authority are not known. It is conceivable that they will not be inconsequential or unsubstantial. The local authority should not be required to bear these costs when they have been given no voice in change of name. Under the amendment pending, the costs do not have to be met by the Federal Government since a good deal of the motivation for the name change has come from private sources who want to name airports all over the country. In fact, it was suggested there ought to be a Ronald Reagan Airport named in every State, which raises the possibility we could take off from one State and land in another and not know where we are, we would always be landing in a Ronald Reagan Airport. But it is reasonable to expect that those who are advocating this name change should pay for it. The CBO statement, which appears in our committee report on the bill, suggests its costs are likely to be minimal. It says that if the State of Virginia chose to change signs, costs would not exceed $500,000. Well, that is $500,000. If they have got a tight budget, that $500,000 makes it all the more tight.
James Oberstar: “So far, the costs that this bill will impose on the local airports authority are not known. It is conceivable that they…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the financial implications of a proposed name change for airports.
Share
More from James Oberstar
We are going to hold them accountable. The Coast Guard will hold them accountable. I do want to point out that the emergency fund is an account within the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. It is not a separate fund of its own. Further, as…
But we all also recognize that the potential cost of meeting these needs is immense.
I wish to express my appreciation to the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Mica, who made a very elaborate statement about the provisions of the bill. I will not elaborate on it, except to concur with him that we are getting the…
I wish with all my heart we didn't have to be here and that the other body had acted on this measure in the 110th Congress and earlier in this Congress, but that's not the case, unfortunately. Without going into any detail or further…





