I believe modifying the Wright amendment without a careful and serious debate about the safety issues involved is premature. At the outset, I want to make it clear that I am not against competition in the airline industry. In fact, I have worked many years as chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee and now as the ranking Democratic member on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee to ensure that competition is alive and well and that consumers are protected. My concerns focus entirely on the safety of permitting greatly expanded traffic growth at Love Field in Dallas, which might complicate the air traffic patterns in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. Let me begin by saying that the Wright amendment was a carefully crafted compromise which resolved a heated and long standing dispute between the cities of Dallas and Fort Worth. Today, Dallas Fort Worth is a vibrant international airport and Love Field is very successful and the home of Southwest Airlines. I will not go into the history of the Wright amendment except to say that it has served the Nation well.
James Oberstar: “I believe modifying the Wright amendment without a careful and serious debate about the safety issues involved is…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing concerns about modifying the Wright amendment and its implications for airline safety.
Share
More from James Oberstar
The gentleman from Washington is mistaken in his understanding or his reading of the amendment that I offer. It's an amendment to OPA. It is not an amendment to the dollar amounts and does not reference dollar amounts. Under OPA, of which…
Again, the acquisition of replacement land is available and authorized under OPA 90. What this amendment does is clarify that in that replacement you can replace that part of the ecosystem that has been irresponsibly damaged with better…
We must move away from complete reliance on public funding for infrastructure and forge a new, stronger connection between private capital and infrastructure needs.
The City of Marquette kept its part of the agreement, conveyed property to the Coast Guard for $1, and now is going to be stuck with the bill. The problem is that the way the transfer worked out, the statutory PAYGO rules preclude…





