Mr. Chairman, 7 weeks since the tragedy of September 11, 3 weeks since the Senate passed an airline security bill by a vote of 100 to zero. The delay in bringing this bill to the floor until now has put tens of thousands of American travelers at risk. That is wrong. Security lapses at airports across the country continue. Screeners that were at the gates before September 11 are there now, with no additional training and the same poor industry standards. It is wrong. Our current airline security system is an outrage. It is a profit-driven industry carried out by the lowest bidder. It has contributed to a workforce that suffers from high turnover, low pay, and low morale, and that is wrong. Baggage screeners should be a highly skilled, highly trained workforce that serves the frontline for our Nation's defense. Aviation security should be a function of Federal, professionally trained law enforcement officials. Border Patrol, FBI, INS and Customs Service are all Federal agencies that protect the public. The traveling public deserves the same protection. That is the right thing to do. Let us not let the innocent people on those American and United flights, along with the thousands of others that perished on the ground, die in vain. Let us do the right thing.
James Oberstar: “Mr. Chairman, 7 weeks since the tragedy of September 11, 3 weeks since the Senate passed an airline security bill by a…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing airline security and the need for federal oversight after the September 11 attacks.
Share
More from James Oberstar
I have worked with the gentleman and our committee staff to craft this language. It's important to note that these are not taxpayer dollars paying for restoration, but rather proceeds from a penalty provided in this provision that is very…
I thank the gentlewoman for her courageous lead on this issue. This $35 billion for Afghanistan is roughly equivalent to the amount in the Recovery Act for highways and transit. If instead of Afghanistan these funds were invested at home…
I would just conclude that it's inappropriate for us to impose this penalty on the FAA through the appropriation process. A much more appropriate way would be to deal with it through our committee. I commit to the gentleman that we will…
Well, it is to replace what has been destroyed. It's really just clarifying what is already available under OPA, but making it clear that the funds can be used for those resources that have been damaged so badly they can't be restored.





