Tom Coburn: “I have a couple of comments to the Senator from Washington State. LORAN won't go away if this instruction for this study…”

“I have a couple of comments to the Senator from Washington State. LORAN won't go away if this instruction for this study is taken out. There are still 4 years that LORAN will be there under the Coast Guard's plan. I also remind the Senator that the FAA has already said they don't need it. The Maritime Commission has said they don't need it. The Coast Guard has said they don't need it. Who needs it when we have other backups? It is true that in 2000 the FAA said we don't have sufficient backup to eliminate LORAN. They have since, in the report--the study that has already been made--said they don't need it. So this is a report to extend the life of LORAN, something that we don't need. I know the Senator from Alaska will oppose this. I look forward to a vigorous debate with him. I will soon ask unanimous consent again to submit the 2005 Federal radio navigational plan into the Record so everybody can see all the claims that have been made by the groups that supposedly don't need it. The plan has already been done. It is not required as a navigational backup. Now, will some people somewhere want to get a better navigational system? Yes. You can buy a GPS system for a boat now for about $300 and you can have something far superior than LORAN ever was or you can use the VOR system or one of the myriad--seven other backups for maritime without using LORAN. With that, I ask unanimous consent that this amendment be set aside, and I will call up another amendment.…”