Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Sequestration and the GA Pilot

As the US government marches inexorably toward sequestration, this might be a good time to pause and see how across-the-board cuts could affect GA. Work on capital improvements (like the new, unified control tower at the Oakland airport) could slow or stop completely. Other FAA services could be reduced or curtailed. Here's a list of airports just in California the FAA has identified for possible tower closures.


APC
Napa Tower
Napa
CA
CCR
Concord Tower
Concord
CA
CMA
Camarillo Tower
Camarillo
CA
EMT
El Monte Tower
El Monte
CA
FUL
Fullerton Municipal
Fullerton
CA
HHR
Jack Northrop Field/Hawthorne Municipal
Hawthorne
CA
LVK
Livermore Tower
Livermore
CA
MER
Castle
Atwater
CA
OXR
Oxnard
Oxnard
CA
PMD
Palmdale Regional/USAF Plant 42
Palmdale
CA
POC
Brackett Tower
La Verne
CA
RAL
Riverside Municipal
Riverside
CA
RNM
Ramona
Ramona
CA
SAC
Sacramento Executive
Sacramento
CA
SCK
Stockton Tower
Stockton
CA
SDM
Brown Field Municipal
San Diego
CA
SMO
Santa Monica Tower
Santa Monica
CA
SNS
Salinas Municipal
Salinas
CA
SQL
San Carlos
San Carlos
CA
STS
Charles M. Schultz-Sonoma County
Santa Rosa
CA
VCV
Southern California Logistics
Victorville
CA
WHP
Whiteman
Los Angeles
CA
WJF
General William J. Fox Airfield
Lancaster
CA


You can view the complete list of 200 towered airports that could be affected by clicking here. When towers close, ATC workers will be idled, safety will suffer (can you imagine all the NOTAMs that will come out to explain this?), flight schools and FBO will be affected. These cuts will hurt a lot of people.

That includes me. My wife is a contractor for a department of the federal government and her "contract" could be terminated, leaving us scrambling to make ends meet. Say what you will about austerity programs and reducing the deficit, but given the weak economy this seems like a particularly bad time to reduce federal spending.

Even the redoubtable Chairman Ben Bernanke is warning that our bad-to-mediocre economic situation could get a lot worse if the sequestration proceeds. On the other end of the political spectrum is Paul Krugman, who has been saying that austerity (whether in the US or in Europe) is a bad idea at this point in time.

Left? Right? How about FORWARD? How about a legislative branch that serves its citizens rather holds them hostage? I wish I had more answers that questions ...

5 comments:

Frank Ch. Eigler said...

For cuts that amount to a reduction to the positive rate of growth rather than actual cuts overall, there sure seems to be plenty of vested interest in generating panic about the sequester. "The fireman, the policeman, the teacher ... and your control tower are going to get it, unless you send more money to Washington."

toddgrx said...

I can't imagine how ops would be at KCCR without a control tower. Given its complicated runway/taxiway structure... it's accidents waiting to happen.

John Ewing said...

Mr. Eigler,

With all due respect, you seem to be repeating "talking points" and adopting an academic, idealistic point of view. Perhaps you are not personally going to feel any impact from the sequestration. Others (like my family) are not in that position.

First, consider the AvWeb article that gives credence to the closure of class Delta towers that I mentioned in my post: http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/FAA_Budget_Cuts_208258-1.html?CMP=OTC-RSS

Second, there's the phone call my wife received today (on a Sunday, no less), that a stop-work order was in effect for her and her federal contractor colleagues.

While some characterize the worries over the effects of sequestration as irrational "panic," for those of us affected, those who need to pay our mortgages and health insurance premiums, the effects of sequestration are just now being realized and are all too real.

It's much easier to take an idealistic position if 1) you personally are not affected by said idealistic position and 2) you can rationalize the pain and difficulties caused to others.

If that's your position, I can understand it, but I certainly do not support it.

Frank Ch. Eigler said...

John, I don't think we're in any way disagreeing. Selected government employees and users of their services will certainly be hurt by the proceedings. My point was that at least some of the blame for that lies in the bureaucracy's desire to maximize felt pain when its budget is threatened.

John Ewing said...

Frank,

We're not disagreeing? Based on your two comments, I'd say our views on government and public policy couldn't be more different.

Asserting that "bureaucracy" is trying to maximize pain from sequestration is simply objectifying government so blame came be assigned. It ignores the across-the-board nature of the cuts required by the legislation and the "starve government" ideology behind the legislation.

Second, you've seem to have missed (or chosen to ignore) the main thesis of my post: Blaming doesn't move the country forward. Dialog, compromise and a sense of civic duty (by both elected officials and tax-paying citizens) can move us forward.

When the failure to fund services that only government can provide begins to affect you or someone you care about, only then will the sequestration cease to be a diversion, an abstract process without real meaning.

For many Americans, this process is just starting.