>> how far are you going to take that -- a shutdown -- >> it's not -- this isn't going to have anything to do with a shutdown. this is -- we'll work in a creative way, but there's any number of members on both sides of the aisle that are already in discussions with us about coming up with either a broader energy package or some other way to work on it. there's a lot of interest in moving this. it goes back to the merits, and the broad support in the public. there's a lot of interest in coming up with equations to move the bill, and our energy committee chairman in the next congress is here, and she has got great ideas in terms of how we can package this, and -- i also want to thank all of the sponsors who joined us to this point. senator landrieu and recognize that we're going to have to have

bipartisan majority to get this done in the new congress, but i really think we have a lot of options. but it won't have anything to do with a shutdown. >> priorities for a broader energy package? what are your priorities to include in a -- >> well, expert lng export, coal ash recycling, hydraulic fracturing. i think there's a whole range of things can do to reduce the regulatory burden and i actually would invite our incoming energy committee chairwoman to maybe mention some of her priorities shep has a thereto say about these things. >> all you need to do is go to energy 2020, 115 page beautiful treatise on what a good solid energy policy will be. but in case you haven't read it, it will be policies that focus on abundance, affordability, clean energy sources, diverse

energy sources, and secure energy sources. so, we're going to have a lot of work in the new congress in the 114th, but i can guarantee you that our opportunities to work with our partners in energy, as canada is, to help advance our economy in the united states as well as help or friends with our trade relationships. you're going to see keystone xl come back and i will repeat the leader mcconnell's words, that we will see that early in this next congress. >> try to move a bill to allow oil exports or lift the oil export ban? >> i think you all know that i have been taking points on the issue of exports generally,

whether they be lng or oil, and i have artic lated them in some pretty extensive white papers. the timing on that is something that is yet to be determined. we have to put together our energy committee for the 114th , and i'm looking forward having good discussions with me colleagues about the priority that we will advance, but i do think that today, you can be assured that this conference is going to continue to push on the keystone xl pipeline, regardless of what the energy packages may look like longer term. [inaudible question] >> you know, that is not up to me to decide. that up to the people of louisiana, and we will see what they do. we got, what, another ten days

to go but that's not my choice. i don't get to pick. thank you. >> thanks, guys. appreciate it. >> coming up on the next washington journal, senator ron johnson of wisconsin discusses the issues before congress it's winds down this session and what is hate with the new congress in january. and then a look at the nsa surveillance bill that would end the nsa's ability to collect bulk records on meshes are phones. we'll hear from laura murphy and the aclu, and later ore spotlight0s magazines, feet tires michael hersh on his recent people examine president obama's national security team. way journal is live on c-span and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter.

>> here are a few of the comments we have received. >> i just have to tell you that to see these people in person, to hear them have the panel discussion or congressional hearing, it is so important to understand the context and to listen to the statement in its entirety. >> i have been watching booktv and i think booktv is the greatest program on tv. i just really like how these authors take the time to not only present summaries of what they rite but the mott rate -- moderator does a great job of stimulating the conversation. it's what i look forward to on the weekends for me to watch as much as i can.

>> i watch c-span all the time when i'm home. the only station i have on most of the time. i think it's absolutely excellent. i watched all of the debate around the country. thank you for the book talks and for the history. i like all of it, and i am thankful it's there andeye any classrooms. i teach at a community college in connecticut. thank you very much. >> continue to let us know what you think about the programs you're watching. call us at 202-626-3400, e-mail us at commands a c-span door doering or send us a tweet at c-span harn tag comments. join the c-span conversation, like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. >> now a house hearing on the federal aviation administration. faa inspector general, calvin koegel, talked.inefficient sir inside u.s. aviation and the progress in building the next

traffic control system and also hear from the heads of organizations representing airlines, pilots and air traffic controllers. this hearing of the house transportation committee is two and a half hours. >> meeting come to order. ...

mean members of this committee and stakeholders across the country to try to better understand what the situation is out there, and there, and today will shed more light on that. in 1958 congress recognized the need to establish a control system which has served our country remarkably well. today we have the safest in the world. however, the system has changed and it is time to take stock of where we are and what we need. today is an opportunity to take a look at issues as we plan. it will not come as a surprise to any pilot or to any passenger who has watched a departure board as his or her flight is delayed or canceled that our system can be better. since the federal aviation administration was created

there have been many attempts to reform it. numerous advisory committees have made reform recommendations based upon input. president clinton and president bush sought to reform the faa in order to ensure the level of service americans deserve. while each had deserve. while each had a varying degree of success, neither was able to implement long-lasting reform. we must ensure that the infrastructure, rules, process is up-to-date and able to withstand the test of time. we must ensure it is properly structured. in report after report the inspector general of the department of transportation and the government accountability office have identified the costly problems of the management

of the modernization programs. for example, they found in carrying out one program the faa wasted a billion dollars in taxpayers money. sadly they will testify today this is not uncommon. eight acquisition cost increases amounted to 4.9 billion. this this is a result of the inability to plan effectively and manage programs in a a way that delivers responsible and cost-effective outcomes. congress has an important role and will continue to provide the tools and resources necessary well connecting the oversight to ensure taxpayer money is not being wasted. now is the time now is the time to learn from past mistakes while at the same time taking note of what other nations have accomplished. what can we apply that will help us safely modernize our

airspace? i do not have all of the answers, answers, so i look to those of you in this room as we move forward, we will put all options on the table. however, anything table. however, anything we do must be done together to ensure our work lays the foundation for the best possible future american aviation, we invented it. we have been the leader for the last 80 years,, but we are now starting to lose our edge. one of the big impediments is our own bureaucracy and washington and around the country that impedes us from competing and moving product to market quickly. if you quickly. if you look back at the 23 extensions, the

sequestration,, the sequestration, the government shutdown, the time is now. the stakeholders who had to go through those painful experiences know that we must take a different look. we have representatives who can offer valuable insight, so i look forward to hearing from our witnesses. before yielding, i ask unanimous consent that the record remain open until such time as witnesses have submitted answers to any questions in writing and ask unanimous consent that the record remain open for 15 days for comment and information by witnesses be included in the record. without objection, so ordered. i now. i now yield to the ranking member. >> thank you. it has been my great honor to serve as ranking member

for the last four years and on this committee for my entire career in congress. your commitment to bipartisanship your commitment to bipartisanship has proven that together we can do great things. we successfully completed the water resource and reform development act this year which showed the american people that congress can come together to pass big bills that improve local economies and our nation's infrastructure. the sum t5 the committee again showed both sides were willing to compromise for the good of the traveling public. i have every confidence that if you work in that same spirit of bipartisanship and cooperation faa reauthorization will be short and swift. i have seen so many, it is like watching a a child, rage and then the parent leaves home. since. since i was first elected to

congress a lot has changed. in 1977 we were on the eve of the entire deregulation of modern air traffic control system. there has been talk of changing the structure of air-traffic control. on that.i would say that when congress enacted the federal aviation act it recognized that good government is at the core of a safe travel control system however this idea takes shape i would ensure my colleagues to ensure that labor remains engaged in aviation programs receive robust funding and to keep it in the realm of good government, where it belongs. with that, mr. chairman, i thank you, i thank you for today's hearing. i will miss working with you i know that with your and

bipartisanship and transparent manner this nation's future nation's future is in good hands. >> i think the gentleman. >> thank you, chairman schuster. i especially want to thank you for holding this hearing at a full committee level to emphasize the importance and would like to echo the comments about the critical importance. importance. the united states has a great deal to be proud of. thanks to the great men and women who pilot aircraft's and numerous other important jobs, we jobs, we have the safest and busiest aviation system in the world that keeps our economy taking. ticking. this industry and these issues are near and dear to my heart. i represent a role in making

advances in aviation safety and air-traffic control technology. however, technology. however, i believe there are things we need to do better, like getting programs done and delivering benefits on time. let us look at the long-term challenges and be bold and decisive and expressive. it is my hope to learn what issues we need to think about and to ensure we continue to have the safest system possible that ensures america's lead. mr. chairman, as you indicated, there is so much at stake, and we have a tremendous opportunity to build on the last few years. i yield back. >> i think think the gentleman and rank t5

recognize the ranking member >> thank you, mr. chairman. i look forward to working with you and all of my colleagues to get a bill done on time. i also want to recognize families of flight 3407. we want to thank you for your tireless efforts. i want to recognize many aviation stakeholders, including a few testifying here today are frustrated with funding uncertainty, but i want to be clear that the faa is making good progress thanks to the strong oversight. this time last year this time last year we were uncertain when we would see a plan. the faa has a plan with industry support. this time last year we were

uncertain about the path forward. now again the faa has a plan with industry support for implementation. so when i read in and stakeholder testimony that the faa is not moving fast enough, i would like i would like to.out we have progressed significantly from last year moreover hearings over the last congress on the work to streamline the. unmanned aircraft systems and national airspace, staying focused on progress. at progress. at the same time we recognize that more must be done. we talk about the challenges and running programs

smoothly and need to recognize the industry problem is not just management but political. last year's efforts to force the federal government off the fiscal cliff, a catastrophe for the every day operation of the national airspace, it caused great harm to next gen efforts to read we have to do better. i hope today's hearing will put us on the path to a strong bipartisan bill. i want to be short sure reauthorization does not become a science experiment. if we resolve to go big, we must do so methodically. with a clear statement of the problem and an understanding of how to solve it without compromising safety.

this hearing might be a good first step. today we are asking what problems should be solved. that solved. that is an important question. we need to understand there may not be one answer. in addition to airspace management we cannot lose sight of the work that needs to be done to safely integrate,, improve certification and streamline facilities. on that note, mr. chairman, i look forward to working with the full committee. i know we can produce a bill a bill that provides funding, visibility, and flexibility that is needed to move forward and continue to make sure we have a safe national airspace. thank you for holding this hearing. >> thank you very much. before we get started, it is important we at knowledge there are a number of members of this committee

that this will be their last hearing. if you will indulge me. to with the most junior member. he has gone he has gone off and lost his mind and decided to run for the senate. i try to tell him, i hope hope you remains to his roots as a house member and continues to work hard to get things done. we wish him well. mr. michel, i do not believe he is here. he will go on to bigger and better things. i look at the folks in congress who usually have bigger smiles than we do, especially at the do, especially at the end of the month and when we are out of session. i wish him the best in whatever endeavors he goes off. gary miller has been a longtime member of this committee. a champion of developers and building in this country and has been on the forefront of trying to reduce the burdens that the government puts on

us as we try to develop and build roadways. so we wish you well in your future endeavors. mr. bishop from new york who was a great ally in working on the water bill. there were times when we would disagree. there were times when we would agree and i would say, i cannot get that through conference. i think we have a good understanding of finding common ground, moving a bill forward. a lot of his hard work is the reason we got to that mark of final passage, and i appreciate the efforts. i will say i will not miss them on third base. i think the last game you had seven putouts or something like that, something outrageous for a

guy your age. i think one of them was me. we are going to miss greatly your voice of reason and, and, of course, you represent your district extremely well, and the committee will miss you. mr. coble, howard coble served over 20 years and has been a great advocate for transportation infrastructure and certainly been a great protector of a great protector of the coast guard and the other committees he has worked on. he is not here today. we wish you well in your future endeavors. truly west virginia royalty. is there such a thank you mac i can make some analogies about being at the top of certain mountains,

but i won't. we wish you well and know that you will do a great job and we will not forget us. you can even talk fast. we hope you will continue. congratulations on your continue. congratulations on your victory. we know you will do extremely well in the senate i think he thought i was going to talk about him, but him, but i guy who served on this committee for almost four decades, every capacity, every subcommittee, on the committee. he was he was here from ice t, t21, safety, i guy with tremendous institutional knowledge and has decided to go back to wisconsin and not put up with the headaches of congress. again, we wish him well in his endeavors. make sure i get everybody. finally, most importantly, my partner, the leader of the democratic side, nick,

you have, nick, you have been a great friend, great ally. we have a lot of stories. my staff told me not to tell the one i i really want to tell, so i will get rolling. you never know what will come out. truly, when we sat down for the first time to talk about how we could work together and nick said, it's about communication. let me know where you are. there are times we would go to negotiate, and nick was with us, agreed to be on the same page and were times that we would try to figure out before. sometimes we did not. he truly was a great counterpunch or. he was able to help me prevail on the issue. again, it was a great honor

to work with you. we got we got a lot done. one very interesting story, the most important thing is where it passed but another story was one of the highlights of the conference , it 's, but i will not go into it because my staff insists i should not. a great story about nick and his history here on capitol hill and the great friendships he has developed again, we will miss you greatly. we know that you will do well and always have friends on capitol hill. >> may i respond to that gmac. >> yes, sir. >> thank you for your kind words. i commend i commend every member of this committee on both sides of the aisle, the professionalism of the staff

,, each member of this committee brings talent and background and a wealth of knowledge about transportation and so many issues. they they also bring a dedication to their constituents above and beyond anything else. this committee is where this committee is where the future of this country is that in my opinion. this committee is about jobs , jobs, jobs. when i look back over the bills we produced in a bipartisan fashion, you truly have returned that spirit of bipartisanship, and every member has a desire to a desire to work across the party aisle in order to produce for the american people. this is where the this is where the future of the country is, in my opinion, and i feel safe that the future is in great hands under your lead.

>> with that i i recognized t5 do i have to call you center get q mac the gentle lady from west virginia. >> it will get you nowhere. i appreciate your lead and have been honored to be on the committee for 12 years. i12 years. i wanted to take this opportunity to take my colleague from west virginia. he served honorably and with long tenure. most notably on this committee. his legacy will be long and strong. the institute of transportation shows his passion for all areas of transportation and is a growing, vibrant, economic driver, and i appreciate that. one of the things i have always admired is that he has a wonderful turn of phrase.

if you have ever heard him argue a.or read his press releases or heard him try to convince you to his way of thinking, thinking, he is very clever and very humorous at the same time. i enjoyed that, except when aimed at me. never aimed at me, but in any event i thank you for everything you have done for me, with me, with me, and for our beloved state of west virginia. i appreciated. thank you. >> i appreciate your kind comments. congratulations to you. we will always be working for the future of our great state and this country. thank you. >> do any other members wish to be heard? mr. bishop. >> i briefly want to thank you, mr. chairman, for your kind words and for the lead you have provided this committee.

my fondest hope is the way in which this committee has conducted its business will come to characterize the way that congress as a whole conducts its business. i fear it may be a distant hope, but a distant hope, but it is very much my hope. i have enjoyed working with the ranking member. to all of my colleagues on this committee, the chairman with whom we have worked closely, i have enjoyed my service, cherished my time on the committee and wish you all the best in the future. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i you, mr. chairman. i have been on this committee my entire tenure in congress. my first term, the subcommittee on t5 you would have been on resources. i won't go into the story

right now. i told him the story the day after election day and got him to laugh. almost the whole time, if not the entire time. i have good stories. how we promoted them. it may not have health as helped as much in your district, although you got some. better on the coast and i have done in years showing transportation investments are important to the american people and bipartisan. thank you for that great work. >> thank you. >> to you. >> to all of our departing members, we wish you well. just had an incredible run.

in my short tenure, i remember working with mr. transportation. we did a lot of positive things. the reauthorization of passenger rail. a record number, 24 billion, which we actually overwrote president bush's veto quietly. but mr. rahal, i found out where beckley west virginia was with our very first transportation hearing on the reauthorization. some things could not be accomplished.

one party have the house, senate, and the white house. we had some rough-and-tumble, bd accomplish for the american people a record number of pieces of legislation. i thank him for his service and all of the departing members for their service. we have an important responsibility and building the nation's infrastructure, and infrastructure, and i intend to continue to work with everyone. i yield back. >> i think the gentleman. with that we will with that we will go on to our panel now. our panel consists of calvin's cove all the third, the third, the inspector general for the department

of transportation, john engler, president of the business roundtable, president of the airline pilot association, president and ceo. president and ceo of airlines for america and traffic controllersal air association. association. thank you all for being here. before i let i let you start, mr. larson wants to be recognized. >> i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a a letter from congress member clark regarding issues around laguardia. >> without objection so ordered. with that we recognize for an opening statement. proceed. >> chairman, ranking member, chairman, ranking member, members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to testify. as you know, undergone

considerable change. faa is also in the midst of a multibillion-dollar a multibillion-dollar effort to improve the efficiency of its air-traffic system. my testimony will highlight several challenges we have identified faced by faa as it tries to meet its modernization and reform goals. first, faa has as to the number of important reforms such as establishing the air traffic organization. it has it has yet to fully adopt sound management practices such as using metrics and goals to assess productivity. reforms will have productivity. reforms will have little effect on slowing cost growth or improving operational efficiency. we determined between fiscal years 1996 1996 and 2012 the

faa total budget, operations budget and personnel compensation and benefits cost nearly doubled in nominal terms with inflation accounting for only part of this increase. further, the workforce remains relatively constant well the air traffic operations dropped 20% between between fiscal years 1998 and 2012. second, faa acquisition second, faa acquisition reforms have fallen short in improving the delivery of new technologies. when faa implemented a new management system its stated goal was to cut acquisition cost by costs by 20 percent and schedules by 50 percent within three years. yet between 1996 and yet between 1996 and the establishment of the atl in 2,004,, acquisitions averaged 38 percent over budget and 25 percent behind schedule, consistent with

prior performance. moreover, of the 15 major acquisitions ongoing as of last year which totaled 16 billion, eight included cost increases amounting to four-point 9,000,000,008 experienced delays ranging from six months to as much as 15 years. most are attributable to two problem plagued programs, but even factoring them out the remaining programs are still $539 million over budget and behind schedule by an average of 35 months. cost overruns, delays, and poor performance is traceable to long-standing management weaknesses in identifying requirements, requirements, estimating complexity, leveraging sound contracting practices and securing reliable cost and schedule estimates. for example, during the award phase a support

service contract to improve air-traffic controller training faa found there was a 60 to 80 percent likelihood that the contract would not meet its goals due to limited staff hours proposed by the successful bidder. however, faa did not require the contractor to address this risk leading to a cost increase of 30 percent in the first two years of the contract. as faa as faa works to better meet the goals of its reforms and modernization effort it faces additional challenges. key among these is the work to implement for next june and investment priorities identified by a joint industry agency community including one our office has identified as a top priority.

adding to the complexity faa faces the task of safely integrating unmanned systems into us airspace. the rapidly expanding demand represents important economic and technological opportunities for the nation however, before commercial you a ask and safely operate we must reach consensus with industry on design and safety, establish necessary rules and regulations, and collect and analyze safety data to better understand and mitigate risk. finally, recent incidents involving fires demonstrate the importance of ensuring faa's has controls in place to mitigate potential security risk and viable business continuity plans to maintain operations of the nation's control system. ultimately the actions have

not achieved the results. we remain committed to succeed. i am happy to answer any questions. >> thank you very much. before we go, it is fitting that he have a fitting introduction. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would like would like to thank you for providing this sound effect. you think of everything. we appreciate that. my great honor. i served as secretary of state for eight years before coming to congress and had the privilege of serving with governor engler. i can be a bit parochial. i think he was one of the

nation's most successful governors, but he left a legacy and transportation. so very fitting that he is here. detroit metropolitan area. he put together an authority , cleaned up a lot of things that needed to be cleaned up. today you can see what a a fantastic facility it is because he recognized how important aviation is. and so with his vision and commitment, we appreciate his attendance here today. >> thank you. i remind our panelists to pull the microphone close to you. with that, five minutes.

>> good morning. thank you very much for your wonderful comments to the committee. i deeply appreciate the opportunity to testify as congress continues work on reauthorization of the federal aviation administration. i am pleased to be at the business roundtable with more than 200 ceos. the united states was considered the world leader. today today our system remains the largest and safest. sadly as the chairman noted it is no longer the most technologically advantaged and may no longer be the world's most cost-effective. services and flight data, preliminary results suggests that delivering services at a lower cost, at a minimum

the next opposition should seek to reaffirm and regain us aviation lead by fostering a more modern and efficient system. such a system would produce significant benefits for all travelers including huge numbers traveling on business. advanced advanced technologies and procedures will enable more planes to land and take off safely on existing runways. more direct more direct routes equal shorter flights and more efficient operations with savings in staffing and fuel. emission and noise pollution would fall. technologies developed and deployed would expand us aviation. business leaders are concerned about the slow effort. numerous officials report

document cost overruns. delayed implementation of the systems and let stakeholders question whether we have the best model for the ongoing management and modernization of what used to be the world's most advanced air-traffic control system. a few years ago experts found the problems start with funding being unpredictable, unreliable, and often inadequate funding streams doing damage to long-term investment. last years sequestration with furloughs of controllers and near shutdown is only the worst example. a second underlying problem, governance. way too many disparate agencies and administrators.

the third underlying problem is the organizational culture which is to embrace innovation so that modernization can occur continuously. an example of a culture of renovation, a culture of renovation, look at at&t, a company chaired by my boss. for years we have been talking about nexgen. powering your basic flip phone to streaming video. the last two decades have seen other countries restructure. the united kingdom has been among the early movers. a high tech service business that can be funded.

more than 50 countries have separated there their air-traffic control systems from their transport ministries leading to arms length regulation of air safety. in the us the advisory council recently studied the same issue. their report made three unanimous recommendations. first, remove all funding from the federal budget so that users pay directly for services and allow that to be bonded. second, create a governing board of stakeholders not just to advise on decisions but to set the priorities for management and modernization. third, separate the operation which will establish safety regulation of the kind that currently applies. these three unanimous regulation, they are an

excellent starting. it is important that the financial and business model they sound awfully discussed, and broadly and broadly disport to five supported. a a critically important opportunity to advance nexgen and put management of the national airspace on a path to continuous modernization. we look forward to working with you to achieve these important goals. i have a more complete statement for submission to the record. >> thank you very much. much. next president of the airline pilots association. >> chairman, ranking member, members of the committee, i am committee, i am president of the airline pilot association international. thank you for the

opportunity to break t5 represent the 51,000 members who fly for 30 passenger and all cargo airlines in the united states and canada before the committee. when it comes to modernizing airspace contrary to what you are hearing previously, i am happy to report we are on the verge of becoming a success story and one that you can help right. we have made considerable progress during turbulent times in spite of dealing with issues like sequestration and operating under 23 short-term extensions. next june is a next june is a collaborative initiative involving industry, government, and key users including airline pilots, controllers, technicians, the systems and components save time, time, fuel, emissions, and money while increasing safety. i want to underscore that. there is there is no

question our nation's airspace needs an overhaul to prepare for the influx of passengers projected to arrive in our terminals and the continued growth of the cargo industry, and there is no question that there is room for growth in the aviation industry. i would say industry. i would say we agree on 95 percent of how to achieve that growth, but the 5 percent we disagree on lies and how to pay for it and who pays for it. that is the real issue. a lack of commitment a lack of commitment in terms of dedicate t5 dedicated resources now. we need to set us on a path of continued infrastructure expansion so we can better serve customers and maintain our position as the world leader in aviation. continuing the tradition of kicking the can down the road will result in failure, and like many of you in this

room my hate failure. we believe that we can fill that role in ensuring that the faa can count on the sustainable, long-term funding needed to get the job done right. however, for the aviation industry to succeed this funding must come from a a source that is separated from the constant jeopardy inherent in the reauthorization process. we simply cannot but the future of our nation's airspace in the crosshairs of dc politics. we are updating the most largest, complex, and safest air transportation system in the world which requires everyone to be all in. up until this.that has not been the case. several years ago several years ago airlines invested approximately $100,000 per aircraft to install controller pilot datalink communications equipment. only for the faa to cut

funding because congress could not supported. that put airlines out millions and left them with useless equipment on aircraft. some of those are now being parked in the desert with equipment that was never used. if airlines invested in new equipment they have to seek a return on investment, not a different. they all want to operate in the 21st century. while the current system is not perfect, performance wise it is one of the best in the world and is consistently pumping out 97 percent capacity through the system. i would i would caution the current operational

performance and cost of the us system may not warrant an immediate need for a complete overhaul, namely creating a a standalone air traffic service provider similar to the model i have here showing you a scale of a scale of that model. pilots will continue to operate safely. again, i would respectfully offer that we need a thorough investigation before we jump to the conclusion that it is the answer in the united states. as i mentioned earlier, the us national airspace is by far the largest most complex airspace system in the world. the nab canada model might not translate well because it only covers roughly one quarter of the airspace. it might not even scale to

our systems needs. we know our system has room to improve with structural changes to the governance serving the fundamental problems. the first need a debate about reliable funding. i have heard you say many times before, mr. chairman, america invented aviation. we have a global leader. we cannot allow government policies through laws, regulations, or taxes to put us at a competitive disadvantage to the rest of the world. we already pay 17 unique taxes. i know that you understand that. we thank you but know that there is more work to do. some do not even go back to aviation. aviation. i am sure i speak for many

colleagues sitting on the panel when we say that we are fed up with the aviation industry being the piggy bank for government programs that have nothing to do with aviation. and that is why i am asking you to invest in the us aviation industry and them here to underscore that we are committed to working together to make the tough choices necessary to ensure our system remains the best, safest on the planet and with your lead stable funding can be held, and we can move forward. >> forward. >> thank you very much. all i can say is a man. with that, the president and ceo. recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, member. thank thank you for inviting me to testify today. president and ceo. >> pull your microphone closer to you. >> this is not working. >> can you shift key mac.

>> happy to work together. >> the industry is under stress and needs to enact policies and procedures that will support growth. the number of pilots has fallen by more than 6,000 each year. in addition the fleet is on average more than 40 years old. the number being produced has fallen dramatically for more than 14,000 to just 674 many stressors on the industry are compounded by outdated faa processes that are costly and cumbersome. a long-term reform minded a long-term reform minded authorization measure is needed. as the committee develops a multi- year faa reauthorization we encourage

the inclusion of provisions that give the direction and tools needed to improve internal processes. those used today may have been needed 30 or 40 years ago but cannot keep pace with today's rapid pace and improvement in technology. changing these processes reducing bureaucracy, improving safety. this should be our collective goals. i goals. i would like to provide three examples of areas. one, medical reform, aircraft certification and retrofit and the faa vsb mandate. medical reform is long overdue. a petition requesting expansion. the standard put in place more than a decade. this allows models the fly with a cursory medical check , the support pilot flies small aircraft.

it has not had a discernible impact on safety. today other than support pilot's all generic five general aviation pilots must take a medical exam every five years. over 40 need an exam every two years. in addition pilots are required to undergo a flight review with an faa certified instructor who must determine the pilots competency and ability to fly. this demonstrates that should be expanded. the faa and the department of transportation are currently

reviewing a proposal. the bills have nearly 185 parted t5 bipartisan cosponsors. we thank you for your vigorous support. we look forward to working with you, this committee, and the next congress. certification and regulatory reform are urgently needed. the aviation industry and been working to streamline the magnification to five manufacturing of aircraft. the bill was signed into law to fully realize the benefits the regulations and orders for retrofitting must be streamlined and transformed. the general aviation fleet is more than 40 years old. widespread availability can make flying easier, safer, less expensive,, and given

the industry a much-needed boost. in practice this approach has the opposite effect that lower cost which might ultimately improve safety. the faa the faa mandate is too expensive. set a standard of january 1 2020 to have equipment. standards were designed for commercial airlines and the resulting equipment is just too costly. more than 82,000 i worth less than $40,000. and those are on a weighted value. a minimum cost the on the reach of many owners.

without changes owners. without changes we will see airplanes parked in fields and reduced to limited flying seriously damaging the thousands of small aviation businesses nationwide. .. nearly $16 billion budget gives the agency sufficient resources to make needed changes in the way it oversees general

aviation. we need the faa to embrace a system that can keep us with rapidly changing technology that is comfortable, timely, and safety improvement that will work to reduce risk tore hundreds of thousands of general aviation pilots. when pilots, industry, and the faa work together we see positive results. we appreciate your leadership on these important issues. >> thank you, mr. baker. now mr. callow, president and ceo of airlines for america. >> mr. chairman, meshes of the committee, airlines normer and its members appreciate the opportunity to par tis pate in this hearing on the operation and odd concernizeddation of the system. the issues are critical to the future of u.s. aviation, and the future growth of our economy. at stake are whether you and your constituents can get to

your destinations faster, smarter, and in a more environmentally friendly way. nick, can you get closer to the mic. >> sorry. i'm already standing up, mr. chairman. >> at stake is whether you and your constituents can get to destinations faster, smarter, and more eye efficiently. aviation is five percent of our gross domestic product. the question before the committee is simple. can we move people products in a more efficient manner with a more modern system. there seems be little did agreement we can do so. three federal commissions and reames of testimony and multiple speeches all agree to the point. so the question becomes, how do we get that system and what does it look like? her the clarity of the goal starts to get complicated. while chairman called for

transformational change, and we agree, different stakeholders have dissing interests and my guess this emptyee will he res sans stand to potential changes. undeniable record of missteps, cost overruns exist. it's been detailed before this committee, been detailed by gao reports, by the inare inspector general and others. some of that record, as well as airline dive appoint are detailed in my written testimony. so, the record begs a series of questions. that need to be asked and what an historic opportunity this reauthorization bill presents. does he united states have the best governance funding structure in place to deliver the most efficient, modern, air traffic control system? have the atc models used by other countries enhance safety and efficiency, and if so, can the best attributes be applied

in our system here without adversely impacting safety. if yes, would the adoption actually improve our system, which is a key question obviously, and if so, at what cost and to whom? asking these questions is not a criticism of the current faa leadership. they have been advancing the ball. however, it is simple my a need to ask and examine these questions given the checkered history of progress and frankly the stakes for maintaining the status quo. a4a has an open mind on these questions to that end we enbeiged independent aviation experts to create a fact base and see of the facts lead to us any kind of conclusions. our study is benchmarking the financial, operational, and governance performance of the u.s. system against modeled of other countries, evaluating risks and opportunities for specific elements of reform on the u.s. system, and developing u.s. aty options, highlighting the benefits, economically and

implications for next jen as welling a potential governance reform. the work is incomplete but basic observations are emerging. first, the difficulty modernization efforts encountered in the back come back to governance structure and funding questions. next, the commercialized atc model present three alternatives to consider-repped by the united kingdom, with a public private partner ship, and canada, a completely independent commercial corporations, and then germany, which is an apt government-owned corporation. all throw models engage air space users in decisionmaking to a greater and more structured agree than we do here. all three models have improcessed system safety efficiency, and all three systems, all three models, if

implemented long-term modernization programs smoothly. the bottom line, we have a good aviation system, the best pilots, the best air traffic controllers, but frankly we can do better. it's clear that we don't need another federal commission on this issue. what we do need is for the congress and all major stakeholders to keep an open mind and take a clinical fact-based approach to look at possible solutions including models in other countries. if we determine that significant reforms are not necessary, or, frankly, not politically achievable, then we still need to examine what we can do about the bottlenecks and difficulties and on stack tells in the current -- obstacles in the current system and might find answers outside the u.s. and apply them here. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, now, turn to mr. paul renaldi. >> thank you, mr. chairman, for the opportunity to testify is an

honor. we all have a stake in the national air space system. it's an economic engine. it contributes $1.5 trillion to our gross domestic product every year and provides 12 million american jobs. we appreciate the committee for the outreach on the industry in order to bert understand the issues in the national air space system. this committize doing it the right way identify the problem and then develop the right solution. what we must make something clear. any change we make needs to be accomplished with the precision like approach so we don't interrupt the day-to-day operation of the national air space system. currently we run the largest, safest, most efficient, most complex, most diverse air space system in the world. our system is incomparable, unequaled and unrivaled by any country in the world. the united states air space system and the faa is considered at the gold standard in the world aviation industry. and yet, we come to the reality,

we need a change. the globalization and innovation that are driving dramatic changes in aviation industry. cower current system serves well to this point. however, we face many challenges in responding to the problems of an unstable budget, the inability to finance long-material projects, competing stakeholder interests, the inability to fro the national air space system for new years and legislative priorities. every stakeholder in the national air space system should work together to ensure that the united states continues to be the world leader. without change, we face continued funding uncertainty. we all remember the disruptions that we experienced in 2013 with sequester. in march the faa scaled down all modernwidation projectes, looked at closing 238 air traffic control towers and tried to close 149 of them. they tried to reduce services across many airports in this country. they stopped atc hiring for the

full year. which is still causing a rippling problem today. they furloughed air traffic controlleres, causing rippling delays in the system. they went to a fix on a failman festival and stopped stockpiling criti parts for essential equipment, to all meet the budget restrictions of sequester. currently the faa is working on what reductions they need to do, starting in october of next year, as sequester comes back into effect. this just can't happen again. this is no way to treat this economic engine and no way to treat our national air space you see, without change, we will continue to struggle to develop, train, implement, the next e next jen initiatives. currently the faa are working on the next jen advisory commit year, we are implementing projects and deploying new equipment and procedures across the country inch order to keep pace we need be properly funded and the faa needs to be adequately staffed which can

only happen with a stable, predictable funding system. we will continue to struggle to maintain -- without a change we will continue to struggle to maintain proper resources and staffing four our air traffic control facilities. the air traffic controllers are the backbone of the national air space system. we should over in short-staff our facilities. air traffic controllers maintain a safe, orderly flow of aircraft across the country. in addition to that, they are the subject matter experts that help us develop, implement, and train the next jen initiatives. and on the job training for every new hire that comes into the system. this requires to us be appropriately staffed, and an understaffed facility can barely keep all the positions open to run the day-to-day operations safely and efficiently. nevertheless, they're going to have to train our controllers on new nextgen technology and equipment. we'll be responsible for the overcost runs.

mr. chairman, our national air space system is an american treasure of we cannot treat it like we did in 2013. aviation is uniquely an american tradition. we need to make changes to secure a stable funding system, a proper governance so that we can continue be the world leader, which will allow to us grow the aviation system, not some rink it, or allow us to integrate knew new users probably and will give us the competitive edge to continue to at the be world leader in aviation. thank you for the opportunity to testify. i look forward to asking you questions you may ask. >> thank you all of you for being here today. we have a number of members that are in the cue for -- the queue for practice. our practice on the republican side, if you're here when the gavel goes down, you -- i will

be brutal with the gavel and the five-minute rule because if everybody shows up we'll be here for a long time. so, five much. s. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i dope want you to be brutal with me. thank you, panel, for being here. i think most of you know that rick larsen and myself have really focused in on nextgen and how this is coming together, so what i'd like to know, starting with you, mr. scovel we task the faa with creating a implex addition plan to deliver next-gen -- in october we saved copy of the plan. can you tell us what you think of the priorities for the fa a's emmix addition plan to address this? >> thank you. certainly we're aware that the

nac's recommendations to faa and faa's plan in october. and as you may remember this committee tasked my office in the inspector general to review faa's plans for moving next-gen forward personally in the near term. so faa's commitment to the recommendations has been vitally important and we're greatly encouraged by those. as the committee knows from reading the report and faa's recommendations, those entailed a greater commitment to performance, based navigation, which our office has endorsed for a long time now. commitment to service operations so when aircraft get on the ground, they can move around the airport surface in an efficient and effective manner, and data come, coming up in years to come, in 2019 specifically. so those are three of the main

recommendations from nac which faa endorsed. we would put, if anything, an asterisk for the committee's consideration next to performance-based navigation. this has been a priority for the airline industry for a long time. it's one that will allow them to move their aircraft in an efficient way, provide fuel savings on route, but faa has historically now had problems in developing those procedures and getting them certified. so, if those problems with delay in the past were to continue in the future, the objectives for near-term success, according to the priorities, may not be realized. >> mr. callow, statement question. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i think that the -- i would agree, performance-based navigation has been a key priority. we helped develop the priorities that the nac suggested.

we think they're critical. the while point is to move to near term benefits to stakeholder can see benefits from investment. some is going painfully slowly despite best efforts. we have moved very slowly on pbn, going city by city, metroplex by metroplex, with not a lot of showing for it. a lot has to do with the procedures being developed. we have the equipment on the aircraft to do it but the process and the procedures to get those planes to use it is not really happening very quickly and there's a whole variety of reasons, some of which are detailed in our written testimony. it's a matter of us being able to -- the controllers being able to use them in different places. so if we do it, it has to be more scalable across the country. otherwise we'll take years and years to gift it to work. meanwhile we have other

technologies mandated that are not harmonized for others for which the cost benefit has not been reviewed. so pbn would be the quickest way to get quick results. >> mr. renaldi i'd like your take on this took. >> we were part of the nac initiatives. i will tell you, changing major air space and flows in and out of metroplex is not an easy task. not something we can develop in a sterile room and roll it out. it has to be tested and developed and continued test evidence with pilots and then tweaked. it's not an easy thing to do. sounds like an easy thing to do but certainly not. the one thing that will slow us down is the unstable funding. the second we have to fall back and we don't have the funding to continue these initiatives, we stop all modernization projects

and just focus on running the day-to-day operations, safe and efficient flow of airplanes. >> thank you, chairman will make sure we have stable funding. thank you. >> with your help. with that, recognize ranking member larsen for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. renaldi, you discussed some of the discussion about ato reform and so on. what reservations would the air traffic controllers have regarding a change in the air traffic organization? >> obviously anytime you make any change to aa system that is as large as this and as efficient as we are at this point, don't want to disrupt the day-to-day operation. we can't lose focus. currently we are running the world's safest, largest, most complex, most diverse system in the world. so if we make changes we have to

be very precision-like, do it very methodically to ensure we do not interrupt the safe and orderly flow of airplanes in the united states. >> captain moak, similar question. you laid out broad principles about your concerns. what specific -- do you have specific items you la like to help us understand with regards to separating air traffic functions out from the faa? >> just a couple of things. first off, we're having a -- in. >> get closer to the mic. >> this is kind of a high-class problem in the united states. if you read the papers and watch the news, you know they're having accidents all over the world, but in the united states we have the safest air space in the world but we want to improve that, we want to it be more efficient, we want to save fuel. and there's other things we want to do. but we're doing that with the idea we have the safest air space in the world, with what was said earlier, that's

controllers, pilots, procedures. so, the idea that we're just going to go to another system, okay, i think we should take pause there and think through it. now, the current system is performing quite well operationally. our airlines have been through consolidation over the last few years. they're performing quite well. and so it gives us the ability to step back, look at it, modernize it. that's important. very important. and all you have to do is look at the dot bureau of transportation statistics and now when they report out of different metrics for the airline industry, they're much immoved. on the issues of pbm, we can do better. the controllers are trained, the pilots are trained. the airlines are equipped and we have to keep getting at it. it's difficult to bring it on

line but about when it is. it is remarkable so i would say proceed cautiously with throwing everything out and, again, i want to underscore the whole thing about stable funding going forward. >> mr. calio, you're doing a report, governor engler mentioned a report, you messenger all the reported athlete have been done. a lot of reports. it seems to me that the timing of these, if we're going to be moving forward in any way, shape or form, whether it's a larger reform or management reforms or individual reforms, things have to come to a head quickly if we're going to be moving forward here by the september 2015. i'm hearing a tapping. that's not you, mr. chairman. thank you very much. you're just impatient generally. have you thought through the timing for us? >> yes, we have. we'll be done shortly and be in

to brief you. we know that you need the material. we -- from our perspective in order to develop a position, we need to know what the facts are and, again, we're trying to do it in a dispassionate fashion so we can la look at our system. we are not suggesting major changes. we are trying to seive they would be worthwhile, whether they can be made and if they can, what the impact would be. >> okay, thank you. governor engler, have you all in throughout through the flip the switch moment, that is, when you move from one model to the next model as you're thinking through the ideas you're presenting here? >> well, i think that's part of the conversation and clearly even under congressional mandate there have been changes in the creation of a chief operating officer responsibility of the ato itself there have been iterations coming along, so i certainly would echo the safest,

largest-don't mess with the way it works but you too have a challenge, i think, inside faa that we have heard a lot about other stakeholders, about -- you sort of got this technical buildout proposition, and i mentioned the idea of our focus on funding. that's very important and key decisions to be made. even the -- one of weakness in the federal budget, the lack of a capital bugging process, and so the attractiveness of being able to bomb this, gift thens funded and built out without financially interruption, let that happen. at the same time there's tremendous amount of work inside the faa in the modernization of procedures and practices and training and vetting that has been discussed here today. so, it seems to me there's plenty of work for everyone. that flip the switch moment is not so much a disruptive thing. i think it's a transition that

takes place. i think that takes time and i don't think it's anything abrupt and certainly can't be anything that disrupts the functioning of what has worked well. >> i recognize mr. massey. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. baker, from your written and spoken testimony, it's my understanding that you're saying that the faa's approve process could be making general aviation more risky or less safe, and can you explain how that is? what needs to change about the approval process? is it taking too long to get technological improvements integrated into general aviation industry? >> exactly right. can you hear me now? okay. the idea that you have an aircraft that was 40 years old, the equivalent of having you car with anam radio, and the certification for an fm radio could take years and millions of dollars. the industry says it costs to

much, takes to lot of and not willing to put the updated progress in aircraft. situational awareness leads to access. today the ipad added commercial uto situational awareness than anything else. if you tried to stall nat on aircraft it would take millions of dollars and take years to get it done. so there should be an expedited process health experimental aircraft that great auto pilots great good at games, great in situational awareness, and very low cost. so the systems that move quickly and the faa has not moved in the process yet. the new aircraft which is hundreds of thousanded of dueful are dollars you can go. it done. >> so they need to be moving quicker. anything in this faa reauthorization that we could do in congress to encourage that. >> we texas there could be an opportunity to put old aircraft in a legacy program or classic program to get these thinged expedited. these safety items. no channeling the power plant or the wing but putting good panels in older aircraft, make it

safer, easier for people to access the air space. it can be dip. >> while we are on the topic of techologial improvements the adsb adoption in general aviation, what does it cost, the least costly entry point for somebody in general aviation to become compliant with the 2020 standard? >> so, for the adsb out, which gives the pilot in the cockpit no information, no traffic or weather information, just pings out, it $50,000 or $6,000 installed today on an aircraft that many or worse less than $25,000. >> so, it's over 20% of the cost of the aircraft. >> now noh advantage. >> is it reasonable to expect some will be parked in hangars or boneyards and pilots now won't be flying bag of this. >> that's the risk. >> there needs to be a lower cost solution. what's your organization doing to promote this lower cost solution? >> we're currently working with

the general aviation marring association and the faa to say there is another type of portable device that could be recognize. the ipad wasn't invented with the atsb came out. could there be something like our cell phone that is pinging out with thed aquist level for the general aviation, a two-passenger airplane. >> general, while we're on the subject of technology here, the faa seems to be behind on issuing rulings on drones and integrating ah as, uab, whatever you want to call them, integrating them into the air space. how far behind are they right now? >> they are behind and they're behind the mandate established by congress in the last reauthorization from 2012. >> when we write this authorization we should say we really mean it this time. >> well, yes, absolutely, and it

would certainly help everybody if the agency listened. look, faa as slow in dig e designating sites. six of them. they were finally designated -- first we went through congress authorization or mandate but we have found that the agency's plans to develop data and to learn from the results that acue from operations at these test sites have not been prepared to the agency's satisfaction and certainly not to the needs of the burgeoning industry. when it comes to, as well to gathering safety data from uaf users currently in the system and from the department of the defense, faa has a lot to learn, a long way to go. >> i wish they were here today to defend themselves or give in the an answer to next question but in your estimation when do you think they'll give us some rules? i have a constituent -- on

behalf of a constituent i sent a letter to the faa asking them to point me to the rules and i don't have a response. been too you think they might come up with some rules? they're spending the money, understand. >> yes. the so-called small uaf rule has been promised by the end of the year. i'm not kind of uas your constituent might be interested in operating but if it's small, i would say, stay tuned, see what faa can produce by the end of the year. >> sounds like mr. baker kind of hinted at an idea that it could help us with drones, the accuracy? maybe we could relax rules for accuracy? >> captain moak? >> one point i think that is being missed here. in commercial aviation, to keep it safe and keep our passengers safe, we need to know where all the planes are. i'm confident working with mark and aopa we'll be able to

achieve that. but on the points made down here, i think i couldn't disagree more with the analysis coming out. we have to be using the same principles, a certification, of the aircraft, the remote piloted aircraft, the drone, the operator, and the people that are operating them as we do for airlines so that we have the same safety. >> my time expired. ...

i really want people to recommend faa procurement, worse procurement, worse than the pentagon. how do we fix that? always a moving target. i i would like people to think about that. we have a dispute over

schedules, i ground system, mandate. they have a mandate they have a mandate that no ground system. why can't we harmonize. why can't we harmonize the schedule for adoption so that there will be real benefits to people both in europe and the united states of america. i would love to hear more about that and then on air traffic control a lot of my information is somewhat dated a midair collision that killed people in europe because they were understaffed and the one person on duty was off doing something somewhere.

that is an issue. that is an issue. when i looked at the productivity issues, we are virtually identical to five identical with canada. i canada. i think that making major changes there is a steep slope, but i am willing to have a thoughtful discussion about that. now i will get to a question which will be directed principally to mr. rinaldi. we have to staff up, a lot of retirements. policies are forcing more people to consider early out i read in your testimony. why do you take people who have just graduated from the academy and send them to the highest level facility and basically engender a high failure a high failure rate? what could the rationale be? could we have more retention and better controllers if we

change that key mac? >> the simple answer is, yes, we could have a better system. i have power. i got power. all right. there we go. all right. all right. okay. it is a great question. we could retain more controllers. our busy tray cons are struggling with staffing because it has been an faa way to take you to somebody freshly new out of the academy and send them to atlanta, new york, chicago

and within six to eight months they are unsuccessful and get sent to lower-level facilities. we tried working with the agency for about two years now develop a process to develop to move the controllers of the lower-level facilities where they are honing in developing skills so they can maintain the ability to do it at a high level like new york, atlanta, or chicago. we are not there yet. we should have been done with this about a year ago. the new hires t5. >> what is so hard about it? >> you will have to ask them. it is taking a long time. when you take someone straight out of the academy and send them, they do not have the training program to teach.

i have sat there and watched the screens. i cannot do screens. i cannot do it. i would not even begin to think that i could do it. do you want to respond to the idea of harmonization in terms of the schedule with europe q mac with that eliminate the concerns q mac. >> it q mac. >> it would not eliminate all. this is a classic case of the standard being embraced. as i said during my earlier testimony we have made a lot of investments. we don't know how it will work, whether the standard will change, whether the equipment will change. harmonization is one part of it, but it, but making it work and making a business case is critical, and if you go back through the cost overruns and failures and pickups, that is

consistently one of the problems. it must be part of the process as to how you get to where you are when you say do use this equipment. >> back to. >> back to the procurement issue. and as i understand it, do you think it is critical we have real-time updates as opposed to every seven or eight seconds which is what i understand key mac. >> more accurate information and more timely information, especially in the interim environment where you can get constant updates of airplanes moving at a very high a very high speed is valuable. it is a lower-level activity i am not sure that there really is a a bank for about there so to speak. >> thank you. >> mr. graves is mr. graves is recognized for five minutes. >> the first question is for inspector general scovel. in your recent audit report how many commercial general aviation aircraft will be affected by the update?

>> thanks, mr. graves. 220,000 general aviation aircraft are subject to the mandate. about 18,000 commercial aircraft as well. >> the entire existing fleet >> virtually. yes, sir. >> do the numbers change, or change, or do you anticipate them changing gmac? >> they will move up and down, but we believe between now and 2020 those numbers will hold generally firm in that range which is the problem some of my fellow witnesses have spoken to, the ability of the manufacturing industry to produce the equipment, the ability of faa to get it certified, simply time and space for aircraft owners to get there planes into repair facilities and stations so

that those boxes can be installed on the aircraft. it is a tough road. >> my next question is probably for mr. rinaldi,, but we have a situation. one of the things promised is lowered cost that will save us money over the long run to eliminate the outdated system which is obviously passive radar and radar overall but we all know t5. >> there we are. you can go invisible, if you want, if you pull that circuit breaker. there is no way of tracking that. then you hear the argument

of making the system permanent. we know in an airplane you do not want to have a system that cannot be disabled if you have obviously an electrical failure or whatever the case may be. what worries me be. what worries me is ultimately we will be operating to systems. we will never achieve we will never achieve any cost savings. i would be very curious what you think. you can weigh in, and i would like mr. baker, if you could, too. go ahead. >> we have a problem that we will be able to work through on implementation mandates, but let's be clear. this is revolutionary, what we need, probably did five years ago,, less separation, can fly curved approaches at 600 miles per hour. you go a long way and seven seconds. this is where we should be going and will help aviation tremendously. the few things that we disagree on, we need to work together to address them.

this is good for the airline, good for the air traffic controller, controller, good for our customers, good all the way around. we we just have to work through those fake ups. >> the safety aspects. will we operate to systems cammack? >> we always do that. from the military folks we normally have two systems. it is rarely you can ever have a light switch on this. that is part of this transformative issue. and you will have cost savings when fully implemented. >> we will go ahead and hear from mr. baker. >> the concern that we have

is the cost related to the benefit. it benefit. it is just to get it out. we think just to have some better weather in the cockpit, it would be of benefit. simply getting to the benefit over time. >> i should have i should have stated early on we believe it's a cornerstone. there are issues i have laid out that must be worked through. they call to action meeting they had earlier was a good start, but there are still issues that must be resolved in order to achieve any cost savings increased safety down the line. in in terms of two systems, yes, we always do, but once

we get past all of that we will have a a much better system assuming we can work out the problems. >> i know that my time has expired, but i would like to here from you on this. >> to think we will shut down the radar system in this country and that someone will be able to shut off the transponder and we won't be able to track airplanes, and i think that it shows a a tremendous amount of value, but we have to have a necessary radar system also. >> you are recognized for five minutes. >> i am about to get on the plane for the fifth time in nine days and i just want to make sure it is safe, safe, right? we are good? >> yes.

thank you. >> yes. we are paying for it. i don't think it hurt anything i disagree with this far as where we want to go. we have a good system that we want to make better. that is natural, american, good. i have a problem. everything i know that i want to make that are about myself or my family or everything costs money. somebody has to pay for it. and we t5 i think i i heard everyone in agreement that we are short on funds, but i am funds, but i am not sure i heard anyone say where we should get those funds. so does anyone have any suggestions because i would like to hear? >> i have one thing i want to say. we need to give the faa or encourage or structure to be able to use private enterprise business principles when putting in an infrastructure program like this. you know, to have been doing with they are doing with one arm tied

behind their back. >> i understand and appreciate. >> that saves money and reduces the funding gap. >> i need more explanation. i love those generic terms that business can do everything better than everyone else and it sounds good and really fits the bumper sticker. i'm not sure what you mean. i read governor engler's testimony and agree. his example rightfully improve their business model. it cost them a fortune. it cost a lot of money to go from an old tape system to a new 4g system. someone had to pay for it. and at&t it was shareholders expanding their business footprint and charging me more, which is fine. how will we expand our footprint if more people are flying and charge them more and keep them flying to back if we don't do that even private businesses have to make money.

if you are telling me there is that much waste, i would love to hear where. show me the numbers. >> congressman, we are congressman, we are happy to provide it for you. but stabilized funding in a funding shortfall is a little different. you you cannot be working up and then all of a sudden have funds shut down. >> i agree. i voted against the sequester. you are talking to the wrong guy. >> i did not mean it like that, but that, but i want to.out occasionally some of these cell phones still drop calls despite the infrastructure improvements. >> well, they are trying to improve, to. all i am. all i am saying is we want to get next gen. someone has to pay for it. it.

it will either be taxpayers for people who use airplanes , the customer. who else is going to do it? if it is the customer, let's not pretend that by the government saying we will expend money and simply have someone else charge you for that is not a tax. it is. i am not against it, but i don't want to kid myself. if government takes action that is either a a direct or indirect tax. call it whatever you want. that includes raising the cost of my airline ticket. well, that is kind of what we do. who is do. who is going to pay for this? i am all for it. by the way, i guess it is appropriate i am on the far left of this panel. i am not afraid of that. for me, honesty is more important than anything else. if we are going to keep up and improve someone has to pay for. are any of you willing to

say that someone should pay for it. are you willing to help pay for it? >> one, just in doing the build out, that is something pretty much i stated. and the way that you do a big project, at least in terms of technology, we are going to use the system for a lot of years. you get the you get the money and then go out and carefully invest the money. he would not stop and start. >> i am a former mayor.

>> are going to do a better job more efficiently of spending my money on the project. overruns. acquisition. we can do that better. bottom line also as you heard an array of multiple different taxes are being collected. we are suggesting there we are suggesting there is a way among stakeholders to look at that, look at what other nations have done, are there ways to make that equitable? we, as the flying public, members of congress fly more than most of the public, you pay every time you fly. can we economize the dollar you are paying to make it go a dollar for the value and not in $0.85. >> when we are finished it will be something else. i

know at some.they will be delivering my chinese food. i also know that they need to see the drones, and we will need to come up with the system a system that will cost money. thank you for your indulgence. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for holding this important hearing on reauthorization. having been through several of them, one of my main concerns is a lack of progress on next gen. first that we worked on at the last bill, we worked on it. unfortunately i think next gen is either in a stall or reverse which is not acceptable. inspector general scoble,

the lack of funding, has that been the major problem in not moving forward? >> we do not think a lack of funding a lack of funding has been a problem. certainly the timing of that funding, the steady stream of funding, but that is different from a lack of funding. the congress has been generous, even exceeding the request. >> somehow faa is not getting it together. in order for next gen to be implemented, everybody year has to have some benefit. the airlines, right, mr. calio? >> this is clearly a.we have made over and over again. >> mr. baker? >> we don't see anything. >> and the pilots?

>> it is the future. >> gov., governor, do you know anything in business or business aviation the does not look for some benefit to a new system or expenditures that they are called upon to make. >> absolutely. >> somehow there is a disconnect. i a disconnect. i do not think we are headed in the right direction. we have got to turn this around. everyone who is at the table , air traffic controllers who use the system, it has to benefit them, to, right? >> right. >> i saw my late and great staff director sitting back their texting. he and i remember leaving an aviation. we both sort of wiped our

four head. i chaired that when i left as chairman, wiped my my four head, and it was a sigh of relief that there had been no major air, passenger aircraft, this is an large aircraft in large aircraft that we have had a disaster like the one we had in november of 2,001 after 911. now, we. now, we did have small commuter and regional aircraft. to do commuter safety, and we did good there. there. i am telling you that the clock is ticking. an air traffic controller, a pilot error. there is no reason that the united states should not have the most advanced air

traffic control system in the world, and we do not have it. have you been to canada western mark. >> i have. >> they are already placing themselves. they have satellite they have satellite capacity. we should be ahead of the game on this. maybe it will take a disaster to wait people up. we cannot backslide. that is one point. >> congressman, i represent the pilots of canada. although math canada is a system we should be looking at, at, i have also had to represent pilots that have had major aircraft accidents. we have to be mindful that

some airports in the northern part under that system do not have the most advanced systems. but they are adopting faster than we are and will student have that if they have that capability from a satellite rather than a radar -based system. that is my. we have to stay ahead. you know not want anything that is outmoded as technology. what you want is the technology that gives us the best coverage. coverage. we will probably always have to have a backup system because we have had and want to maintain the safest. i am telling you, we all need together. this group can make it happen. we have to pay for it. mostly and 80 - 20

proposition. i would like to see that more, and i do not think there should be a war between the airlines and the airports. we need the facilities. airports need to be expanded to be able to accommodate the aircraft we have coming into play. one last thing. you all find out the representatives, the ambassador. okay. there should never be an agency up in montréal that controls all of the rules, the international rules. ..

i did want mr. baker to address the falling number of single piston powered aircraft and number of pilots in the united states. >> he did at that time in his testimony so we have that on record. with that, miss norton is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. forgive me, i have a cold. i agree with mr. mica, in the

present environment it may take a catastrophes to move this along. good thing this hearing wasn't called progress because you have had nothing but setbacks and it's time you were candid with the public and this committee. it's murder flying today. more people are trying to fly and having to be more and more cautious. that's where we need to tell the american people. i had high hopes for nextgen because of the economic effects and our open country and because of what it means for our place in the world, but you have operated within an environment where you have had to stop major nextgen programs where the environment of 20,000 plus furloughs, half a billion dollars cut in operations, hiring for -- you know, somebody

needs to be candid here. and tell the public what i think the gravamen of your -- said proceduresly. i wish we were proceeding at all. this 2020 date is a fiction and what we need to tell the public-don't we, is that they're going to have -- we are going to be living with the present system for the foreseeable future. you are an inspector general. you're supposed to tell the truth here. isn't that in effect what the testimony amounts to today and what the present lack of progress has meant? >> there's some very tight with

wickets -- forksoo. >> for what? >> for industry and faa or. >> i'm talking about the public size. >> i'm sorry. i misunderstood. >> eye talking about on the public side. the public side has to be a partner to whatever wickets the private side is trying to run. >> by public if you mean the faa and what it must do in order to provide these enhanced air traffic control services to our national air space, absolutely. >> so, this is a system you got and -- what i'm asking you to do is to make the system we have as safe as you can, because you really can't sit there with a straight face and tell me, and tell the american public, that the way we're going to get out of this is move to a new system, a system with high hopes, less delays, less environmental impact, because we are not going

to do that anytime soon. yes, captain maok. >> in case i gave the wrong impression, ourmm for our customers and pilots and crew members is the safest system in the world. >> i'm not questioning your safety, i'm telling you dis-- i don't have to -- the way my colleagues do it. but when i do fly, i see what is happening. i can't imagine what they see. it is murder. because more and more people want to fly, and more and more crowded skies. i believe we have a safe system. i know it's, because you slow things down to make it safe. huh-uh. >> the other thing i want to add on, many of -- nextgen is not defined by the 2020 mandate or by adsb. it's a work in progress and many of the benefits of nextgen have already come online and that's gettin