See
Vox.com Snookered by Debunked 2016 CBO Score of Air Traffic Control Reform by Marc Scribner of CEI.
"Over at Vox.com, Alexia Fernández Campbell has a post discussing the Trump administration’s release of its “legislative principles” for reforming U.S. air traffic control, which closely mirror a reform proposal
introduced in 2016 by House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
Chairman Bill Shuster (R-PA) that would spin off the Federal Aviation
Administration’s (FAA) Air Traffic Organization into a self-supporting,
independent, nonprofit corporation.
Unfortunately, the author falls for a debunked piece of budget
analysis sophistry that was briefly seized on by opponents of air
traffic control reform last year. Worse, the Congressional Budget Office
(CBO) concedes in the score itself that its assumptions are
nonsensical, as I noted at the time.
She claims in her piece:
Budget analysts believe that privatizing
the system would actually cost more money. Shuster’s bill, which
inspired Trump’s plan, would raise mandatory spending by $89 billion and
increase the deficit by $19.8 billion over the next 10 years, according
to a Congressional Budget Office analysis. This is largely from the
added cost of the needed equipment and technology to speed up the
modernization process.
Budget analysts do not actually believe this, but were forced to
write it anyway. The CBO scoring process has been compared to a dumb
robot. Garbage in, garbage out. And CBO was fed garbage and thus
swallowed garbage, with predictable results. As CBO explains in its
score on pages 16-17:
The estimated changes in direct spending
and revenues under H.R. 4441 reflect CBO’s assessment of the budgetary
impacts of enacting H.R. 4441 as a stand-alone measure. Ultimately,
however, the net budgetary impact of activities related to air traffic
control under H.R. 4441 would depend on the details of subsequent
legislation that lies beyond the scope of this cost estimate. CBO cannot
predict whether such additional legislation will be enacted pursuant to
H.R. 4441, but expects that the overall net budgetary impact of
shifting responsibility for air traffic control to the ATC Corporation
would not necessarily increase future deficits by the amounts reflected
in this cost estimate if additional legislation consistent with H.R. 4441 was enacted.
Broadly speaking, while CBO estimates that
the proposed corporation would spend more than the FAA otherwise will
under current law for capital investments to modernize infrastructure
and equipment related to the air traffic control system, CBO expects
that underlying costs related to operating and maintaining that system
would not change significantly under H.R. 4441. As a result, CBO expects
that shifting responsibility for those costs to the proposed
corporation would not materially change the magnitude of spending
related to air traffic control if future appropriations for the FAA’s retained responsibilities were reduced accordingly
to reflect the shift—from mandatory to discretionary—of such spending.
Under H.R. 4441, CBO expects that overall amounts of such federal
spending would remain more or less the same, with incremental increases
in spending stemming primarily from the ATC Corporation’s authority to
issue debt to finance additional investments related to modernization.
Similarly, if future tax-related legislation separate from H.R. 4441
was enacted to reduce existing aviation-related excise taxes by amounts
equivalent to new user fees that would be charged by the ATC
Corporation under H.R. 4441, the resulting amount of revenues available
to support air traffic control (and other aviation activities) would be
largely unchanged and could continue to cover most, if not all
aviation-related spending. [original emphasis]
Since only the authorization title and not the revenue and
appropriations titles had been scored (the latter two were not yet
written), CBO assumes a business-as-usual case for current FAA taxes and
spending. In reality, reform proponents are asking for aviation taxes
and FAA’s budget to be appropriately reduced—currently, the FAA spends
about $10 billion annually on air traffic control.
So, what the CBO assumed is that not only would the new nonprofit air
traffic control provider invest into modernizing its system and collect
user fees, Congress would also continue taxing and funding at the same
levels to support a phantom, parallel, government-run air traffic
control provider. This is absurd and Vox.com ought to at least note
CBO’s explanation for why its score of last year’s air traffic control
reform proposal is absurd."
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.