What Does an FAA Shutdown Mean for You?

Wednesday, August 03, 2011

(Chris Murphy/flickr)

The fight over the debt ceiling is over in Washington, but another showdown over government funding is still dividing Congress. Since July 22, the Federal Aviation Administration has been partially shutdown, waiting for Congress to make a decision on its funding. As a result, thousands of F.A.A. workers are being furloughed — and won’t get back to work until after the recess in September.

Who will be affected by the shutdown? The Takeaway's Washington correspondent Todd Zwillich explains why the shutdown matters to consumers, tax payers and F.A.A. workers.

Produced by:

Jen Poyant


Todd Zwillich

Comments [3]

Lary Nine from Long Hill, NJ

Are there facts supporting this idea that non-union jobs are more economically viable than those with collective bargaining? How about evidence that unregulated, laissez-faire capitalism unleashed i s a good idea?
Quite the contrary, the historic evidence supports opposite conclusions. Furthermore, if we hadn't allowed a trillion dollar military adventure to nowhere over the last decade, the GOP wouldn't had the leverage to attempt this repeal of the last 50 years of building a vibrant middle class!

Aug. 04 2011 10:15 AM

Todd was wrong, as he started this story. Todd was almost completely wrong. That's uncharacteristic for Todd, who is a smart guy. He finally, at the end of this story, got it right.


This FAA-shutdown battle is not all about that small issue; it is about a very much bigger issue. And Obama has no right to pass this off on Congress. Obama is up to his rear end in this controversy.

This is a very big fight over union organizing rules. It became a big fight, because Obama appointed two union leaders to a federal mediation board, and with their votes, the federal mediation board passed new rules that changed organizing vote counts from percentages of workers in a bargaining unit, to percentages of voters in a bargaining unit. Making it far easier to push through organizing votes with small numbers of determined union activists.

It is not "ridiculous," Celeste. It is a big, tough fight. This is a zero-sum game, Celeste. It is not silly. It is a big deal. It goes to very guts of politics and political fundraising. With union dues that go to Democrat political campaigns, and union muscle, used to impose their will in important but little-understood backroom deals like this.

Republicans went public, and drew a line in the sand, over the debt-limit. No new taxes.

And now they can, and should, do the same about the federal mediation board work rules. These fights are, I think, working out very well for Republicans. People, once they understand the fights, tend to side with the Republicans.

Aug. 03 2011 11:09 PM

Should the expression political pork be mention in this discussion? How many people use these rural airports and should have the "bridge to nowhere" been funded indefinitely? How about taking $16 million from the $787 billion in the stimulus package?
The Democrats ran the government for two solid years and spent more money during that period than any time in human history
with Sen. Reid not submitting a budget in the Senate for over 800 days and defeating the President's unserious budget 97-0. Any frustration about that or did anyone in the media even notice?

The Democrats could have raised the debt ceiling quickly last year on their terms but did they deliberately choose to put it off for political reasons to share the debt quagmire they created with the Republicans while defaming them in the process? Did the Democrats manufacture this harrowing debt ceiling crisis for their own political advantage? Did it work?
Is it not a good thing we finally have some oversight on this two year spending spree as we careen toward $20 trillion in debt in ten years which will mean a real "toxic environment" for whole nation? "Ridiculousness" indeed.

Aug. 03 2011 09:31 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.