Southwest Rapid Rewards - House Committee Strips Anti-trust Exemption

"The fat lady is no longer clearing her throat. The House Judiciary Committee has just decisively removed any anti-trust exemption language from a bill that would enshrine the Wright Amendment compromise in law. The vote is a major victory for Love Field Partners and their attorney Bill Brewer and a major defeat for Dallas Mayor Laura Miller. Love Field partners is the entity that owns the former Legend Airlines terminal building which would be torn down under the agreement. "


Oh boy... it's not lookling good for the compromise now.


Link (http://www.dallasblog.com/dallas-blogs/2006/9/13/house-committee-strips-antitrust-exemption-from-wright-compromise.html)

The chances of that shady back-room deal being authorized by the Congress before January 3 now seem quite remote.

This made my day.

{double post, oops}

What you folks are missing is that it's not obvious that there's enough support in Congress to get Wright revoked. So if the compromise doesn't pass in its original form, Wright could live on indefinitely rather than being amended immeidately (to allow one-stop tickets to be sold) and ended completely in 8 years.

The choice isn't between the compromise and revoking Wright -- it's between the compromise and Wright persisting indefinitely.

I disagree. That AA and DFW are parties to the compromise shows that they accept that repeal is inevitable and not the end of the world. It will happen regardless of the failure of this compromise.

There was no good reason that this agreement should have antitrust immunity, so for once congress has made a good decision! (IMHO, natch). The deal was made without public input (at the table) and only benefits 2 carriers while leaving every other carrier out in the cold. While some would argue this kills the deal and Wright will now live on for ever, it also has the potential to put the parties back into negotiation mode. The justice dept was right to question this agreement when it was first announced.

There was no good reason that this agreement should have antitrust immunity, so for once congress has made a good decision! (IMHO, natch). The deal was made without public input (at the table) and only benefits 2 carriers while leaving every other carrier out in the cold. While some would argue this kills the deal and Wright will now live on for ever, it also has the potential to put the parties back into negotiation mode. The justice dept was right to question this agreement when it was first announced.

The Justice Department did not question the agreement. Someone in the Justice Department wrote a memo (which was leaked) questioning the agreement. The Justice Department has not taken a position on the issue.

As for public input...the elected mayors of Dallas and Fort Worth came to a compromise that they felt was in the mutual best interest of their constituencies. No, there was not a ballot proposition or direct referendum, but we live in a representative democracy, not a direct democracy.

Indeed, if "public input" is your primary concern, it makes a lot more sense for the issue to be decided locally (as it has been in the compromise), rather than for Congress or the Justice Department to start monkeying with it (which is want the anti-Wright anti-Southwest crowd want).

From a purely political perspective, Southwest and American are two of the biggest engines of the North Texas economy. I simply don't see this issue ever being resolved without them both buying into it.

Indeed, if "public input" is your primary concern, it makes a lot more sense for the issue to be decided locally (as it has been in the compromise), rather than for Congress or the Justice Department to start monkeying with it (which is want the anti-Wright anti-Southwest crowd want).


Seems to me that this matter has immense national implications way beyond the mere location of the TX airports, and as such is appropriately settled federally.

And I am firmly in the "Wright sucks" camp.

Seems to me that this matter has immense national implications way beyond the mere location of the TX airports, and as such is appropriately settled federally.

Why? It only affects flights to/from one airport (DAL). And it's not like anyone has ever suggested expanding Wright to apply to other airports or other states.

Unless you're traveling to or from North Texas, Wright doesn't affect you. As such, it is truly a local issue, not a national one.

Unless you're traveling to or from North Texas, Wright doesn't affect you. As such, it is truly a local issue, not a national one.

Last time I checked, Wright is a federal law. As such, any effort to modify or repeal it requires federal action which requires buy-in from legislators who represent more than just north Texas. This makes it a national issue.

Unless you're traveling to or from North Texas, Wright doesn't affect you. As such, it is truly a local issue, not a national one.

That's a reasonable argument, but it's undeniable that Congress has the authority to act. If common carrier flights to other states are not interstate commerce, I don't know what is.

I didn't say Congress didn't have authority to act. I said it is a local issue, by which I meant it primarily affects residents of North Texas. IMO those are the people who should be making the decision. But yes, you guys are certainly correct that from a procedural standpoint, amending or removing it requires national approval.

I didn't say Congress didn't have authority to act. I said it is a local issue, by which I meant it primarily affects residents of North Texas. IMO those are the people who should be making the decision. But yes, you guys are certainly correct that from a procedural standpoint, amending or removing it requires national approval.

Yes, sure, it primarily affects residents of North Texas, but not exclusively. It certainly affects me a lot when I want to travel there from ORD or MDW, and millions of other people nationwide.

And it's a lot easier for commercial interests to, shall we say, "influence" a few local TX politicians than it would be to similarly "influence" a whole bunch of DC politicians.

The more money vested interests have to pay out to politicians to get their way, the less likely they will be to do so successfully, and the better I like it. The process should also be somewhat more transparent with the federal government in on the action.