Problem is, "fixing" this most obvious of problems will result in under-funding other parts of the FAA and other agencies, e.g., the Airport Improvement Program is being raided for ATC salaries, and in turn their problems will fester. In particular, capex is getting seriously squeezed right now, and neglecting preventive maintenance now will mean much higher spending in a few years. Penny wise, pound foolish.



Easy for the WSJ editorial page to broadcast empty platitudes, rather more difficult to, you know, govern the republic.

1. All agencies received uniform cuts, and USDOT cannot reallocate cuts between departments. That's why a legislative fix was necessary even for FAA to internally reallocate capital funds to operations. (Again, this is a completely unsustainable way to run an organization.)

2. The USDOT's communities grant is the TIGER program. This was (i.e., it's gone now and can't be cut anyways) an example of how USDOT staff made smarter, more economically sound transportation investment decisions than the old earmarks system did: in particular, it was the first USDOT grant program to use economic benefit-cost analysis. (Much more here.) You would think the WSJ editorial board would like that, but no.

3. There's no use playing these "why should I pay for government services that do not directly and immediately benefit me?" games. Why not complain about the new M-8 cars on the Metro-North, or Hurricane Sandy relief, or other federal spending that disproportionately benefits WSJ editorial board members but not really The Rest Of Us?