Burnt Orange Report

I'd much rather be in bed with Southwest Airlines. Not only because I, too, feel that competitive markets are the way to go, but because, bottom line, they're a better airline. I've flown from Austin to LA and from Austin to Manchester, NH on round trip, non-stop Southwest flights for just about $230. Gotta love that.

"At any rate, this is a perfect excuse for me to start a little (Hutchison-free) rant about the Wright Amendment, a federal law which restricts flights to Love Field in order to prevent competition with flights to D/FW International."

Rather hard to do when you post something that blatantly raises the question of conflict of interest. And then inadvertently raise the question with regard to both candidates.

Pick one from column A or column B. Apparently you still get Vinson & Elkins. Read the Batson Report. We need a column C.

I'm a Texan (Lubbockite) living in the Chicago area, and because of the Wright Amendment I can't fly through Dallas at all, because Southwest isn't allowed to fly from Midway to Love Field and it's significantly more expensive to fly American from O'Hare to D/FW. Ultimately, I have to bypass Dallas entirely and fly to Hobby, and I imagine other people are experiencing the same issue.

The Wright Amendment affects people flying all over Texas, not just travelers in the Metroplex. Besides the economics and politics of it, it's a drag on a lot of folks who end up forced to detour through Houston and complicate otherwise simple travelling plans.

Mr. Kay Hutchison, former House member, Republican Party Chairman and gubernatorial candiate, Ray Hutchison is also with Vinson & Elkins, for what it's worth.

Sorry guys, give me an airline with reserved seats, first-class upgrades, and comfortable airport VIP lounges...Continental.

To be honest, since I expected more of a debate but there hasn't been one, I will concede two things. First, more competition through the Metroplex would hurt airlines that aren't profitable anyways (like American). Second, more flights to Love could have adverse environmental impacts on North Dallas/Highland Park.

Here's another thought... What impact would it have on the labor movement? I'm not going to take a position, just wanting to interject that into the discussion.

I am strongly in favor of maintaining the Wright Amendment. A deal is a deal and Southwest should honor its obligations. The engine of economic growth in the Metroplex has been DFW Airport. Our economic eggs are necessarily in that basket. It only makes sense to safeguard, promote, and protect DFW as the regional airport of choice. Besides, Southwest has long spurned the request to have Southwest fly out of DFW. The only reason they do not: a childish fit of pique that has gone on for far too long.

Southwest would not hurt American if the Wright Amendment is repealed. Southwest doesnt fly to even half the destinations that American offers and I highly doubt theyre going to increase destinations that quickly.

There should just be some compromise on the issue. Southwest should be told they have to stay at Love Field. That would prevent them from offering more capacity since Love itself isnt that large. But just allow flights from Love Field to fly nonstop out of Dallas without the layover process. Southwest might gain some business, but not enough to put AA under. There are people who like cattle car survival of the fittest flights on Southwest, and then there are those who enjoy going out to DFW and catching a flight on AA.

Mario - thanks for parroting the DFW Airport propaganda line; I've only just heard it a zillion times. If you really believe that "the engine of economic growth in the Metroplex has been DFW Airport" - kindly prove it. First define what the specious term "economic engine" means and then prove that DFW Airport was singularly responsible for economic growth in North Texas and not the phenomenal growth in sunbelt metro-mega-plexes since 1960. And kindly show how two North Texas airports would have inhibited economic growth - that'll be tough!

DFW Airport is a soviet-style big government behemoth right in the heart of cowboy capitalism - a monument to the strutting egotism of DFW boosters that's actually hurt consumers. Its primary beneficiaries are a monopolistic low quality airline, smarmy contractors and bought-off elected officials of both parties, and bureaucrats like Mario permanently connected to the government teat.

"Its primary beneficiaries are a monopolistic low quality airline, smarmy contractors and bought-off elected officials of both parties..."

I just love that "both parties" you managed to put in there. The sleaze is on both sides of the aisle. Not that I would accuse anyone of conflict of interest, but elected representatives could say "I will have to recuse myself because my husband/wife/brother/sister-in-law/law firm/pet piranha may benefit from this proposed legislation." Even occasionally might help.

We've already discussed the same problem with the judges. Same principle. Funny word. Principle.

Like the word ethics. A lot of people talk about it. Very even know the meaning of the word.

Rachel,

You do not know me to make your pathetic, ad hominem attacks.

My work as an attorney has absolutely zero to do with my support of the Wright Amemndment.

I live, work, and my child goes to school in Tarrant County. I am a supporter and advocate of policies that will not burden or harm Tarrant County residents.

As a lifelong Democrat and progressive, I find it hilarious that you would trot out rhetoric befitting a weblog like Redstate.org here .... Soviet style what? Update your terminology, Rach.

Typical GOP smear tactics ... any regulation, or planning, or limits on private business and it is branded as communism. Good Job, Rush ... erm, Rachel.

And then the classic "attack the messenger" Republicanism ... just like Ambassador Wilson, Richard Clarke, etc. Impugn the messenger when you don't like the message. I am a "bureaucrat sucking at the government teat." Nice. Well done.

As for addressing the merits of my comments, consultant firms have offered independent analysis in support of my views. Simat, Helliesen & Eichner, Inc. http://www.sh-e.com/ has concluded that Wright repeal would lead to a grievous economic loss for North Texas.

Please return to Powerline or whereever you usually inhabit ... and learn some manners.

I'll never be able to think about (Marxist-Leninist) D/FW the same way again, that's for sure! :)

Sort of off-topic, but Ranchero, as another Texan living in Chicago, I fly ATA from Midway to DFW. Now, I do think ATA is inferior to Southwest in terms of service, but b/c of their recent bankruptcy, ATA offers really great deals on flights all the time. I've flown Midway-DFW roundtrip for under $200 several times - as low as $149 sometimes.

Until the Wright Amendment is changed, it's the next best thing.

Yes, Ramey, that's true, and I do tend to take ATA down there. We both know that American and Continental tend to be utterly uncompetitive with it pricewise. The problem is that ATA doesn't go anywhere else in Texas, so if I'm continuing on to, say, Lubbock or Amarillo or Midland/Odessa, then, at best, I have to switch airlines, and at worst, airports. In either case, I pay out the wazoo for it and I'm screwed if my flight is late.

Thus, in my opinion, the Wright Amendment isn't just about the Metroplex and its travelers, but Texans from basically everwhere west of Ft. Worth.

Mario, you still didn't answer Rachel's legitimate questions about your claims, which make it sound like DFW is significantly dependent on DFW Airport.

How is that increased traffic and business at Love would result in an economic loss for DFW? For DFW Airport, perhaps. I don't buy it that repealing the Wright Amendment would hurt DFW economically. But the fact is that American Airlines is having its own problems without competition from Love and Southwest, and a good part of that reason goes to the business model of basing airlines on hubs rather than point to point which affects flight times, aircraft wear, and turnarounds. Even with the Wright Amendment, American Airlines is struggling. And as goes AA, so goes DFW Airport where AA uses more than have the gates.

O'Hare grew and performed quite well while Midway continued. A number of cities have multiple airports.

Jim D., as for environmental impacts, the traffic at Love Field is already increasing (by 15% in 2001). From my reading of the environment impact study, the noise and air pollution increases would not increase appreciably thanks to several controls and initiatives to minimize the pollution.

I remember reading an article somewhere that cited the two independent consulting reports (one hired by AA and one hired by Southwest). I believe that both concluded that the Dallas/Ft. Worth area would end up losing flights if the Wright Ammendment was nixed.

If the Wright Ammendment was nixed, DFW would lose X flights, and Love Field would gain Y flights. The problem is that Y > X, meaning that there would be a net loss. This would be because DFW would lose several of the hub AA flights.

I do love southwest, but I am a die hard AA fan especially since they are the last main airline left not to go bankrupt. I feel that the loss of flights AA would suffer would just put them closer.

Wanna fly to Dallas today? You can take American to DFW for just $529. Or Southwest to Love for $149. 'Nuff said.

Bubba,

The Metroplex is dependent on the economic strength of DFW Airport and its unique position as a regional resource. Don't take my word for it, the Dallas Chamber of Commerce stated: "Since the airport is considered the key economic engine for the Metroplex with $17 billion (other numbers I have seen: $14.3 billion) in economic impact, good news for DFW is good news for the local economy." (March 2002)

By my information, the metroplex has 16 fortune 500 companies. One of the oft-mentioned reasons why the metroplex is such an invititing location is DFW airport ... according to many of these organizations.

Additionally, DFW Airport has been a national model for the inclusion of Minority & Women-owned businesses.

According to independent studies, Wright repeal could result in a decrease of air traffic to levels not seen in 20 years. Moreover, one indisputable fact is that DFW Airport has the growth capacity the Love Field simply cannot match. And additional growth will far more adversely affect residents around Love Field rather than their counterparts at DFW.

It makes no sense to hobble what has proven to be perhaps our premier regional asset.

An excellent pdf on the impact of Wright repeal: http://www.keepdfwstrong.com/thefacts/pdf/impact.pdf

I apologize for referring to Mario Perez as a bureaucrat. “My work as an attorney has absolutely zero to do with my support of the Wright Amemndment (sic)” by which I assume he means he’s actually a paid flak?

Airline deregulation, of which DFW Airport was specifically exempted courtesy of ethics challenged Jim Wright, was sponsored by Senator Edward Kennedy and signed into law by then President Carter – a Democratic initiative.

And I stand by my description of DFW Airport as a “soviet style big government behemoth” – no terminology update needed here: Chernobyl stands today as a living monument to the same thinking that animated the creation of DFW Airport. Progressives were the ones that broke up monopolies to make a level playing field so the little guy could compete.

Although I applaud Mr. Perez’s “commitment” to Tarrant County residents; my commitment, like those of most progressives not otherwise bought off, is to the consumer. I suggest Mr. Perez might ask his neighbors what they think of the American Airlines/DFW Airport surcharge every time they buy a ticket.

And since when is SH&E “independent”? Unless you mean it was the most “independent consultant study money could buy”!

Finally, “attacking the messenger” would assume that one actually had a message to attack other than the craven parroting of a soviet style propaganda line from the lips of Don Carty and his union-busting airline!

And I’ll have everyone know I ALWAYS place my left hand in my lap at the dinner table and eat with my mouth closed.

Rachel,

You have clearly established a few things. 1.) You behave like a jackass; 2.) You cast aspersions on the motives of others, never believing that others can hold a beliefs different than yours without some pecuniary or other interest; 3.) Your Judgment is severely impaired to attack Speaker Jim Wright, an incredible public servant, on a TEXAS, DEMOCRATIC, BLOG. 4.) Your irrational hatred of DFW Airport and wild comparisons to the Soviet Union/Chernobyl put you square into tin-foil hat territory. 5.) Your criticism of the consultant firm of Simat, Helliesen & Eichner, Inc., a respected outfit, is unreasonable and baseless (the criticism you offer may said of any studies sought by Southwest Airlines that you dutifully tout).

And finally, since you were too thick to understand previously: I am neither paid nor employed by anything/one connected to American Airlines or DFW Airlines. In fact I have an immediate family member employed in a significant capacity with Southwest Airlines. So take your antiquated john birch-society-sounding-self somewhere else. And get some education before you spout off about Jim Wright.

Well, getting back to the original post, I do believe that KBH should recuse herself from the Wright Amendment hearing on November 10.

It is a matter of public record that her husband, Ray Hutchison, has served as the lawyer for the DFW Airport board since its inception. It seems likely that the Hutchison family income from that activity alone would dwarf Sen. Hutchison's salary as U.S. Senator.

Throw into the mix that opensecrets.org lists the DFW Airport lawfirm, Vinson & Elkins, as Sen. Hutchison's primary source of political contributions, and it creates the appearance of a very large conflict of interest.

If one is to believe KBH's rhetoric, repeal of the Wright Amendment would damage DFW Airport. By logical extension, this would reduce the Airport's capacity to issue more of the block buster bond issues, every one of which appears to generate income for Vinson & Elkins and Ray Hutchison personally.

At the very least, she should step aside during the hearing and let other committee members take the lead.

As far as "a deal is a deal" is concerned, didn't KBH say when she was running (the 1st time) that she'd only serve 2 terms in the US Senate? Yet, here she is, running for a third. Should she be held to it, or have things "changed", like the airline industry in North Texas has "changed" with Delta's scapping their hub?

If I hear the term "economic engine" from the www.keepAAsolvent, er, keepdfwstrong.com folks another time, I thing I'm gonna hurl...

The pro-Wright folks continually refer to some ominous yet non-specific "risk" to DFW, and also ask "why chance it?"

Chance what exactly? Some of the Pro-Wright folks seem fixated on things as an "either/or" proposition, i.e. either you keep the status quo with Wright in place, -or- somehow "risk" the great DFW economic engine simultaneously shucking all 12-cylinders skyward which then rain down in flames and hit schools and orphanages and also cause the complete failure/shutdown of DFW and the Metroplex themselves. Of course, the simplistic answer is indeed their "why risk it" but the more pertinent question is "exactly how real or likely is this "risk?" When Wright goes, sure, there will be some degree of change involved, and like the WSJ piece on PIT demonstrates, it could end up being better in many ways. Yet, here they are again with this implied risk of imminent and cataclysmic doom for DFW should the populace even -think- about WA repeal. Black or white, and gray is apparently not an option in their world.

It's been written that about 70% of AA's passengers connect at DFW, and the other 30% are local folks. It's also been written (in various letters to the editor) that the fares ABC-DFW-XYZ are lower than that the fare that our local folks pay to hop on the same flight DFW-XYZ. Put those two factoids together and you can then see several things that DFW/AA would prefer that you not see or think about:

- Other than buying airport food, magazines and miscellaneous gift shop stuff during their connection time at DFW, connecting passengers don't provide much fuel to that "economic engine" that we hear so much about.

- That means those 30% (the local folks) are getting shafted with an airfare premium.

- Repealing Wright and allowing Southwest to fly longer flights wouldn't affect that 70% of DFW connection passengers, but it would lower some of the fares that AA is now able to extort from their captive 30% local folks.

Now, crank-in the BNA, PHL, and PIT examples, and it's pretty easy to see that the world will -not- tilt on its axis with some long-awaited competition for local Metroplex travelers, and that overall traffic (at both DFW and Love) would go up.

As was opined in a recent Ft. Worth newpaper column, Metroplex growth drove DFW's success, and not the other way around (as both DFW and AA have deluded themselves into thinking).

What right do the machiavellian officials of AA and DFW, have telling me where to fly when going to or through north Texas? What if the Wright Amendment refused AA from flying more than 300 miles from DFW or if DFW was limted to aircraft of only 50 seats or less? Boy, would they scream loud and long.

The real issue concerning the Wright Amendment started when DFW was built. The Fed. Gov. forced all airlines to move from Love and Ft. Worth to DFW. SW did not fly interstate then and was not party to that move. They have since refused to be a party to a ruling that all other competitors have been forced to follow.

As SW grew they just refused to participate and now want the benefit to grow with a monopoly at Love and close proximity to much of the business population of Dallas. Face it, if you live in the North Dallas area your much more apt to fly from Love than DFW if long haul flights are available. Hence, a SW/Love Field monoply for that business.

On the other hand, those that have opined at repealing the amendment because of SW low fares (not really a salient arguement) or because the prefer SW service could get those fares just as easily if SW flew from DFW to Chicago, Los Angeles or other city they chose to serve unrestricted.

The Wright amendment should not have been enacted in the first place. But as it was it should apply to all airlines, not just some. Any competitor flying interstate flights from the metroplex ought to fly from DFW. Then let price, schedule and other competitive factors rule the marketplace.

Did anyone watch the Senate hearing on November 10th?

Sen. Ensign practically yelled at American Airlines' CEO, telling him all this stuff about way back when DFW was formed is "ancient history," and that the courts have long since ruled against American Airlines and their whiny arguements.

Sen. McCain then accused American Airlines of "punishing" Southwest and kept asking why DFW is such a special case when the rest of the U.S. airline industry was deregulated in 1978.

It's a good question. The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 actually encourages service out of secondary airports, and the benefits to the U.S. of deregulation have been enormous.

North Texas isn't special... it's time to put this antiquated piece of protectionist corporate welfare in the garbage bin where it belongs.

Southwest tries to come off as the victim here, but they're not. Know the history of the Wright Amendment before complaining about free enterprise. Southwest profitted through the Wright Amendment, a compromise to allow commercial flights to continue out of Love Field while giving room for the new DFW Airport to grow. Otherwise the whole blasted Love Field airport would have been shutdown. At that time SWA did not have to worry about the Wright Amendment restrictions since it was a regional carrier. Meanwhile, housing development has increased tremendously in the Love Field area because of homebuyers believing that the Wright Amendment would prevent an increased amount of traffic, both air and land. Southwest can fly whereever they choose from DFW Airport, just as they do at LAX and Sea-Tac. Furthermore, DFW Airport offered millions of dollars in incentives to take over the now defunct Delta Terminal and they refused. The only reason Southwest cannot fly long haul flights out of Dallas is because of Southwest and Southwest alone.

"Southwest tries to come off as the victim here, but they're not. Know the history of the Wright Amendment before complaining about free enterprise. Southwest profitted through the Wright Amendment, a compromise to allow commercial flights to continue out of Love Field while giving room for the new DFW Airport to grow."

I think you are the one that needs the history lesson. The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 opened up competition within the airline industry, and locally. DFW tried to fight Southwest at the federal level but failed. Then they called upon Jim Wright - who tacked on the "Wright Amendment" to the International Air Transportation Competition Act of 1979, legislation that had nothing to do with doemstic air travel, but was going to pass into law. As that did, so did the Wright Amendment. Southwest is a profitable airline because of how they run their business, not because of the Wright Amendment.

"Otherwise the whole blasted Love Field airport would have been shutdown."

And exactly what proof do you have of this? The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 opened things up in air travel. Suppose the Wright Amendment had never happened. Southwest would have remained at Love Field, and would have continued to grow and profit. It probably would have taken DFW longer to become the airport that it is today, but I believe both would still be in existance and thriving, as well as promoting more competition within the local market.

"At that time SWA did not have to worry about the Wright Amendment restrictions since it was a regional carrier. Meanwhile, housing development has increased tremendously in the Love Field area because of homebuyers believing that the Wright Amendment would prevent an increased amount of traffic, both air and land."

The "Master Plan" is what is preventing growth of Love Field. Not the Wright Amendment.

"Southwest can fly whereever they choose from DFW Airport, just as they do at LAX and Sea-Tac. Furthermore, DFW Airport offered millions of dollars in incentives to take over the now defunct Delta Terminal and they refused. The only reason Southwest cannot fly long haul flights out of Dallas is because of Southwest and Southwest alone."

Like they say - keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. AA would love to have Southwest at DFW. Southwest should not have to relocate to another airport... an airport that would not be suited to how they operate their business. Are you saying that everyone who is offered the incentives that Southwest was offered should take them, even if it would not be good for their business? When it comes to "incentives" like this, it is often wise to let them go as the price that would be paid down the road would be far greater. When it comes to airline operations, Southwest and AA are like apples and oranges.

Dallas is a major metropolitan city, and there is no reason why we shouldn't have two airports and the competition that would come with that. The only reason Southwest canot fly long haul flights out of DFW is because of the Wright Amendment, and this needs to be lifted.

"Southwest tries to come off as the victim here, but they're not. Know the history of the Wright Amendment before complaining about free enterprise. Southwest profitted through the Wright Amendment, a compromise to allow commercial flights to continue out of Love Field while giving room for the new DFW Airport to grow."

I think you are the one that needs the history lesson. The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 opened up competition within the airline industry, and locally. DFW tried to fight Southwest at the federal level but failed. Then they called upon Jim Wright - who tacked on the "Wright Amendment" to the International Air Transportation Competition Act of 1979, legislation that had nothing to do with doemstic air travel, but was going to pass into law. As that did, so did the Wright Amendment. Southwest is a profitable airline because of how they run their business, not because of the Wright Amendment.

"Otherwise the whole blasted Love Field airport would have been shutdown."

And exactly what proof do you have of this? The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 opened things up in air travel. Suppose the Wright Amendment had never happened. Southwest would have remained at Love Field, and would have continued to grow and profit. It probably would have taken DFW longer to become the airport that it is today, but I believe both would still be in existance and thriving, as well as promoting more competition within the local market.

"At that time SWA did not have to worry about the Wright Amendment restrictions since it was a regional carrier. Meanwhile, housing development has increased tremendously in the Love Field area because of homebuyers believing that the Wright Amendment would prevent an increased amount of traffic, both air and land."

The "Master Plan" is what is preventing growth of Love Field. Not the Wright Amendment.

"Southwest can fly whereever they choose from DFW Airport, just as they do at LAX and Sea-Tac. Furthermore, DFW Airport offered millions of dollars in incentives to take over the now defunct Delta Terminal and they refused. The only reason Southwest cannot fly long haul flights out of Dallas is because of Southwest and Southwest alone."

Like they say - keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. AA would love to have Southwest at DFW. Southwest should not have to relocate to another airport... an airport that would not be suited to how they operate their business. Are you saying that everyone who is offered the incentives that Southwest was offered should take them, even if it would not be good for their business? When it comes to "incentives" like this, it is often wise to let them go as the price that would be paid down the road would be far greater. When it comes to airline operations, Southwest and AA are like apples and oranges.

Dallas is a major metropolitan city, and there is no reason why we shouldn't have two airports and the competition that would come with that. The only reason Southwest canot fly long haul flights out of DFW is because of the Wright Amendment, and this needs to be lifted.

The main reason SW chooses not to fly out of DFW is simple. To much congestion. If your planes are not in the air they are NOT MAKING MONEY. SW prides itself on quick turn arounds and spending as little ground time as possible.

At Love field SW has 20 minutes to get a plane turned around and back in the air. On average I would say that AA sits around for about 45 min. or so before turning their airplanes. Plus almost every time I fly out of DFW I sit on the taxi way for about 20 minutes before actually taking off. Maybe 5 minutes at Love Field.

Strangely enough I just realized that a flight to Houston takes about an hour. Thats about the amout of time an AA plane sits waiting to depart.

Sw just arrived and AA just took off.

DFW is just not the place for an efficient airline to opperate