When you buy a cheap plane ticket, you're supporting terrorism

Tim Cavanaugh | June 10, 2005

Texas lawmakers are considering repealing a 26-year-old law that protects consumers and makes air travel safer by barring airlines at Dallas Love Field from flying beyond Texas and six nearby states—thus ensuring that Southwest Airlines can't compete with American Airlines on flights from Dallas to Chicago and other major cities. American is working to make sure passengers remain safe from the option of taking another airline.

"Repealing the Wright Amendment only serves to line the pockets of Southwest," says an American spokeswoman.

"In other words," says Reason reader Russ Dewey, "keeping the law on the books only serves to line the pockets of American Airlines."

Comments

|6.10.05 @ 4:41PM|#

I remember being infuriated by a story about this on NPR a few months ago, but I don't remember what bogus justification was used to pass the amendment iin the first place, and the three links provided here gave no clue. Does anyone here know what the excuse was? I doubt even Texas politicians would have the cojones to come right out and say "we're passing this bill to enrich our political donors."

|6.10.05 @ 4:47PM|#

It's because Southwest was taking away business from the brand new Dallas Fort Worth airport - George Will had a good op-ed a week ago:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/03/AR2005060301461.html

|6.10.05 @ 4:52PM|#

That post confused me so much I actually had to follow the links.

|6.10.05 @ 5:39PM|#

Repealing the Wright Amendment only serves to line the pockets of Southwest

Please tell me she was she was at least stifling a laugh when she said this... Just another example of how the airlines (big ones like American that is) have become the biggest pigs at the corporate welfare trough.

fyodor|6.10.05 @ 6:17PM|#

Will they finally get around to passing a law that lines MY pockets for cryan out loud?!?

|6.10.05 @ 6:46PM|#

Yeah, see the problem with central planning as practiced by the late Soviet Union was that there were only a few people at the top making these kinds of decisions. We don't have that problem here in America. In America, lots of different people at lots of different levels do the central planning.

...Thank God the courts are there to make sure we all don't get in each other's way.

P.S. I know this kind of thing happens everywhere, but it doesn't surprise me that this is happening in Texas. It doesn't surprise me at all.

|6.10.05 @ 7:46PM|#

Getting screwed by the Wright Ammendment has been a badge of honor for Southwest.

Their ticker symbol (LUV) reflects the airport they've always had to fly from.

I think for the first seven years, Texas lawmakers kept them on the ground.

Now look.

|6.10.05 @ 8:52PM|#

I think Texas should repeal the Wright Amendment under the condition that Southwest stop trying to "entertain" us on every flight. The last few times I had to fly Southwest it was like a very bad Night At The Improv; halfway through the final leg, I was praying the Shoe Bomber was on board...

|6.10.05 @ 8:54PM|#

Southwest was only able to get as big as they did in the days of regulation because they only flew in Texas. That meant they weren't subject to federal regulations.

The Wright Amendment is a piece of federal regulation that requires lots of people outside of Texas to approve it. It really screws over the people who live in North Texas because it gives American a virtual monopoly.

|6.10.05 @ 9:15PM|#

How hard would it be to get that desiccated fruitcake from the Carter administration, who deregulated the airlines, to put in his one-cent worth here?

BTW, I used to fly frequently from Dallas to Houston. I recall how user-friendly SW Airlines was from Love field.

I also appreciated how Continental Airlines would "move our tail" for you.

Ah, for the days before political correctness.

|6.10.05 @ 10:06PM|#

I love the amusing flight attendants on SW flights. Even if they're not ready for prime time, at least they try. And after that insane lawsuit over "eenie meenie" I encourage them to joke as much as possible.
My favorite was when doing the safety briefing, the attendant used and switched accents three times during the litany. The seatbelts were done in a French accent, the airbags in Russian, etc. It's one of things that makes the airline so enjoyable.

|6.10.05 @ 10:42PM|#

Daniel Montiel,
Back when SW just flew to and fro betwixt Houston and Dallas, only one language was spoken.
It must have been French, as I had an erection lasting four hours.

Matt|6.11.05 @ 1:34AM|#

Well, it affects me rather less since I'm out of contact with the person I used to visit in Dallas, but I know that when I _did_ go there, it was a royal pain thanks to the Wright amendment. I seriously thought that we Chicagoans had all but cornered the market on local featherbedding political trickery, but Jim Wright had us totally beat.

|6.11.05 @ 3:41AM|#

The Economist article on this is hysterical
http://economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=4033661

'American Airlines, which occupies most of the slots at DFW, is throwing a fit, claiming the move would be bad for Dallas. It accuses Southwest of �roaming the halls of Congress seeking special favours�. American, which would not dream of doing such a thing itself, has already secured the support of Joe Barton, the Texan chairman of the House energy committee, who has vowed to stop the bill.'

...

'�There is no need for Love Field,� says American's spokesman, adding that Southwest avoids Dallas-Fort Worth because it �can't make as much money as it would at Love Field.�'

'It is hard to imagine any other industry in America where that would be considered a slur. Nevertheless, the grubby capitalists at Southwest are undeterred.'

Dave|6.11.05 @ 4:12PM|#

Remind me again of which airline has been given tax breaks and government bailouts, and is facing financial difficulties--again--and which one is kicking ass and taking names?

Seriously--what kind of behavior are these clowns trying to encourage?

|6.12.05 @ 12:34PM|#

Seriously--what kind of behavior are these clowns trying to encourage?

Umm ... just a stab in the dark ... the kind of behavior that involves enormous payoffs to influential congresscritters?

|6.12.05 @ 1:49PM|#

Lets not forget that Southwest does benefit from this arrangement. Yes they could compete in DFW but really they have a nice government sponsored duopoly where SW gets Love field all to themselves and American gets DFW. Southwest would prefer the regs go away but they do benefit a great deal with the regulations in place (higher fees into Love, less cost in not paying for DFW gates) so they don't put up too much of a stink at the lobbying level. If they wanted it changed they could probably get it done politically. Instead they can take the high road from a PR perspective and then don't actually try and make the change keeping the duopoly in tact.

M1EK|6.13.05 @ 3:34PM|#

What all of you are forgetting (coincidentally, I'm sure) is that the deal in creating DFW was that Love Field should reduce or eliminate plane service. Dallas and Fort Worth (and the Feds of course) laid out some serious cash to build DFW, with the understanding that it would effectively REPLACE Love and whatever Fort Worth used at the time.

OH MAN, THAT'S HORRIBLE! THE GALL OF FORCING LOVE FIELD TO LIVE UP TO ITS BARGAINS!

I like Southwest as much as the next guy, but let's be serious. Where I am (Austin), the old airport closed for the new airport -- had the old airport stuck around under some kind of deal limiting flights, it would not be fair to later fuck with that deal, unless you're Darth Vader messing with Lando Calrissian or something.

R C Dean|6.14.05 @ 11:42AM|#

M1EK - since when did Love Field agree to go out of business as part of the subsidies given to DFW?

ed - since when is Southwest's position at Love field guaranteed by federal legislation?

|6.14.05 @ 4:10PM|#

He's right. The original 1968 bond covenant called for both airports (Love Field and Meacham in FW) to eventually stop "certificated passenger" service. Meacham stopped, became a general aviation-only airport, and then made an abortive try at passenger service again in the mid 90's (I flew out of there once).

The obvious solution, then, would be to repeal the Wright amendment in return for closing Love Field. Then SW and AA could compete equally at DFW. The reason you don't hear about that is neither side wants it: SW doesn't want to fly out of DFW and AA wants to retain their juicy out-of-state monopoly.

|6.14.05 @ 4:47PM|#

Sorry, a correction. The Fort Worth Airport back then was Greater Southwest Int'l. It was closed (in accordance with the bond agreement) and demolished. Meacham is a different airport (and did try passenger service to Houston in about 1995).

|6.22.05 @ 2:32PM|#

American Airlines is cool. Southwest sucks because it has no first class. It actually has NO class...just like school in summertime!

Really, though, Dallas sucks. All of Texas sucks except for Austin. I have lived in Dallas. It is a right shitty place to live. What makes it even more frustrating is that people living there think it's god's gift to cities. If they ever bothered flying on either Southwest or AA, they would experience such joy in living in a city with public transportation and an IQ above 89. Oh, but then they'd be exposed for the retards they are. Nevermind. Just stay in Texas, thank you.

Love Field is a shitty airport, by the way. DFW is far nicer.

|6.22.05 @ 2:34PM|#

Oh, and the reason that Texas sucks except for Austin: redneck republicans recklessly run rampant claiming they're right. Big red state. Little blue city of Austin. Big nightmare is Texas.

Mike Judge was wise to leave Texas because he has some talent and an IQ above 89.