Let Foreign Airlines Serve Domestic Routes in the U.S.
Argentina is opening domestic air travel to foreign airlines for the first time. The same trick has worked wonders for Europe.

Over 12 million travelers poured through American airports over the extended Christmas weekend, making it one of the busiest travel periods ever.
The high demand for holiday travel means snarled security checkpoints and long waits at baggage claim, but it also comes with higher prices: The average domestic airfare over Christmas exceeded $320 this year. That's actually quite a bit lower than last year, when average prices spiked to well over $400, in large part because "domestic airline capacity has come back to what we saw pre-pandemic, which means more planes flying than what we saw in past few years," a spokesman for travel-booking website Hopper told CBS News last month.
More capacity equals lower prices. Hey, that might be something that federal aviation policy makers should keep in mind.
Here's something else: Over the weekend, Argentina's new, libertarian President Javier Milei announced a so-called "open skies" initiative that will scrap many of the regulations prohibiting foreign airlines from operating flights between Argentinian cities. Combined with the abolition of government price controls on airfares, the new rules will allow foreign airlines to directly compete with Aerolineas Argentinas, the national airline that has managed to lose an estimated $8 billion since 2008 despite having a monopoly on domestic flights.
America, thankfully, does not have a government-owned monopoly responsible for domestic air travel. However, the federal government does prohibit foreign airlines from operating flights between American cities. That means Americans have only a few choices when it comes to flying domestically—and on some less commonly traveled routes, maybe no choice at all.
Those restrictions on "cabotage" by foreign-owned and -operated airlines are naked protectionism for the shrinking number of American-based airlines. As always, consumers pay the price—and could reap the benefits of greater competition.
A 2020 paper by researchers at the Brookings Institution, Bayes Data Intelligence, and Washington State University, for example, found that American travelers would realize $1.6 billion in annual benefits from the entry of just one foreign airline into the U.S. market.
Some of those benefits would be rather straightforward: lower prices created by greater competition. But other benefits would likely materialize too. If given the chance to expand their operations into the United States, low-cost European airlines like Ryanair could bring their innovative business models to this side of the Atlantic.
Indeed, as the Cato Institute's Scott Lincicome pointed out in a post for The Dispatch last year, the elimination of national monopolies and cabotage regulations in Europe during the 1990s has produced a flourishing market that includes legacy brands (like Air France and Lufthansa) along startups like Ryanair, WOW, and others.
The result: "These airlines have low prices, lots of fans, and (unsurprisingly) tons of capacity," Lincicome wrote. In the United States, a similar arrangement could lead to "lower fares, more routes/capacity, more jobs—and no federal subsidies or brute force needed."
Allowing foreign competition along domestic airline routes wouldn't solve all the problems that naturally occur when millions of Americans decide to travel over the same weekend, of course. There are only so many seats in the airport bar, after all, and so far as I can tell, no airline in the world has solved the problem of screaming children.
Even so, more competition would force existing American airlines to offer better service or lower fares—things that would certainly ease some of that holiday travel stress. And more capacity means more opportunities to visit far-flung loved ones, not only during the holidays but throughout the rest of the year too.
And if famously over-regulated places like Europe and Argentina can embrace the benefits of competition in the skies, what the heck is America waiting for?
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Too many idiots at the airport as it is, lower prices would just bring more.
Most of them are just TSA employees, though.
TSA employees have the right stuff.
"Argentina's new, libertarian President"
The one who wants to put limits on protests against the government? Sounds like he's about as occasionally libertarian as Rand Paul.
You mean limits such as not blocking traffic and interfering with the rights of other people? Gee, watching out for the rights of the traveling public is so anti-libertarian in your world, I guess, Beaver.
You mean the one who wants to make protesters financially responsible for any inconvenience or damage that they cause? Can’t see a problem with that.
Except for J6. That doesn't count because Republicans.
....they've spent YEARS in prison. Over trespassing.
But, please, do go on.
Don't piss off the lefties in government. They will use every dishonest, unethical method that exists to ruin you and to make an example of you to make the sheep stay tightly in the herd.
It is plane to see that cronyism prevents this. You are now free to mooch about the country.
If you are an adult child under the age of 15, have any mental or physical limitations that may prevent you from following the instructions, or are not comfortable performing the necessary duties required to operate an emergency libertarian exit, please let an adult libertarian know, explicitly or implicitly, and they'll rightly ridicule you for blocking the exit like a statist retard while pointing you towards a more appropriate seat.
I could see it if there was one national airline that was the only airline serving the country. The US has several airlines serving domestic routes that compete with each other, thus we've already had the competiton. I'm not sure a Lufthansa or British Airways, much less Ryanair or WOW would even want to compete against the likes of Southwest, Jet Blue, American, Delta, United, Spirit, Frontier, etc., even if they could. The only way I think opening it up would work is to allow the Canadian airlines to serve US domestic routes. Seriously, Boehm (as usual) is rather ignorant of US airline history and how airlines in most of the rest of the world act in total opposition to the typical US airline. I just don't see that $1.6 billion in annual benefits becoming reality.
Here's a listing of the airlines of the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airlines_of_the_United_States
Let's be honest, Ryanair isn't much different than Spirit Airlines, serves the same niche, and would be rated about as poorly. Anyone up for charging a fee just to use the lavatory (yes, this was an actual proposal by Ryanair)?
Since when is it in the best interests of anyone to let the government constrict who competes?
Russia/Ukraine? Israel/Gaza? GOF Research?
Or were you, once again and in tired Reason fashion, conflating trade between two private individuals with trade between two (or more) federally-subsidized holdings corporations in a federally-regulated market?
If Ryanair wanted to operate here, "Ryanair USA LLC" is just some paperwork away in Delaware.
Typical Boehm. Writing articles about things that he hasn't a clue about.
Ok Eric, who's going to do the maintaince on these foreign aircraft? I can see the Union's response to this. Back in the 80's there was a discount airline. I was going home on leave and was told that the flight was delayed. The reason for the delay was a flat tire. When we looked out the window we could see the plane with a replacement tire, jack and all of the tools necessary to change it. They were waiting for a mechanic to get flown in from their hub. Nobody at the airport was going to help them because their maintaince people were non-union. Do you really think that this is going to change?
Are these airlines going to have to operate under FAA Standards for training and maintaince?
What's the Pilot's and flight attendent's union going to think about this?
I can go on and on. 30 years ago this was my field and not much has changed.
The last time a commercial airplane crashed was March 2022. That's not just the US. That's worldwide.
As far as unions go, fuck 'em. Seriously. All the do is drive up prices.
I'm on your side there concerning Unions. I can remember when the Machinist's Union merged with the baggage handler's Union from Eastern. Then you had a baggage handler with 20 years making the same as a mechanic with 20 years. This was the same baggage handlers union that Eastern spent $4 million to go to a color coded system because many of them couldn't read.
Would love to see RyanAir come to the U.S. The US is so far behind Europe when it comes to flights and trains. We have the highest price routes compared, and yet crappier service too. (Not that RyanAir has good service, but they run most routes under $100 RT.)
There are no profitable trains anywhere in the US. None.
The Gravy Train in Cali. Profitable from the perspective of raking in copious amounts of tax dollars.
Maybe. But is there anything stopping Ryanair from establishing a US-regulated subsidiary and bringing "their innovative business models to this side of the Atlantic"?
Great article the gravy train needs to stop for the airline companies. Flying has become expensive and miserable because of mergers and regulatory capture. When you decide to fly you answer to the airline company not the other way around. If you don't like it you can try the other three airlines. Competition is way overdue.
Not that I necessarily agree, but is now the time to be trying to increase the number of flights--and the CO2 emissions that inevitably go with it? In most of the world right now, that's going to be a hard sell.
Might be one of the dumbest ideas ever that is recycled every few years.
First the foreign airline how would it get slots and gates in New York, DC, LAX etc all full , yes you could get one here or there but not in a meaningful way.
Next when they did get a coveted slot are they going to use it to fly to Columbus OH, St Louis no way they are going to add the 38th flight between 4 airlines between NYC and Chicago because that is where the most people and most money is at, they are not going to serve underserved markets until the high value markets are covered.
Next airlines are so heavily regulated it is ridiculous, how do we regulate an airline that HQ is in another Country that flies point to point in the USA, it will have MX done in another different country and most likely the employees from another entirely different country.
This idea always sounds good until you start in on the details, terrible idea as always.
This idea always sounds good until you start in on the details, terrible idea as always.
This is the intent. It's supposed to have only a veil or fig leaf of libertarianism. Koch libertarianism took a party philosophy so simple and broadly applicable it worked on a bumper sticker and hollowed it out into bumper sticker philosophy. You heard a joke about The Jones Act, brought in foreign air (or sea) carriers (or open borders, ladders, and taco trucks), wound up with the same or even more regulation, more people camped under overpasses "at or below the poverty line", and no cost savings? The joke was on you.
It would be nice to have Quantas drop in on American Samoa and Easter Island en route to Buenos Aires and on to DC .
Oh Canada
Trudeau Stuffs Tampons In Men's Bathrooms
All restrooms in Canadian federal buildings will now be stocked with tampons and sanitary products under PM Justin Trudeau's new policy, regardless of the gender on the door.
Canadian Conservative Senator Linda Frum kicked off a storm online last week when she posted on X "Back in the day, when only women menstruated, we had to pay for our own products. But now that men menstruate too, these products, as of this week, are mandated to be free in all men’s washrooms in all federal workplaces," she wrote.
Canada's Employment and Social Development explained that “unrestricted access to menstrual products better protects menstruating employees and makes sure that they feel safe to use the toilet room that best reflects their gender.”
They're great for nose bleeds and for sticking in your ears.
Busted lips, knocked out teeth. Remove the string and even the experts probably wouldn't recognize it as different from dental packing, especially with two black eyes.
Why does Reason let writers with little knowledge of the subject write these articles? The European Union is less than half the geographic size of the United States. The airlines there were equivalent to regional carriers in the US and most of them still are.
no airline in the world has solved the problem of screaming children.
Legalize opioids! Right, Jacob?
De-regulate duct tape.
JFC
Javier Milei - Slashes Bureaucracy, Cuts Gov't Spending, Destroys Regulations, Liberalizes Domestic Markets.
Reason - We Should Open Our Subsidized, Over-Regulated Domestic Market To Subsidized, Over-Regulated Foreign Air Carriers So That We Can Subsidize and Over-Regulate Them Too!
Reason, do you not think any airline in the EU doesn't subsidize their airlines, even after the WTO said they did so illegally? Do you think the EU has fully liberalized air travel between (e.g.) Spain and Poland the way it's liberalized between TX and NY? If European airlines aren't more competitive in a more regulated foreign market, how would you expect them to be more competitive in a less regulated market without, effectively, just becoming domestic air carriers? Do you even know the answer to these questions or are you just repeating, as Sandra and others rightly point out, the "Feed more brown and foreign bodies to the Leviathan" narrative?
Speaking as a cis-hetero patriarchal sexist pig male, I can tell you that foreign carrier flight crews, especially on Asian airlines, are MUCH better looking, and friendlier, that their American counterparts. If the tickets are cheaper, that would be a bonus, but I would pay more.
In principle there's sense here, but FAA is trying desprately to reduce the number of flights because there is a shortage of ATC capacity.
---------
Then, in March, even more bad news from the Biden FAA. As a result of the administration's inability to see issues on the horizon, the Biden administration was left to demand airlines cancel regular flights during the busy summer travel season in response to the FAA's air traffic controller staffing shortfall.
Even though there's no reason the FAA, Buttigieg, or Biden wouldn't have known there'd be a shortage of air traffic controllers this summer, they didn't do anything to avert the shortfall. Instead, they've pushed responsibility onto airlines that requires them to reduce flights by up to 10 percent of an airline's takeoff and landing rights to "avoid congestion" at airports around New York City and Washington, D.C. from May 15 through September 15.
Would delays due to such "congestion" — which might not be averted anyway if ATC staffing shortages aren't remedied soon — be subject to Biden's forthcoming rule requiring airlines to compensate passengers?
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/rebeccadowns/2023/12/25/is-biden-for-real-on-this-post-about-air-travel-n2632836?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&recip=4474886
Most foreign airlines are heavily subsidized by their respective governments giving them an unfair pricing advantage but by all means Eric, let put 100's of thousands of Americans out of work so you can save a few bucks on your flight to Ft Myers. FFS. There is also the fact, conveniently left out of your rant that most commercial airports in the nation are already operating very near or at peak capacity as well as Air traffic Control. Did you do any research at all before you wrote this tripe?