Update: April 23, 2007

Public Subsidies for Airports Benefit Few

The following is an expanded version of a letter to the editor published in the Hillsboro Argus in response to an editorial by Val Hess on Rapid Transit.

In a 4/06/07 editorial Val Hess brought attention to the high speed train advancements in France, Japan, and other countries. Sadly, the United States lags far behind both industrialized and developing countries in establishing this mode of transportation as a viable option largely because of its history of investing almost exclusively in aircraft and automotive industries, both of which pose a much greater risk to global warming than rail does.

Representative Earl Blumenauer in a 6/29/05 congressional speech promoting funding for Amtrak (which can hardly be described as high speed but it's all we've got) stated:

"There are people here who have a theological zeal that somehow Amtrak should be self-supporting, but they sit back as we lavish subsidies on the airline industry, which has not shown a profit in its passenger service for 75 years, despite $14 billion in airport subsidies, $11 billion in air traffic control. After 9/11, we gave them $15 billion in loans and grants. In fact, Amtrak and its operation helps keep down airline ticket prices because it provides some competition."

To bring this closer to home it is curious to note that Washington County and Hillsboro officials never seem to tire of entertaining offers to sell off the use of the fairgrounds, located next to the Hillsboro Airport, on the basis that it doesn't turn a profit. Yet at the same time many of these same officials egregiously pander to the gas guzzling, carbon dioxide emitting, benzene spewing aviation industry at the Hillsboro Airport and at various other aviation facilities in the county.

The Hillsboro Airport Master Plan reveals the intent of the Port of Portland in league with the FAA to gouge taxpayers across this land for $126 million dollars over the next 15 years to finance improvements at this "executive" general aviation airport which primarily caters to corporate jet interests, flight training, and general aviation hobbyists. And what do we as members of the public receive in return for this bestowal of corporate welfare on an airport that serves a small minority of private business interests rather than the public good? We get noise, pollution, health problems, a decrease in property values, and serious safety and security risks.

Surely $126 million dollars can be put to better use - high speed rail, environmental protections, benefits for the unfortunate victims of Walter Reed Hospital scandal and other veterans throughout this country, adequate training and body armor for troops being sent into battle, medical insurance for the 45 million uninsured people in this nation, decent and humane mental health treatment for all. Clearly there are numerous worthy causes. By contrast, tax payer subsidies for the Hillsboro Airport and other general aviation facilities in Washington County represent a truly galling, shameful, and indefensible example of state sponsored corporate welfare at its worst.