N.Y. Passengers' Bill of Rights Preempted By Federal Deregulation Law, Court Finds

Federal aviation law preempts New York state's stricter "passenger bill of rights," a federal appeals court ruled March 25 (Air Transport Association of America Inc. v. Andrew Cuomo, 2nd Cir., No. 07-5771-cv, 3/25/08).  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that the federal Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 (Pub. L. No. 95-504) preempts the New York law thanks to a provision that ensures that no state or locality may enact a law "related to a price, route, or service of an air carrier." 
      In the wake of several high-profile long delays in the winter of 2006-07, New York enacted the passengers' rights law, which forced airlines to accommodate passengers' needs if flights have been boarded but are delayed on the runway for more than three hours. It required that airlines provide passengers on such grounded planes with services including sanitary restrooms, air ventilation, food, water, and medical assistance. 
      The Air Transport Association of America--the country's largest aviation trade group--sued New York over its enactment of the law, and the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York sided with the state. ATA then appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals.  "The court's decision vindicates the position of ATA and the airlines--that airline services are regulated by the federal government and that a patchwork of laws by states and localities would be impractical and harmful to consumer interests. This clear and decisive ruling sends a strong message to other states that are considering similar legislation," ATA said in a statement.  The court's ruling is available at: http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/opinions.htm by searching for docket no. 07-5771.
      Rep. Jerry Costello (D-Ill.), chairman of the House Transportation Committee's Aviation panel, used the decision to call for Senate action on Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization (H.R. 2881). Disputes over the funding title of the FAA reauthorization measure has caused it to stall in the Senate. The House passed their version of the bill in September 2007.

Amtrak Delays on Freight Tracks Cost Over $100 Million in FY 06, Study Finds

Delays to Amtrak trains running on freight railroad tracks cost the cash-strapped agency $136.6 million in fiscal year 2006, according to a report by the Department of Transportation inspector general released publicly April 1.  Amtrak owns very little track outside of its popular Northeast Corridor route and private rail companies by law must allow Amtrak access to--and priority over—their freight rail lines. Disputes over the law and its enforcement have caused many of the delay problems.  The monetary costs of the delays stem from additional labor expenditures, extended staffing requirements, and extra fuel consumed. Ridership--and revenue--also decrease as on-time rates go down. 
      The report's $136.6 million figure is based on Amtrak reaching an on-time rate of 85 percent, a significant raise from the current 66 percent. The report notes that such an increase would be "a difficult task."  The report “Effects of Amtrak's Poor On-Time Performance” was requested by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), chairman of Senate Commerce's Surface Transportation Subcommittee and lead author of the Senate-passed Amtrak reauthorization bill (S. 294). That measure, which has not seen House action, would allow the Surface Transportation Board to investigate and fine freight companies that cause significant Amtrak delays, according to Lautenberg's office. 
      "This report puts in real dollars what these delays are costing Amtrak, taxpayers and rail travelers. Passengers shouldn't have to miss their meetings or family engagements because a freight train is blocking the tracks," Lautenberg said.

Spring Forum Approaches, Deadline for Policy Resolutions April 11

Saturday, April 11 is the deadline for submission of policy resolutions for consideration by NCSL's eleven standing committees during the 2008 Spring Forum.  Utah Representative David Clark, Chair of the Standing Committees, will refer the proposed statements to the appropriate committee.  The NCSL Permanent Rules of Procedure require that policy positions be directed at Congress, the Administration or the federal courts and must involve issues that affect the states.