RSS
Nebraska Farmers To Receive USDA Disaster Assistance
Nelson Leads Effort To Withdraw Regulation On Young Farm Workers
U.S. Postal Service Agrees To Five-Month Moratorium On Closing Rural Post Offices
KOLN-TV: Sen. Nelson: Russia Must Continue to Remove Barriers to Free Trade
Read More > >
Most Nebraskans are very practical, patriotic and giving people who are always ready to stand up for the good of the country. In times of need, we are willing to accept our fair share of budget cuts in order to reduce spending and help balance the budget.
We also realize that just because we live in a mostly rural state with a relatively small population we should not be taken advantage of and forced to bear a disproportionate share of the burden. During my two terms as Governor and as Nebraska’s Senator, I have fought off attempts to balance the budget on the backs of rural Americans. Unfortunately, that is what the Administration is trying to do with this year’s Transportation Appropriations bill.
Among other things, this bill provides millions of dollars in economic assistance to rural areas through the Essential Air Service Program (EAS) to make sure small communities have access to commercial air service. Because of the economies of scale, commercial airlines would not be able to serve small airports without subsidized support from the federal government. Without this assistance, our rural areas would be cut off from the nation’s transportation infrastructure because it wouldn’t be economically feasible for the air service providers to serve the relatively smaller customer base. The Transportation – HUD Appropriations bill provides $110 million in funding for EAS, which is $60 million more than the Administration requested.
Congress has appropriately chosen to fund many vital programs above the Administration’s request which has provoked a veto threat and accusations from the White House that the Transportation-HUD appropriations bill contains excessive and irresponsible spending. I think most Nebraskans will recognize that these types of cuts – exemplified by the proposed cut in EAS funding – are excessive and irresponsible. These cuts would ultimately result in a loss of services and programs to Nebraskans and in the case of EAS the cut could mean an end to commercial air service and a loss of critical economic opportunity for our communities.
The bill also prohibits the U.S. Department of Transportation from shifting some of the costs to keep air service from the federal government to local communities. I have often said that when the federal government shifts a cost to local governments they act as the shifter, and the shiftee gets the shaft. This budgetary gimmick results in zero savings, it just forces the local governments to spend.
As I have said before, when it comes to rural living, Washington just doesn’t get it. Assistance for small airports is often targeted by federal bureaucrats who consider this “flyover country.” They don’t understand the importance of air service in rural communities. Eliminating commercial air service at rural airports would not only be a major inconvenience for the flying public but would harm the economic well being of the area. A good transportation system that includes air travel is necessary for economic development and job creation.
My hope is that the Administration will work with Congress to pass the Transportation – HUD appropriations bill rather than threaten a veto. This bill includes other direct assistance to Nebraska and is important to funding our national transportation infrastructure.
This is an opportunity for compromise and honest discussion about the importance of the national priorities funded in this bill. Domestic priorities such as transportation improvement and safety should not be left by the roadside.
###
Search: Rural Affairs, Infrastructure, Transportation, Speeches, Op-Eds, Columns