Although there's an exception to every rule, and the aviation biz has more of them than most anywhere else, in general governmental controls on international competition do not have the effect of enhancing consumer welfare so much as domestic shareholder value in the relevant industry. In nearly every instance of opening up national markets in x industry to international competition, the consumer has benefited and I see no particular reason why the airlines should be any different. Nevertheless, as I say, the aviation biz is a peculiar beast and doesn't often correspond to the usual expectations. It's well worth studying, though given the instability in the industry just now, this doesn't strike me as the idea time to pursue such a thing actively. Evan McElravy emcelr@po-box.mcgill.ca http://users.penn.com/~cpa1/ > To the extent that new U.S. flag entrants like JetBlue continue to offer > nonstop > services in multiple frequencies at attractive prices, incumbents are > disciplined and the consumer benefits. I see no way that allowing cabotage > would substantially improve consumer welfare. For example, AC does not have > the > cost structure, while WestJet is focused elsewhere. In fact, were the growth > of > U.S. new entrants to be impeded by allowing cabotage, consumer welfare would > be > damaged, not enhanced > > To the extent that new entrants were no longer able to improve consumer > welfare, > the equation should be re-evaluated. That is not a present concern, and > likely > not in the foreseeable future, however. But it is one of the factors US DOT > has > historically viewed as important.