Re: Airports: Was: Those clowns near LGB

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Al has a reasonable point, but who built the airport at Everett? How long
should the feds be able to call the tune? I've been to Burbank, and it
seems like stepping into the 1950's. My suspicion/guess was that Burbank
was built by/for Lockheed. If you accept federal money for a general
aviation airport, does that give the feds the right to turn it into an
airport for Southwest, etc. without the locals' assent? Yes, there is
emminent domain, but then the affected folks have the right to just
compensation.

This is a complicated issue: while the framers of the Constitution wanted
a central government strong enough to carry out the tasks needed, they,
including Hamilton, wanted to limit the powers of the central government.

john

On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Allan9 wrote:

> I'm going to throw two cents worth here.
> If you're going to accept 90% Federal funding for an airport/terminal then
> you shouldn't restrict the airports usage.  If you want to provide 100%
> funding then it's your ballpark.  Play the game you want by your rules.
> Landing fees are designed to pay (in most instances) the airport sponsors
> 10% and daily operating costs.
>
> Al
--
John F. Kurtzke, C.S.C.
Department of Mathematics
278 Buckley Center
University of Portland
Portland, OR  97203
503-943-7377
kurtzke@xxxxxx

[Index of Archives]         [NTSB]     [NASA KSC]     [Yosemite]     [Steve's Art]     [Deep Creek Hot Springs]     [NTSB]     [STB]     [Share Photos]     [Yosemite Campsites]