Submitted by Merrill Matthews, a resident scholar with the Institute for Policy Innovation in Dallas, Texas. Follow him on X @MerrillMatthews.
A record number of travelers are taking to the skies this year. In an era of expensive groceries, gas, food and rent, the last thing anyone wants is a massive increase in airfares.
But that's precisely what travelers could experience if lawmakers push through new restrictions on prices, routes and even seat sizes.
More airline regulation might sound appealing. But red tape always comes with a cost, often in higher prices but also in reduced access and convenience.
Air travel used to be heavily regulated. Until the late 1970s, government officials set fares, routes and schedules for all interstate air travel. Prices were sky high, the industry operated inefficiently and relatively few people flew.
Lawmakers decided they had to do something. Congress passed the Airline Deregulation Act in 1978. The law allowed airlines to determine their own routes and prices.
The change unleashed competition and allowed low-cost operators to enter the market. Choices skyrocketed and prices fell. On an inflation-adjusted basis, the cost of flying is half of what it was before Congress deregulated the industry.
Deregulation led to more options. The number of cities connected via nonstop service, and the number of carriers providing that service, increased markedly.
More affordable tickets and an explosion of routes made flying accessible to millions of Americans. In 1977, a quarter of Americans reported flying in the past year. Today, it's close to half. Nearly 90 percent of Americans have flown in their lifetime.
Considering these outcomes, why do policymakers seem intent on bringing back onerous airline regulations? Especially considering the government has a less-than-stellar public-transportation "track record" -- that is, Amtrak.
Amtrak is a government-subsidized public train system that receives billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies. Government created the system because passenger trains were losing money. The Washington Times notes, "Even with all that money, there are still widespread complaints about the train service. Signal problems, mechanical snafus and computer breakdowns are seen across the country."
In Congress, members have proposed legislation that would pave the way for more federal control of airline baggage policies, fees, and seat sizes. A recent Department of Transportation rule imposes complex restrictions on airline refund policies that even the seasoned traveler may be hard-pressed to understand.
Together, the changes amount to an oversized regulatory regime that would be expensive and time consuming to comply with. Some airlines could be forced to raise prices or cut unprofitable routes altogether.
Proposals to re-regulate the airlines have nothing to do with passenger safety. It's been 15 years since the last fatal U.S. commercial airline crash.
To be sure, there's room to improve America's air travel system. Shortages among air traffic controllers contribute to frustrating flight delays and cancellations. Outdated facilities and infrastructure pose challenges in many parts of the country. But remember, these broken parts of the system are largely under government control already.
Subjecting airlines to burdensome regulations wouldn't make air travel better. It'd lead to higher costs, fewer routes, and less-satisfied travelers. Don't let Washington do to the airline industry what it did to train travel.
Submitted by Merrill Matthews, a resident scholar with the Institute for Policy Innovation in Dallas, Texas. Follow him on X @MerrillMatthews.
A record number of travelers are taking to the skies this year. In an era of expensive groceries, gas, food and rent, the last thing anyone wants is a massive increase in airfares.
But that's precisely what travelers could experience if lawmakers push through new restrictions on prices, routes and even seat sizes.
More airline regulation might sound appealing. But red tape always comes with a cost, often in higher prices but also in reduced access and convenience.
Air travel used to be heavily regulated. Until the late 1970s, government officials set fares, routes and schedules for all interstate air travel. Prices were sky high, the industry operated inefficiently and relatively few people flew.
Lawmakers decided they had to do something. Congress passed the Airline Deregulation Act in 1978. The law allowed airlines to determine their own routes and prices.
The change unleashed competition and allowed low-cost operators to enter the market. Choices skyrocketed and prices fell. On an inflation-adjusted basis, the cost of flying is half of what it was before Congress deregulated the industry.
Deregulation led to more options. The number of cities connected via nonstop service, and the number of carriers providing that service, increased markedly.
More affordable tickets and an explosion of routes made flying accessible to millions of Americans. In 1977, a quarter of Americans reported flying in the past year. Today, it's close to half. Nearly 90 percent of Americans have flown in their lifetime.
Considering these outcomes, why do policymakers seem intent on bringing back onerous airline regulations? Especially considering the government has a less-than-stellar public-transportation "track record" -- that is, Amtrak.
Amtrak is a government-subsidized public train system that receives billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies. Government created the system because passenger trains were losing money. The Washington Times notes, "Even with all that money, there are still widespread complaints about the train service. Signal problems, mechanical snafus and computer breakdowns are seen across the country."
In Congress, members have proposed legislation that would pave the way for more federal control of airline baggage policies, fees, and seat sizes. A recent Department of Transportation rule imposes complex restrictions on airline refund policies that even the seasoned traveler may be hard-pressed to understand.
Together, the changes amount to an oversized regulatory regime that would be expensive and time consuming to comply with. Some airlines could be forced to raise prices or cut unprofitable routes altogether.
Proposals to re-regulate the airlines have nothing to do with passenger safety. It's been 15 years since the last fatal U.S. commercial airline crash.
To be sure, there's room to improve America's air travel system. Shortages among air traffic controllers contribute to frustrating flight delays and cancellations. Outdated facilities and infrastructure pose challenges in many parts of the country. But remember, these broken parts of the system are largely under government control already.
Subjecting airlines to burdensome regulations wouldn't make air travel better. It'd lead to higher costs, fewer routes, and less-satisfied travelers. Don't let Washington do to the airline industry what it did to train travel.