Good afternoon, Chairman Inouye and Vice Chairman Stevens. I appreciate being here.
We have just heard testimony about the “Blueprint to Discover America.” Their three main goals – a faster and more secure visa system, more rapid processing of passengers at airports, and creating a more welcoming environment for international passengers – are goals that we all agree upon.
The good news – and I am sure that it is the result of the good work by Partnership members, is that these are also goals that are already being addressed by several federal agencies.
A quick review tells us that there are many committed people working together on these issues in the Administration, the travel and hospitality industries, and the airlines.
The Rice-Chertoff Initiative, the DHS/State Department “Secure Borders, Open Doors” initiative, the US-VISIT program, and the Commerce Department’s U.S. Travel and Tourism Advisory Board, have all focused on these same goals to improve the international traveler experience.
These government initiatives, such as E-passports, model airports, developing a “single portal” for transmission of passenger information, adding new consular positions and decreasing the wait time for visa applicants, are going a long way towards improving the passenger experience. As I compared the government’s programs with the objectives of the “Blueprint,” I felt that those “Blueprint” objectives were in great measure being addressed.
Having noted the consistency of the objectives between the “Blueprint” and the many government initiatives, there is one glaring inconsistency. The “Blueprint to Discover America” runs counter to one of the key recommendations set forth by the Travel and Tourism Advisory Board, which raised concerns about imposing taxes on passengers. It explained how new taxes can “increase the cost of travel and can dampen demand for inbound travel.”
The Partnership’s “Blueprint” suggests that their new objectives can be met with an investment of $300 million to underwrite such initiatives as training CBP and TSA officials in “customer service techniques.”
It goes on to suggest that all of the initiatives could be paid for with a $5 fee for “all travelers leaving the United States via air” or with a charge of approximately $10 added to the cost of “purchasing the airline ticket.” (To be fair, the “Blueprint” offered a third funding alternative: the issuance of $1 billion in tax-credit bonds.)
In my view these fee proposals are wrongheaded and counterintuitive. Why would we want to charge passengers more at the very time that we are trying to encourage more of them to visit the U.S.? That simply does not make any sense.
I would like to remind the committee that international airline passengers are already paying approximately $50 in U.S. taxes and fees for each trip to America. What passengers should expect for that $50 is an efficient system to get them through our airports.
If more needs to be done to expedite handling airline passengers or processing visas – and it does – then the federal government needs to underwrite these efforts.
After all, in 2006 those $50-each passenger fees generated $3.3 billion to $3.7 billion.
The “Blueprint” also says that “all foreign travelers into the U.S. should be greeted at the inspection booth with the words ‘Welcome to the United States’.”
While I appreciate a warm welcome – it is really hard for me to support charging passengers a $5 fee to purchase a smile and a greeting.
The ATA strongly favors securing America’s borders, and we can do that by eliminating inadequate processes and transitioning to electronic visa application forms, making visa appointments on-line, sharing data among government agencies to avoid duplicative work, and adding even more consular positions and locations.
Mr. Chairman, ATA is also quite sensitive to the need to balance the sometimes competing interests of post-9/11 security with ease of travel. Our airlines frequently comment on the so-called “hassle factor” that security presents, but at the end of the day we accept the reality that there are some necessary trade-offs.
ATA has been working very closely with government agencies to implement these initiatives. We have long been an advocate for full coordination among government agencies and support a DHS-led “single face” at U.S. airports of entry.
I want to reiterate – we support the fundamental objectives in the “Blueprint” to speed passengers through airports, to expedite visa processing and enhance security, and to make the travel experience more enjoyable. For the most part, we think these objectives are already being addressed by the State Department, DHS and the Commerce Department – but that they could clearly be done with more vigor and with a greater sense of urgency which this Committee can encourage and enforce.
America must effectively compete for international visitors or millions of travelers will take the billions of dollars that they would have spent here -- elsewhere. Our airlines are eager to bring more international visitors to America so they can experience first hand what we already know: America is a great country to do business with, and to visit.
Thank you.