LightSquared’s business model appeared to be the creation of an entirely new “4G” internet wireless network from the fringe safety zone bandwidth dedicated to the secure military and civilian GPS. Mr. Falcone, his wife Lisa Falcone, and LightSquared Chief Executive Officer Sanjiv Ahuja each made $30,400 political contribution to Democratic campaign organizations in 2010 to allegedly influence Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to allow the project to proceed under increasingly relaxed standards according to Congressional sources. A letter from Republican House members referred to e-mails between LightSquared representatives and White House officials about attendance at fundraisers for President Barack Obama that coincide with LightSquared contacts: “While some may call it a coincidence, we remain skeptical.”

LightSquared’s FCC operating license had originally included strict provisions intended to ensure the network would be primarily a satellite-based system, with terrestrial components serving as a backup when users were not able to link with a satellite. But these provisions were softened via several license modifications; including the FCC granting LightSquared permission to sell terrestrial-only handsets as a concession to help the company raise billions in financing.

The FCC had ordered testing and Congressional committees on science, armed services and transportation held hearings to determine if the LightSquared plans to offer wireless Internet services to 260 million people would cause harmful interference to GPS operations. In September Congressional investigators asked Jacob Lew, director the Office of Management and Budget and John Holdren, director of the Office of Science & Technology Policy for records of all contacts by LightSquared or its affiliates with staff of the agencies.

Following the acknowledgment by LightSquared officials of the Wells Notices; the National Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) Systems Engineering Forum, an executive branch body that advises on policy makers on issues around GPS, reported that it found that 69 of 92, or 75 percent, of receivers tested “experienced harmful interference” at the equivalent of 109 yards from a LightSquared base station. The results from testing by the Department of Defense and the Federal Aviation Administration, along with GPS makers Trimble Navigation Ltd. and Garmin Ltd., farm-gear maker Deere & Co., and General Motor Co.’s OnStar unit, according to the draft seen by Bloomberg News, determined “LightSquared signals caused harmful interference to majority of GPS receivers tested” and that “No additional testing is required to confirm harmful interference exists.” After considering all possible mitigation options including reducing the power of the planned LightSquared base stations and outfitting GPS receivers with special filters, the report’s authors found there is “no practical way for the high-power LightSquared terrestrial network to coexist with myriad applications that rely on relatively low-power GPS signals in an adjacent part of the electromagnetic spectrum.”

Given that it now appears LightSquared already squandered a $1 billion of investor’s money to put a satellite in orbit and were busy raising billions more for what may have been a scam from the start; perhaps a little contrition by LightSquared management would have been an appropriate course of action. But late today, the company arrogantly reacted in a press release that it is: “outraged by the illegal leak of incomplete government data, This breach attempts to draw an inaccurate conclusion to negatively influence the future of LightSquared and narrowly serve the business interests of the GPS industry.”

With Phillip Falcone potentially about to do the perp walk and Congress already geared up for crony capitalist investigations of Solyndra and MF Global; the White House and several of the Executive Department agencies may have a very busy schedule over the next few months trying to figure out what they didn’t know and when they didn’t know about LightSquared. The miraculous timing of the release of this crucifying technical report will inflame Congressional suspicions that only crony capitalism could have allowed a proposal that would have disrupted navigation systems on cars, boats, tractors and planes to come so close to approval.

Feel free to forward this Op Ed and follow our Blog at www.econservativenews.com

Thank you all the success of Chriss Street’s latest book: “The Third Way” now available on
www.amazon.com

An important factor in these movements is the fundamentally anarcho-syndicalist tenor of the union movement, which demands an ever greater share of national income. Public-sector unions like the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees have been prominent in the “occupy” movement. Wisconsin AFSCME proudly sent pizzas “in solidarity” with the Wall Street occupiers.

Rutgers University labor economist Leo Troy calls public-sector unionism “the new socialism.” The old socialism was based on state ownership of the means of production. The new socialism involves the transfer of an ever greater share of the economy to the public sector. Government at all levels took about 5% of GDP a century ago and 13% on the eve of the Great Depression. The New Deal increased the proportion to one-third by 1960. We are in the forty percent range now, and the full nationalization of health care will put us over half.

Unions have been a primary force in the expansion of state power. Even the reputedly “conservative” American Federation of Labor called for “the abolition of the wage system.” A.F.L. President Samuel Gompers put organized labor’s goal as simply “more” — exactly what Johnny Rocco, the Al Capone-like figure portrayed by Edward G. Robinson in the 1939 film “Key Largo,” explained as his ultimate end. The New Deal’s expansion of state power was based principally on private-sector unionism that began with the “occupy Flint” sit-down strikes of 1936.

Congress had empowered unions by the National Labor Relations (Wagner) Act to balance the power of corporations. But they had become a law unto themselves. Roscoe Pound, the Harvard Law School Dean who had done much to promote labor reform in the progressive era, noted in 1958 that unions were free to commit torts against persons and property, interfere with the use of transportation, break contracts, deprive people of the means of livelihood, and misuse trust funds, “things no one else can do with impunity. The labor leader and labor union now stand where the king and government . . . stood at common law.” Rather than a countervailing force to limit corporate power, unions had themselves gained “a despotic centralized control.” The private-sector union quest for “more” finally killed the auto and steel industries and private-sector unionism itself.

Public-sector unionism had suffered a major setback with the Boston police strike of 1919, which exposed the anarchical consequences of what Massachusetts Governor Calvin Coolidge called a “strike against the public safety” and which President Woodrow Wilson called “an intolerable crime against civilization.” Government employees were expressly excluded under the Wagner Act. As President Franklin D. Roosevelt explained, “the very nature and purposes of government” made collective bargaining impossible, because a public employer is “the whole people, who speak by means of laws”—that is to say, the government is sovereign. A union that could compel it to bargain must perforce become the new sovereign.

The ethos of organized labor could often be predatory and nihilistic. It reminds one of the famous “Melian dialogue” in Thucydides’ history of the Peloponnesian War. The Athenians tell the citizens of Melos that they must join their alliance against the Spartans. When the Melians reply that they have a just right to remain neutral, the Athenian ambassadors reply that “we both alike know that into the discussion of human affairs the question of justice only enters where the pressure of necessity is equal, and that the powerful exact what they can, and the weak grant what they must.” When the Melians insist on their rights, the Athenians annihilate the city, kill all the men, and enslave the women and children.

This was the spirit of Representative William Clay’s advice to the air traffic controllers in 1980. He urged them to:

“…completely revise your political thinking. It should start with the premise that you have no permanent friends, no permanent enemies, just permanent interests. It must be selfish and pragmatic. You must learn the rules of the game and learn them well. Rule Number 1 says that you don’t put the interest of any other group ahead of your own. What’s good for the federal employees must be interpreted as being good for the nation. Rule Number 2 says that you take what you can, give up only what you must. Rule Number 3 says that you take it from whomever you can, whenever you can, however you can. If you are not prepared to play by the rules then you have not reached the age of political maturity and perhaps you deserve everything that’s happening to you.”

The United States dodged a bullet when Congress refused to enact Representative Clay’s National Public Employee Relations Act—a “Wagner Act for public employees”—in the mid-1970s. It was helped by a close Supreme Court decision that suggested that such an act was beyond Congress’ heretofore limitless power to regulate interstate commerce. Reagan’s breaking of the air traffic controllers strike also helped to ensure that the United States did not go as far as Italy, Greece, or even Great Britain–before Margaret Thatcher–in turning over its government to public-employee unions.

The ethos of “more” for the public sector has driven most of the West to the point where the private sector cannot produce enough to stave off bankruptcy. Occupy Wall Street drivel notwithstanding, the outright confiscation of all of the income of the “1%” would not even eliminate this year’s federal deficit.

The latest federal subsidy comes under the little-known Small Community Air Service Development Program (SCASDP), which provides temporary help to small airports to attract and maintain local air service through marketing and revenue guarantees. St. Cloud officials said the taxpayer gift would go a long way toward courting a new carrier, mostly by offsetting the financial risks involved with getting new service off the ground. In other words, the federal government is subsidizing the airport so the airport can subsidize the airlines. “One hundred percent of it will go towards what we call a minimum revenue guarantee. It’s really putting a pot of money somewhere set aside that in the event that airline loses money or has some start up costs or whatever it might be that they’re able to pull from that and make themselves whole,” airport director Bill Towle told the St. Cloud Times.

While increasing St. Cloud’s chances of attracting air service, analysis by the Freedom Foundation of Minnesota suggests the program fails to deliver for communities more often than not. In fact, a federal audit found that half of SCASDP grants failed to meet their objectives or failed to continue to provide air service capable of competing in the marketplace after the subsidies dried up.

Federal auditors have consistently raised questions about the overall lack of effectiveness of the $20 million per year FAA program. An Office of Inspector General 2008 audit revealed that just 30 percent of subsidy recipients were successful in achieving and sustaining their desired results for at least one year. The 40-page report concluded that “70 percent of the grants in our review failed to fully achieve their objectives. Specifically, 50 percent of the grants were unable to achieve any of their articulated grant objectives or were unable to sustain grant benefits beyond the grant horizon.”

On paper, St. Cloud’s bid appears to align well with the audit’s recommendations for maximizing the possibility of success. Airports that woo new air service tend to fare better than airports that attempt to improve an existing air service, according to the audit. Other important variables include offering revenue guarantees, marketing support and high level community involvement.

While there are no guarantees, St. Cloud’s strategy includes all of those key elements, including raising additional financial support from the community. Nevertheless, the decade-old program has been excluded from the FAA Reauthorization bill working through Congress. The subsidy is destined to become a rare example of a Washington program that both sides of the aisle agree does not work, according to House Transportation and Aviation Committee staff in Washington.

In the end, St. Cloud will have secured one of the program’s first and last taxpayer gifts from the SCASDP. FAA records indicate that a $1,000,000 grant was awarded jointly in 2002 to Brainerd/St. Cloud airports during the first round of SCASDP funding. The records do not specify exactly how the subsidy was used to pursue the program’s mission of supporting and sustaining long-term air passenger service after federal funding runs out. A 2005 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report found that $250,000 of the first grant was reimbursed to the federal government. Neither federal DOT nor Brainerd and St. Cloud airport officials responded to FFM’s requests for information.

In fact, three more Minnesota airports received subsidies during the program’s decade-long existence: Duluth in 2003 ($1 million), Hibbing in 2005 ($485,000) and  Marshall in 2005 ($480,000). The Hibbing Airport even received special designation in 2005 under SCASDP as an Air Service Development Zone. GAO investigators, however, could not even determine what qualified an airport for Air Service Development Zone status or any actual benefits tied to the designation.

One official from an unspecified airport told the GAO that “positive local publicity for the airport” was the only effect they could report in connection with the designation. As for Minnesota’s five recipients of SCASDP grants, only Duluth currently offers non-subsidized passenger airline service. Marshall and St. Cloud do not have regular passenger air service, while Delta has tentatively announced plans to drop its subsidized flights to Hibbing and Brainerd.

The numbers in chart form are listed below:

SMALL COMMUNITY AIR SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

MN Grant Recipients 2002-2011

2002- Brainerd/St. Cloud   $1,000,000
2003- Duluth                              1 ,000,000
2005- Hibbing                                 485,000
2005- Marshall                               480,000
2011- St. Cloud                               750,000

What has led to this massive shut down? Senate Democrats refusal to curb a wasteful government subsidy of $200 million known as the Essential Air Service (EAS) program.

As of last Friday, the FAA has lost its authorization to spend money and levy fees because Congress couldn’t come to an agreement on a transportation bill. House Republicans are currently purposing a temporary transportation bill to last through September allowing time for the two parties to come together on a larger agreement. Included in the bill is a provision that would curb the EAS program.

The EAS program was originally created in 1978 as a subsidy to help out small and rural airports as the government stepped back from regulating routes and fares. The program was intended to last 10 years. Over three decades later, the program is still in existence serving over 140 airports; its budget keeps exploding and now the program functions only to subsidize routes that would have been abandoned year ago.

The EAS program subsidizes a rural airport in Lewistown, Montana. In 2007, that airport reported that it averaged .6 passengers per flight. Last year, an EAS route between Atlanta and Macon made many flights without a single passenger on board, which resulted in an annual per-passenger subsidy of $464 to keep that route running. And in Kansas, EAS pays three airports in Dodge City, Garden City and Liberal to remain open. All are within 75 miles of each other.

Over the last decade, the EAS budget has increased 300 percent from $50 million to $200 million as of last year.

With all these blatantly ridiculous examples of government waste, the House and Senate have already agreed to limit EAS eligibility to communities that are located 90 miles or more from a large- or medium-sized airport, saving $12.5 million annually.

Further, Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman John L. Mica (R-FL) included in the House version of the temporary extension a provision that would prohibit EAS subsides that exceeded $1,000 per passenger which would end service to three rural airports (Ely, NV, Alamogordo/Holloman AFB, NM, and Glendive, MT) and save $4.1 million annually.

Considering how outrageous subsidizing even $1,000 per passenger is, it is amazing that Senate Democrats led by Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) continue to oppose the temporary reauthorization bill.

The American people need to stand with Congressman Mica, and insist we stop this ridiculous government waste of taxpayer dollars any more.

Is it any wonder we have a debt crisis?

The National Mediation Board, an Obama crony-filled body connected tenuously to the AFL-CIO recently overturned decades of precedent when it determined that workers who chose not to participate – or could not participate – in an election to form a union did not receive a voice in the election’s outcome. Previously, a majority of all workers in a shop were required to form a union; if a worker was absent for a vote to form a union, that worker was counted as a “no” vote, thus imperiling union creation. Not content with results of recent elections, the NMB decided that unions could be formed with merely a majority of present workers, making forming a union much, much easier.

Back in April, the House GOP passed an FAA reauthorizatin bill that would have killed the NMB decision, restored workers choice, reduced wasteful government spending, cut back on restrictive airline industry regulations, and provided the FAA with the resources necessary to improve flight control and air traffic technology, all without levvying any new taxes or fees on American taxpayers. Of course, as with many bills that do what Americans want, Democrats vociferously opposed the measure in the Senate and passed their own bill with none of the benefits of the House bill.

Now, that bill is headed to a joint session, and suddenly the GOP has an unprecedented, rare opportunity.

They can stand strong against the Democrats and their union backers and represent the interests of the American taxpayer in DC by supporting HR 658 – the House version of the bill that contains the tough language, preserving taxpayer dollars and preserving workers choice. We, as Americans must encourage them to step up and support this bill.

The NMB was created by that union-hating, capitalist pig Franklin Delano Roosevelt to oversee union elections in the air and rail industries. Under Obama, the board made its first pro-active rule in over 75 years of existence, changing the way union votes are counted to enable an entire workforce to be forced to unionize by a minority of votes.

The House has an opportunity to pass legislation that will turn back the clock on the administration’s overstepping of its boundaries, and send a strong “game over” message to the union bosses counting on the Democrats to line their pockets. Namely, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act, which includes a provision to overturn the NMB’s new rule and re-instate the system that has worked for decades.

The airline workers want this, and with a Republican majority in the House it should be a sure thing, right? Well, it’s not that easy. A handful of House Republicans, largely in union-heavy districts, are clearly more concerned with their re-election than with the mandate of fiscal responsibility and smaller government that put them in power in the first place.

Rep. Steven LaTourette (R-OH), along with Democrat Jerry Costello, is trying to tack on an amendment taking the teeth out of the legislation. In a letter to the other Members, they claim that rolling back the new NMB rule “would jeopardize the fairness of union representation elections.” So essentially what they’re saying is that a policy upheld under such Presidents as FDR, Truman, Carter, and Clinton was somehow unfair to unions?

Other key Republican fence sitters include Reps. Mary Bono-Mack (CA-45), Ilena Ros-Lentinen (FL-18), Lincoln Diaz-Balart (FL-21), David Rivera (FL-25), Joe Walsh (IL-8), Robert Dold (IL-10), Judy Biggert (IL-13), Bobby Schilling (IL-17), Ed Whitfield (KY-1), Jo Ann Emerson (MO-8), Jon Runyan (NJ-3), Leonard Lance (NJ-7), Michael Grimm (NY-13), Michael Turner (OH-3), Steve Austria (OH-7), Steve Stivers (OH-15), Jim Gerlach (PA-6), Mike Fitzpatrick (PA-8), Todd Platts (PA-19), David McKinley (WV-1).

UPDATE: Big Government has been informed that Rep. Michael Turner is not on the fence, is opposed to the amendment and is a co-sponsor of the legislation reversing the NMB’s rule.

Ironically, earlier that day, NATCA, the air traffic controllers’ union, had started its annual safety conference.  Their reaction was predictable:  what is needed in the tower are more (presumably unionized) employees—someone whose job would be, one supposes, to keep the other person awake for the half-dozen flights that land at DCA between midnight and 6am.

If keeping tower staff awake is our primary concern, a $10 alarm clock, set to go off at regular intervals, would suffice just fine in this regard, and we can forego the tens of thousands of dollars a year in salary and benefits for the second man.  We could also co-locate other non-tower flight operations to the tower for the overnight shift.  But to focus on the number of overnight controllers or why people are falling asleep on the job ignores the bigger, and more important, picture.  This event underscores a deeper problem—one of security, and not safety.

In the days following this incident, a recording surfaced of a fellow air traffic controller operating in Warrenton, VA and in regular communication with the flights into DCA.  In that recording, Warrenton blithely tells the pilots of the plane that he has tried calling the tower at DCA to no avail.  And that’s it.

Considering that the airspace surrounding DCA is considered to have the highest security priority in the nation, encompassing as it does the White House, the Capitol, the Pentagon, the CIA, and just about every other essential federal agency.  This is the reason DCA was shut down immediately following the September 11^th attacks, and why the airspace remains among the tightest restrictions in the nation.

With the Pentagon just miles away, one wonders why Warrenton failed to notify anyone in law enforcement, homeland security, or national defense of the silence at DCA tower.  At the very least, why didn’t someone notify Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority’s own police force? They could have sent someone up into the tower to check up on the napping air traffic controller within minutes!

This is not idle nitpicking, either.  Given the importance of DC airspace, and the proximity of DCA to a host of targets, it is not inconceivable for a “tower taking” to be the opening move in a terrorist attack on DC.  That the tower was allowed to go silent and nobody in the security realm even made a cursory check is galling to say the least.

If this is not standard operating procedure, then it should be made so immediately.  The FAA ought to require that when a tower goes silent in the DC area, those who recognize the potential security breach ought to notify that airport’s law enforcement personnel immediately, who ought to, in turn, notify the appropriate homeland security and Department of Defense agencies.

Moreover, from a proximity standpoint, instead of putting another controller in the tower (which makes little sense from either a budgetary, safety, or security standpoint), MWAA ought to add tower checks to its normal, nighttime security operations.  They ought to visit the tower to ensure that all is well, and they can make regular contact with the control tower via radio.  They have the manpower on staff, airport security is within their purview, and ensuring that that the tower remains secure certainly comes under their rubric.  There is no reason while regular tower checks shouldn’t immediately become a part of that.

It is easy to look at a situation and say, “let’s throw money and manpower at it and see what happens.”  But manpower isn’t the central issue—and neither is safety.  The planes landed safely and because safety is ultimately the responsibility of the pilots we have two on commercial airliners.  From a safety standpoint the various systems worked in this case.

The breakdown here is one of appropriate procedures and we create a system in which there are checks, balances, and, ultimately, accountability.  Congress, the NTSB, and the FAA ought to keep that in mind as they review what happened at Reagan National on March 22^nd.