That Time Republicans Wanted More Regulation

When it comes to cell-phone calls on airplanes, some GOP lawmakers say federal restrictions are just fine.

WASHINGTON, DC - OCTOBER 11: U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) speaks to members of the media at the Capitol October 11, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. On the 11th day of a U.S. Government shutdown, President Barack Obama spoke with Speaker Boehner on the phone and they agreed that they should keep talking. 
National Journal
Add to Briefcase
Elahe Izad
Dec. 17, 2013, 2:40 p.m.

From Big Gulps to green­house-gas emis­sions, the GOP has no in­terest in be­ing aligned with “nanny state” gov­ernance. It is the party of few­er reg­u­la­tions, not more — ex­cept when it comes to phone calls on planes.

Sev­er­al Re­pub­lic­an law­makers are on a cru­sade to avoid hav­ing to hear their seat­mates jab­ber end­lessly, and they think the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment needs to do something about it.

“This case is dif­fer­ent be­cause of com­mon sense,” GOP Sen. Lamar Al­ex­an­der of Ten­ness­ee said of his pro­pos­al to ban cell-phone calls on planes. “The Re­pub­lic­an Party is also a non­vi­ol­ent party, and if you al­low 2 mil­lion pas­sen­gers every day to yap their in­ner­most thoughts while strapped in 17-inch seats between two oth­er per­sons, you’d have to have 10 new air mar­shals on every air­plane.

“So this is an ef­fort to pro­mote peace and justice, and I’m sure Re­pub­lic­ans are for that as well.”

House Trans­port­a­tion and In­fra­struc­ture Com­mit­tee Chair­man Bill Shuster has also in­tro­duced a bill to ban phone calls on planes. The Pennsylvania Re­pub­lic­an has 17 GOP and 11 Demo­crat­ic co­spon­sors, and the bill is sim­il­ar to one in­tro­duced by Al­ex­an­der and Sen. Di­anne Fein­stein, a Cali­for­nia Demo­crat. The bills would ban only cell-phone calls by pas­sen­gers, not text mes­saging.

Shuster doesn’t view his pro­pos­al as un­ne­ces­sary gov­ern­ment reg­u­la­tion. “We are elim­in­at­ing the ban on people be­ing able to text and email, so what I say is, tap, don’t talk,” he said. “This is about so­cial dis­course in our skies today. They’re in con­fined places, crowded “¦ I think it’s un­ne­ces­sary to add this.”

What’s got every­one so wor­ried about this any­way? Well, the Fed­er­al Com­mu­nic­a­tions Com­mis­sion is con­sid­er­ing lift­ing its ban on cell-phone calls while fly­ing, a rul­ing that would only deal with the tech­no­lo­gic­al ques­tion of wheth­er it’s safe for such calls to be made in the air. The Trans­port­a­tion De­part­ment has be­gun a com­ment peri­od as the agency ex­am­ines wheth­er to ban in-flight calls to pro­tect trav­el­ers’ rights and safety. The Fed­er­al Avi­ation Ad­min­is­tra­tion has already is­sued new guidelines on al­low­ing use of elec­tron­ic devices — though not phone calls — dur­ing takeoffs and land­ings.

House lead­er­ship is “happy to” work with Shuster on the bill, ac­cord­ing to an aide, and Shuster says he may get a floor vote in the New Year on his pro­pos­al. He also says he has pop­u­lar opin­ion be­hind him. In a re­cent As­so­ci­ated Press-GfK poll, 48 per­cent of re­spond­ents said they were totally op­posed to al­low­ing pas­sen­gers to make calls on com­mer­cial flights; 19 per­cent were in fa­vor and 30 per­cent said they neither favored nor op­posed it. (The over­all er­ror mar­gin was plus or minus 3.5 per­cent­age points.)

Liber­tari­an-lean­ing Reas­on com­mis­sioned its own poll, con­duc­ted by Prin­ceton Sur­vey Re­search As­so­ci­ates In­ter­na­tion­al, show­ing 45 per­cent of Amer­ic­ans fa­vor al­low­ing calls dur­ing flights, with 50 per­cent op­posed. (The mar­gin of er­ror was plus or minus 3.7 points.) The site writes that oth­er polls “do not make it clear wheth­er Amer­ic­ans want the gov­ern­ment to ban their fel­low pas­sen­gers from talk­ing on cell phones dur­ing com­mer­cial flights, or if they think that de­cision should be left to the in­di­vidu­al air­lines.”

Law­makers like Shuster cite the specter of pan­de­moni­um break­ing out at 30,000 feet, par­tic­u­larly giv­en that many flight at­tend­ants hate the idea.

“In far too many op­er­a­tion­al scen­ari­os, pas­sen­gers mak­ing phone calls could ex­tend bey­ond a mere nuis­ance, cre­at­ing risks that are far too great,” Veda Shook, pres­id­ent of the As­so­ci­ation of Flight At­tend­ants-CWA, said in a state­ment. “As the last line of de­fense in our na­tion’s avi­ation sys­tem, flight at­tend­ants un­der­stand the im­port­ance of main­tain­ing a calm cab­in en­vir­on­ment, and pas­sen­gers agree.”

But these law­makers also don’t think that the private mar­ket should be the fi­nal ar­bit­er on wheth­er people should be al­lowed to speak on phones. “How do you let the mar­ket de­cide? We didn’t let the mar­ket de­cide if people could smoke on planes,” Shuster said. “It’s very dif­fi­cult to se­greg­ate on planes, like on trains with the quiet car.”

The nuis­ance factor may reign su­preme, as even mem­bers of Con­gress — who travel fre­quently — are con­cerned about their trips back home. Shuster says in­di­vidu­al mem­bers of Con­gress are “a mi­cro­cosm” of the trav­el­ing pub­lic. And they “are com­ing up to me say­ing, ‘Let’s not do this. It’s con­fined. It’s loud.’ “

Al­ex­an­der only has to worry about a one-hour flight home, but his co­spon­sor, Fein­stein, has a five-hour trip back to Cali­for­nia. “She could be trapped in between two people talk­ing about their in­ner­most per­son­al thoughts for five whole hours and she can’t get out of her seat, she can’t get off the air­plane,” Al­ex­an­der said. “So I think that most Amer­ic­ans think this is just plain com­mon sense.”


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.