Only those with either mush for brains or rocks in their heads would characterize the latest forcing of taxpayers to subsidize yet another airline to add more flights out of Pittsburgh International Airport (PIT) as “an early Christmas present.”
Yet that’s what one public official called the news that the state and the Allegheny County Airport Authority will pay Frontier Airlines $600,000 to add service to four U.S. cities, including Philadelphia.
Frontier says it will offer introductory fares as low as $19 for one-way flights to Philly. But an airline official says he expects, supposedly based on demand, that the rates will remain close to the introductory fare.
Right.
Added Christina Cassotis, the Airport Authority’s CEO, as “reported” in the authority’s in-house propaganda unit, BlueSkyNews:
“[The] announcement is a major win for this region and the entire state and strengthens PIT’s standing as a growing origin and destination airport. We know the demand for all of these routes [also including to Atlanta, Dallas-Fort Worth and Raleigh-Durham] continues to be strong, and we thank Frontier for making such an investment in us.”
Yet again, class, if “the demand for all of these routes continues to be strong,” why must public officials continue to grease the airline’s palms with public money?
“Do these people think the public are complete dunderheads?” asks Jake Haulk, president-emeritus of the Allegheny Institute. “A $600,000 subsidy? At $20 per ticket, that would pay for 30,000 tickets to Philly.”
Haulk, a Ph.D. economist, reminds that the same people cheering on subsidies for airlines also are praising the subsidizing of rail passengers to travel across the state on Amtrak.
“They want to compete with the Pennsylvania Turnpike and take away business from it? Not sure how welcome that will be at a Turnpike Commission that has been used to supplement mass transit or how it meshes with air travel subsidies.
“Good grief,” Haulk laments.
Haulk also takes issue with another elected official’s unsubstantiated claim of forthcoming grand economic benefits from the subsidized flights.
“A $72 million dollar impact? Who concocted that number?” the think tank scholar asks, who also questions the propagandish demand spiel.
“The claim that there is a huge demand for cheap air travel to Philly is pure gibberish . Where is the study?”
No economic impact or demand studies have been made public.
The bottom line involving the state and the Airport Authority’s continuing play-to-play scheming remains fundamental:
“Why is the airport subsidizing locals to fly at all?” Haulk asks. “To increase passenger counts to make that overly expensive under-construction new midfield terminal at PIT look better?”
This supposed “need” to keep subsiding flights is “shameful, disgraceful and totally emblematic of a lackluster economy and stalled population-growth area,” Haulk concludes.
But that’s what the public continues to get with public officials with mush for brains, rocks in their heads — or both.
It’s certainly no cliched “early Christmas present.” Clinkers and lumps of coal for the stockings of those who keep perpetrating such a public policy farce would be most apropos.
Colin McNickle is communications and marketing director at the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy (cmcnickle@alleghenyinstitute.org).
