
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: TUESDAY, November 7, 1995                   TAG: 9511070060
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A-4   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

INESSENTIAL

PROVIDING transportation infrastructure is a legitimate part of what government does. But that doesn't mean market demand should have no role in policy considerations. As with much else, care must be taken that transportation programs serve justifiable purposes and don't degenerate into little more than boondoggles.

A case in point: the federal Essential Air Service program, which subsidizes commercial passenger carriers to a favored few small towns in America. A Clinton administration bill would cut the program by a third, from $33 million to $22 million; a budget-conscious Republican Congress presumably is willing to go along.

Granted, it's not a lot of money by federal spending standards. But a few million here, and a few million there .... Anyway, it's the principle of the thing that counts the most.

Granted, an argument can be made that air service is to Alaska and the islands of Hawaii what the federal highway system is to the rest of the country.

But in the rest of the country - like Ephrata, Wash.; Keene, N.H.; Bar Harbor, Me.; and, near this neck of the woods, Danville, Va. - that argument is harder to sustain. Those places do have highways that can get their residents to nonsubsidized air service in no more than a couple of hours, and often less.

For the folks of Danville, as an example, there'd be Lynchburg, Roanoke or, more likely, the bigger Raleigh-Durham or Greensboro airports.

There's also the possibility, too, that some local air service could survive without the subsidy. Ticket prices might go up, and the number of passengers might drop - but 26 communities have become ineligible for the program since its inception in 1978 because air service grew too profitable.

Moreover, the areas served by the air service could themselves provide a subsidy if they felt the need were critical enough. As is indicated by the presence of places like Bar Harbor on the list, the program is not necessarily an uplift effort for the economically disadvantaged.

All transportation, to varying degrees, is government-subsidized. The public has a stake in public infrastructure. As a matter of regional policy, subsidizing air service on a limited basis might make sense in some cases. (The Roanoke airport might be one.)

As a matter of national policy, though, subsidizing air service to small towns makes little sense. Unlike urban mass transit, the policy neither reduces the need for road-building nor provides energy efficiencies. The temporary program, originally to end in 1988, was extended once. May it be allowed to succumb at its current expiration date of 1998, if not sooner.

by CNB