Fly the Friendly Skies

I'm a bit disappointed. I was hoping for months and months of pain so a real "national conversation" could take place as to why the federal government runs air traffic control to begin with. But no. The Senate passed a bill to allow the FAA flexiblity to move money around so air traffic controllers would not be furloughed. It passed with unanimous consent. The House just passed the Bill: 361 yeas, 41 nays, 30 not voting. Who says bipartisanship is dead?

When Congress agrees on something they act, quickly. I'm guessing they wanted to avoid the inconvenience they would suffer as they travel to and from DC and maybe more importantly avoid being accosted in airports, and on airplanes by angry constituents wondering why the FAA couldn't cut something else, other than air traffic controllers.

The sequester, as a policy, in my opinion is not all bad. In fact, it's rather genius. Congress can't agree on spending priorities so it decides everything (excluding welfare for old people) has to be equally cut. Sounds fair to me. If you can't decide how to prioritize  why not cut everything equally? Well, here is something the overwhelming amount of Congress can agree on, so they fix it. Washington Works!

Like I said, I hoped for more pain so we could ask the tough questions. Maybe Obama vetoes the bill? Can we get that lucky?