Their methodology makes illogical comparisons and ignores quality losses

Elliott Sclar, Director of graduate programs in Urban Planning at Columbia, his book on privatization won two prestigious academic awards, the Louis Brownlow Award for the Best Book of 2002 from the National Academy of Public Administration and the 2001 Charles Levine Prize from the International Political Science, 03, [“Pitfalls of Air Traffic Control Privatization,” National Air Traffic Controllers Association, http://www.inthepublicinterest.org/sites/default/files/PitfallsofATCPrivatization.pdf] E. Liu

One of the strongest arguments for privatization is found in the belief that it will save money. It is suggested that privatization will cut the bureaucratic waste out of the operation. This is done by a methodology that can be referred to as "psuedo benchmarking." Benchmarking is a time honored management tool for comparing the performance of an organization with an outstanding peer as a way to assess its performance in terms of effectiveness and efficiency. However it is, at best, only a first approximation as no two organizations are ever identical. Differences matter and must be taken into account. The Reason Foundation, in its attempt to argue for the cost savings of privatization, cite the cut in the size of the Canadian ATC system when it was converted to a private operation with the creation of NAV CANADA. There are clearly problems with such a comparison between a system the size of the U.S. system and the Canadian system, which is only a fraction of the size. But, more importantly, as the NRC study shows, the cut in staffing at NAV CANADA may represent a decrease in quality. Quality in this case translates into passenger safety and national security.

Privatization – AT: Orszag

Orszag doesn’t think the fed is bad, just that gridlock blocks spending – Fiat solves that

The Hill, 11

The Hill, 9-23-11, [“Air Traffic Controllers union to Peter Orszag: Butt out of NextGen fight,” Keith Laing, http://thehill.com/blogs/transportation-report/aviation/183583-air-traffic-controllers-union-to-peter-orszag-bud-out-of-nextgen-fight] E. Liu

In his opinion piece, which appeared Thursday in Bloomberg News, Orszag was not critical of the FAA's performance — rather, he said, the problem was the political climate in Washington, which makes increasing federal spending difficult.

States CP 2AC

Gerald L. Dillingham, Director, Physical Infrastructure Issues , 10-5-11, [“FAA Has Made Some Progress in Implementation, but Delays Threaten to Impact Costs and Benefits ,” Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives, www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-141T] E. Liu

Allan Erbsen, Associate Professor, University of Minnesota Law School, 11, [“Constitutional Spaces,” MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW 95:1168, papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1785546] E. Liu

First, consider the air above the United States. The air is essentially a modern analogue to admiralty jurisdiction—a channel of transportation and commerce shared by actors moving between multiple jurisdictions under circumstances requiring uniform rules. But unlike admiralty, the Constitution never mentions the air (which is unsurprising given that air travel was not viable in 1789). Thinking about air as a space within the constitutional framework raises at least three interesting questions about how air overlaps with other spaces. First, is the air above a state also within that state? Courts have uncritically assumed that states have territorial control over their airspace in cases where states tried to exercise personal jurisdiction over defendants served on airplanes.338 Yet state jurisdiction must end somewhere. For example, it does not extend to orbiting satellites.339 So there may be an altitude beyond which the fiction of territorial jurisdiction evaporates.340 Second, even if state territory extends vertically, there is a question about whether Congress and the federal judiciary have the same legislative and common law authority over the air that they have over admiralty. The air is a channel of commerce in which Congress can preempt state law,341 and over which Congress has claimed “exclusive” national “sovereignty.”342 However, it is not clear that dormant federal preemption over navigable airspace is as strong as dormant preemption over navigable waters, and thus the role of federal common law is uncertain.343 Third, the mirror image of the question about whether state power over land encompasses some of the appurtenant air is whether federal power over air encompasses some of the appurtenant land. This question arises because air travel requires airports, and thus federal power over airspace may extend to the lands that planes use to access this space.344 The extent of federal power over land as an incident to its power over the air remains an open question.345 The air thus hovers above us as an unenumerated space in the “public domain” lacking “precise limits” and a clear legal status.346
States CP 2AC
6. Airports are a federal government obligation

ACG, Associated General Contractors of America, represents more than 33,000 firms including 7,500 of America's leading general contractors, 11

ACG, Associated General Contractors of America, represents more than 33,000 firms including 7,500 of America's leading general contractors, 5-20-11, [“Why and How the Federal Government Should Continue to Fund Vital Infrastructure in the New Age of Public Austerity,” http://www.mmsend50.com/link.cfm?r=33208529&sid=13749970&m=1370386&u=agca&s=http://www.agc.org/galleries/news/Case-for-Infrastructure-Reform.pdf] E. Liu

One area where this question is likely to arise is federal investments in infrastructure, including highways, transit systems, airports, dams, levees, federal buildings and drinking & wastewater systems. Some are likely to wonder why federal taxpayers should help subsidize financing for drinking water in Louisville, pay into a pool of funds that will add new highway capacity in Richmond, or use general treasury funds to prevent flooding and speed barge traffic by improving locks along the Ohio River. The answer is that it is clearly in the national interest to invest in infrastructure. For example, there is a clear, constitutionally defined federal role for supporting interstate commerce by investing in transportation infrastructure. Likewise, there is a strong argument to be made that the federal government has a vital role to play in maintaining our national economic security by investing in the infrastructure that is vital to commerce. Indeed, the Constitution is quite clear that it is the responsibility of the federal government to facilitate interstate commerce. Today, the vast majority of that interstate commerce travels on America’s vast, interconnected network of highways, airports and waterways. That means that if Congress and the Administration want to fulfill their Constitutional obligation to facilitate interstate commerce, they must continue to make the investments needed to maintain sufficient quality and capacity along our interstate highway network, our waterways and ensure the safety of air travelers. It also is important to note that the federal programs for investing in highway and transit projects has traditionally been self-funded. Since the 1950s, highway users have, through a mixture of gas taxes and other use-related fees, provided all of the funds that go into the Highway Trust Fund. Until only recently all federal surface transportation investments had come from this self-funded Trust Fund. In other words, structured correctly, the federal surface transportation program does not have to cost anyone that doesn’t use the highway system a single penny. As important, there is a strong argument to be made for the fact that the proper role of the federal government is to create and set conditions favorable to private sector job creation. For example, in an economy where the difference between success and failure is often measured by a company’s ability to deliver goods quickly and efficiently, maintaining transportation infrastructure is as important to the success of the private sector as are stable and low tax rates, minimal red tape and regulations and consistent and stable rule of law.

✈Disadvantage Answers

ACG, Associated General Contractors of America, represents more than 33,000 firms including 7,500 of America's leading general contractors, 5-20-11, [“Why and How the Federal Government Should Continue to Fund Vital Infrastructure in the New Age of Public Austerity,” http://www.mmsend50.com/link.cfm?r=33208529&sid=13749970&m=1370386&u=agca&s=http://www.agc.org/galleries/news/Case-for-Infrastructure-Reform.pdf] E. Liu

One area where this question is likely to arise is federal investments in infrastructure, including highways, transit systems, airports, dams, levees, federal buildings and drinking & wastewater systems. Some are likely to wonder why federal taxpayers should help subsidize financing for drinking water in Louisville, pay into a pool of funds that will add new highway capacity in Richmond, or use general treasury funds to prevent flooding and speed barge traffic by improving locks along the Ohio River. The answer is that it is clearly in the national interest to invest in infrastructure. For example, there is a clear, constitutionally defined federal role for supporting interstate commerce by investing in transportation infrastructure. Likewise, there is a strong argument to be made that the federal government has a vital role to play in maintaining our national economic security by investing in the infrastructure that is vital to commerce. Indeed, the Constitution is quite clear that it is the responsibility of the federal government to facilitate interstate commerce. Today, the vast majority of that interstate commerce travels on America’s vast, interconnected network of highways, airports and waterways. That means that if Congress and the Administration want to fulfill their Constitutional obligation to facilitate interstate commerce, they must continue to make the investments needed to maintain sufficient quality and capacity along our interstate highway network, our waterways and ensure the safety of air travelers. It also is important to note that the federal programs for investing in highway and transit projects has traditionally been self-funded. Since the 1950s, highway users have, through a mixture of gas taxes and other use-related fees, provided all of the funds that go into the Highway Trust Fund. Until only recently all federal surface transportation investments had come from this self-funded Trust Fund. In other words, structured correctly, the federal surface transportation program does not have to cost anyone that doesn’t use the highway system a single penny. As important, there is a strong argument to be made for the fact that the proper role of the federal government is to create and set conditions favorable to private sector job creation. For example, in an economy where the difference between success and failure is often measured by a company’s ability to deliver goods quickly and efficiently, maintaining transportation infrastructure is as important to the success of the private sector as are stable and low tax rates, minimal red tape and regulations and consistent and stable rule of law.

Plan Popular – Bipartisanship

Congresspeople are in support of NextGen due to congestion benefits

Meehan 12

Patrick Meehan[Congressman Representing 7th District of Pennsylvania]/Meehan Says NextGen Air Traffic Control Investment Key to Regional Economy/February 14, 2012

The Hill, 10-5-11, [“Dems battle GOP over cuts to new FAA air traffic control system,” Keith Laing, http://thehill.com/blogs/transportation-report/aviation/185771-faas-nextgen-future-funding-debated] E. Liu

Carolyn Lochhead[Senior Editor for Chronicle Washington Bureau]/Obama's infrastructure spending plan gains support/September 9, 2011

Washington Post, 6-3-11, [“New guidance system for skies could face delays,” Ashley Halsey III, http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/antidote-to-air-gridlock-is-complex-undertaking/2011/06/30/AG9bdnwH_print.html] E. Liu