U.S. lawmakers are considering various models to remake the ATC system the Federal Aviation Administration now oversees to include reorganizing it as a “federal corporation” or spinning off the FAA’s air traffic organization as a not-for-profit private entity. But a hearing the House aviation subcommittee held on March 24 revealed that leading Democrats don’t subscribe to Republican Transportation Committee chairman Bill Shuster’s call for “transformational” reform.

The political parties concur that the ATC system as currently structured is hobbled by federal funding uncertainty and challenged to achieve the $40 billion-plus NextGen technology modernization. But Democrats question whether the sweeping change Schuster advocates is really necessary, and whether a new governing model can be designed in the six months remaining until the FAA’s current authorization expires.

“Airlines are making money, the system is safe and the FAA, with close congressional oversight, is making progress on NextGen,” Rep. Rick Larsen (D-Wash.), the ranking Democrat on the aviation subcommittee, stated in opening remarks at the hearing. “So the question must be asked: what is the problem we are tackling when we talk about reforming our air traffic control system? … If we resolve to go big in this [FAA reauthorization] bill with significant air traffic reforms, we must do so methodically—with a clear statement of the problem we are trying to solve and a clear understanding of how to solve it without compromising safety in any way.”

Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) questioned how airports and general aviation would fare under an ATC model that replaces federal taxes with fee-based services; if radio frequency spectrum reserved for aviation would be transferred to private control; and if unionized controllers would accept retirement contribution plans over their defined-benefit pensions. In an exchange with Paul Rinaldi, president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (Natca), DeFazio asked: “Mr. Rinaldi, your folks are kind of in favor of defined benefit plans, yes? Are they interested in defined contribution plans as a transition?” Rinaldi responded “not necessarily.”

Natca, which represents 20,000 aviation safety professionals, including nearly 14,000 controllers, accepts that structural changes to the ATC system may be coming but urges caution. “Natca believes a discussion on any type of reform must take place in a well-reasoned and rational manner, without rushing into any structural changes,” Rinaldi stated in written testimony. “We agree that the current funding situation is unacceptable and we would like to explore alternative models that could address these problems.”

The 13-member Management Advisory Council (MAC) that advises FAA Administrator Michael Huerta is floating a “concept” that would see the FAA refashioned as a federal corporation. “As a federal corporation, this new FAA would operate with its own governing board,” stated written testimony by Craig Fuller, the former Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association CEO who serves as vice chairman of the MAC. “The board would operate like a private-sector board and would not be advisory. It would retain and oversee the work of a CEO/Administrator who would report to the board…This would be bold and it would be transformational. The board would not be precluded from making future choices related to spinning off elements of the enterprise.” But the MAC has not formally endorsed any specific reform proposal, Fuller told the subcommittee.

Shuster (R-Pa.) anticipated that ATC reform skeptics would ask “why now” in his opening remarks. “Air traffic levels have declined by 15 percent since 2007, but the FAA and its budget have gotten larger,” he said. “This is the right time to act. We have the breathing room and imperative to get ourselves on course. The only answer is transformational reform that will ensure that our ATC service provider operates like a business, with no degradation in safety levels.”