The nation is hurtling towards aviation gridlock and potential disaster in the sky. Our aviation system is in trouble. Too many flights are delayed. Service is not as good as it should be. And as the technology leader of the world, we have second-rate air traffic control equipment.

It is against this backdrop that I must reject the Senate proposal to cut aviation spending.

While the Senate claims that they are unlocking the Aviation Trust Fund, just the opposite is true. The Senate proposal actually spends about $3 billion less over the next three years than the trust fund takes in in revenues during that same period.

To make matters even worse, the Senate proposal actually reduces Aviation Trust Fund spending below current baseline levels.

I am also dismayed that the Senate is insistent on eliminating the general fund contribution to aviation which has been in place for the last 25 years. This general fund share reflects security and safety investments, as well as military usage of the air traffic control system.

The Senate proposal simply fails to recognize the growing needs in aviation, such as the projected one billion people that will be flying annually just a few years from now.

The House tried to find common ground. We were willing to accept a TEA 21-type firewall in lieu of off-budget. But the Senate would not agree. We proposed to guarantee trust fund spending with a point-of-order in lieu of a firewall. But the Senate still would not agree.

I question our priorities when in these times of trillion dollar budget surpluses, with air travelers investing billions more into the Aviation Trust Fund, we cannot find the commitment to make our aviation system safe and competitive.

The Senate proposal also says the flying public cannot use the money they have invested in the Aviation Trust Fund to make their skies safer. According to today's numbers, that is $11 billion in trust fund cash balances and the $1 billion in annual interest earnings. The flying public dutifully deposited the money and they deserve to see it invested properly. Under the Senate proposal, the trust fund balances would grow by over $3 billion over the next three years.

Worshipping at the altar of fiscal short-sightedness will carry a high price when our aviation system becomes hopelessly congested. If we do not make investments that are necessary we risk the destruction of one of the economic engines that keeps our economy roaring.

I hope we have not let this historic opportunity slip through our fingers. I hope we can find a workable compromise and I hope we can give the American people the safe and competitive aviation system they deserve. But I cannot accept a proposal that makes little changes to a system that is in desperate need of change.

I continue to oppose further short-term extensions of selected aviation programs. This band-aid approach can only delay the significant investments that the flying public has paid for and deserves.

I pledge that I will renew my efforts next year to unlock the Aviation Trust Fund and fulfill our commitment to make our skies as safe as they can be.

END