1122 Longworth House Office Building – Washington, D.C. 20515 – (202) 225-1880 (phone) & (202) 225-5914 (fax)

I have expressed my reservations about allowing pilots to carry firearms to my colleagues several times.

However, it has become clear that this committee overwhelmingly supports arming pilots – in spite of the Bush administration’s objections and all the work that remains to be done on other, and arguably more beneficial, aviation security measures.

As a business traveler who had flown over 100,000 miles before coming to Congress and now as someone who travels across the country to get from home in Alamo to work in Walnut Creek, I have the utmost respect for our pilots. We owe it to do all we can to ensure their cockpits are secure and that they can do the job they are so well-trained and capable of doing.

Fundamentally, I think it is a mistake for this committee to overrule the Transportation Security Administration – the very organization we created to make these decisions – who strongly objects to this legislation.

To now come back and cherry-pick issues here and there – especially after intense lobbying by pilots unions and the National Riffle Association – reeks of election year politicking and is quite frankly poor policy making.

Moreover, I have serious concerns about this legislation. It is inconsistent and lack uniformity, it obviates state laws and rewrites international law on the right to carry firearms, it exempts everyone but the federal government from liability should an innocent passenger be injured or killed, and it creates more security problems than it solves by making armed pilots potential targets outside airports and putting guns all over airport terminals and airport hotels across the country as pilots tote their guns from home and from place to place. It also tasks the Transportation Security Administration, the department that opposes this measure and is already over-tasked, with implementing this very vague program.

Ironically, this committee’s approach contradicts the strongest argument of people advocating that we should arm pilots. If giving commercial airline pilots firearms is a matter of national security and is so necessary for protecting the plane, why only do it on only two percent of airplanes?

Nothing that is truly needed for security – like tower communications or going through a metal detector at the airport or even the plane’s black box – is applied in such a piecemeal way.

We did not do a pilot program for armored cockpit doors; every plane is meant to get one. We did not do a pilot program for checking luggage for explosives; everyone’s meant to be checked. We did not do a pilot program before we decided to make almost all airport screeners federal employees; and that’s going to be hard to do. So why do a pilot program for this?

If we are going to arm pilots, then we must do it the right way, instead of adopting this bill which is essentially a B.Y.O.G. – bring your own gun – approach to aviation security.

We need an approach to security and arming pilots that is uniform and seamless – no matter what pilot is flying the plane you’re on and what airport you’re flying out of.

We need to be sure weapons are standard equipment in cockpits – not carried from pilots’ cars in the employee parking lots through terminals and eventually onto airplanes.

We need to hold airlines accountable for accidental discharges that harm innocent passengers – not put the federal government, and essentially every American taxpayer, on the hook.

And we need to be sure that all pilots have met high standards and are certified through rigorous training – anything less is reckless.

I look forward to working with my colleagues on this committee through several amendments I will offer today so that we can make this bill a better bill. We need a legislation that is thoughtful, consistent, and as good for the American people and their security as it can possibly be.