SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
faa
'What on Earth Is Going On?': FAA Reopens El Paso Airspace After Closure Order Sows Chaos
"No reason given. No one, not even military users, were apparently given advanced warning," said one veteran journalist. "Aside from 9/11, I can't remember anything like that."
Feb 11, 2026
Update: 9:50 am ET:
Just hours after ordering a halt to all airline traffic coming in and out of the El Paso International Airport, the FAA on Wednesday morning reversed the order and reopened the airspace in the city's region along the Texas border with Mexico.
In an agency social media post, the FAA said, "The temporary closure of airspace over El Paso has been lifted. There is no threat to commercial aviation. All flights will resume as normal."
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy claimed in a social media post that the FAA and the Defense Department “acted swiftly to address a cartel drone incursion. The threat has been neutralized, and there is no danger to commercial travel in the region.”
Earlier...
Speculation and alarm were triggered overnight after the Federal Aviation Administration, late Tuesday, with nothing more than "special security reasons” given as a reason, ordered the suspension of all incoming and outgoing flights from the airport in El Paso, Texas.
"What on Earth is going on?" asked Franklin Leonard, a contributing editor with Vanity Fair, in a reaction to the news—given the limited information provided by the federal government—that was similarly expressed by many online.
In a post on Instagram, the El Paso International Airport said, "All flights to and from El Paso are grounded, including commercial, cargo, and general aviation. The FAA has issued a flight restriction halting all flights to and from El Paso effective from February 10 at 11:30 PM (MST) to February 20 at 11:30 PM (MST)." No further details were given, and passengers were told to contact their carrier for status on specific flights.
Inevitable online speculation—including concerns about US military operations in Mexico, a connection to President Donald Trump's sweeping deportation operations, and other less plausible notions—was rife in the early hours of Wednesday morning as word spread of the closure. Others simply noted the unusual nature of the FAA order.
"So this is really strange," John Stempkin, a veteran news producer with NPR, said of the unexplained closure. "No reason given. No one, not even military users, were apparently given advanced warning. Aside from 9/11, I can't remember anything like that."
A statement from the airport said the grounding order had been given “on short notice” and that it was waiting for additional guidance from the FAA. In its notice, the FAA said the federal government “may use deadly force” against aircraft violating the airspace and determined to pose “an imminent security threat.”
The grounding of flights, noted the Associated Press, "is likely to create significant disruptions given the duration and the size of the metropolitan area. El Paso, a border city with a population of nearly 700,000 and larger when you include the surrounding metro area, is a hub of cross-border commerce alongside neighboring Ciudad Juárez in Mexico."
Reached by phone early Wednesday by the New York Times for his reaction, Representative Joaquin Castro, a Democrat who represents San Antonio, said he had no idea what was going on. “Sorry, I don’t have some clear answer,” Castro told the Times. Asked if he was surprised, the lawmaker simply said, “Yes.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Calls Grow for Federal Probe Into Possible 'Criminal' Musk Corruption at Aviation Agency
"The public has a right to know that their tax dollars are being spent in the public's best interest and not to benefit a government employee's financial interests," according to a recent ethics complaint filed by the Campaign Legal Center.
Mar 17, 2025
The drum beat for a federal probe into whether billionaire and GOP donor Elon Musk violated conflict of interest law through his dealings with the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration is growing louder following reporting that technology from Musk's Starlink, the satellite network developed by its company SpaceX, will be involved in upgrading the FAA air traffic control system.
On Monday, a group of Democratic senators sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and Acting Inspector General at the Transportation Department, Mitch Behm, demanding an investigation into whether Musk's activities at the FAA have violated the criminal conflict of interest statute. The letter was first reported by The Guardian on Monday.
"We are concerned that Musk... may be using his government role to benefit his own private company," the senators wrote.
The letter, sent by Sens. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) cites coverage from The Washington Post, which in late February reported that the FAA was considering canceling a $2.4 billion Verizon contract to upgrade the FAA's communication system "that serves as the backbone of the nation's air traffic control system" and award the work to Starlink, citing unnamed sources.
The letter follows an ethics complaint, filed last week by the nonpartisan legal group Campaign Legal Center (CLC) to Behm, also asking for an investigation into whether the FAA's business transactions with Starlink "are improper due to violations of the criminal conflict of interest law."
Both the letter from the Democratic senators and the CLC complaint cite a section of federal statute that prohibits government employees—including special government employees, which is Musk's designation—from "participat[ing] personally and substantially" in any "particular matter[s]" in which the employee, their spouse, their companies, or other business partners have any "financial interest."
"Public reports establish that the FAA began using Starlink services and considering contracts with the company in response to Musk's requests," according to the letter from CLC. "The public has a right to know that their tax dollars are being spent in the public's best interest and not to benefit a government employee's financial interests."
In early February, Musk—who has been deputized by U.S. President Trump to pursue cuts to government spending and personnel—said that his so-called Department of Government Efficiency(DOGE) will "aim to make rapid safety upgrades to the air traffic control system."
According to Bloomberg, a SpaceX engineer arrived at the FAA headquarters in late February to "deliver what he described as a directive from his boss Elon Musk: The agency will immediately start work on a program to deploy thousands of the company's Starlink satellite terminals to support the national airspace system."
"There is no effort or intent for Starlink to 'take over' any existing contract," SpaceX wrote on X in early March. The company said it is working in coordination with another prime contractor for the FAA's telecommunications infrastructure "to test the use of Starlink as one piece of the infrastructure upgrades so badly needed along with fiber, wireless, and other technologies."
Per Bloomberg, the FAA is already testing or actively using multiple Starlink terminals.
The CLC letter argues that reporting provides evidence that "the FAA's business relationship with Starlink is tainted by Musk's influence. Musk is a government official with broad authority who acts with direct support from the president. With this authority and support, he has openly criticized the FAA's contractors while directing the agency to test and use his company's services."
This "establish[es] a possible criminal conflict of interest violation, and an [Office of Inspector General] investigation is needed to determine whether the facts constitute a legal violation," per the CLC letter.
The requests to probe Musk's business connections to the FAA come as the U.S. has dealt with a series of plane crashes and accidents, which in some cases have been deadly, and has invited scrutiny of the country's air traffic control system.
John P. Pelissero, the director of a government ethics program at Santa Clara University, told the Post that it appears that "because of Musk's current position in DOGE and his closeness to Trump he and his company are getting an advantage and getting a contract," speaking of the potential Verizon contract cancellation.
"Who's looking out for the public interest here when you get the person who's cutting budgets and personnel from the FAA, suddenly trying to benefit from still another government contract?" Pelissero said, according to the Post.
Keep ReadingShow Less
After Latest Musk Starship Explosion, 'We Are All in the Debris Field of a SpaceX Mishap'
"Really reassuring that the SpaceX guy is taking over the FAA," one observer quipped.
Mar 07, 2025
The eighth test launch of SpaceX's Starship, which billionaire CEO Elon Musk claims will be the spacecraft that eventually transports humans to Mars, ended Thursday in much the same way the seventh did: an explosive failure that sent toxic and polluting debris raining down from the sky.
"We are all in the debris field of a SpaceX mishap," remarked journalist Aaron Rupar after the spacecraft exploded just minutes following its lift-off from a launch site in Texas.
Reuters reported that "several videos on social media showed fiery debris streaking through the dusk skies near south Florida and the Bahamas after Starship broke up in space shortly after it began to spin uncontrollably with its engines cut off."
"The back-to-back mishaps occurred in early mission phases that SpaceX has easily surpassed previously, a setback for a program Musk had sought to speed up this year," the news agency added.
Musk, who is leading SpaceX while simultaneously spearheading a lawless effort to eviscerate the federal government and its workforce, wrote on his social media platform following the Starship explosion that "rockets are hard."
Another failed launch by Elon Musks' SpaceX tonight.
Tesla's explodes. Twitter collapses. SpaceX crumbles. Everything Elon Musk touches turns to shit.
Let's call a spade a spade—Musk is a failure.pic.twitter.com/07DscAvPbF
— The Debt Collective 🟥 (@StrikeDebt) March 7, 2025
The explosion forced the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)—an agency that Musk and his cronies have infiltrated—to suspend air traffic at several Florida airports, citing "space launch debris."
The New York Times reported that falling debris from the Starship explosion impacted flights "as far away as Philadelphia International Airport."
Musk, the world's richest man, has been vocal about wanting SpaceX subsidiary Starlink to take over the FAA's air traffic control system.
Following Thursday's explosion and subsequent flight disruptions, New Yorker staff writer Philip Gourevitch wrote sardonically, "Really reassuring that the SpaceX guy is taking over the FAA."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Watchdog Warns DOGE Cuts to FAA Make Next Airline Disaster 'More Likely'
"Maybe in the DOGE boys' video game simulations, it doesn't matter if they lay off hundreds of staff from the FAA. In the real world, however, it will make flying less safe," said Public Citizen's Robert Weissman.
Feb 17, 2025
As the Trump administration began firing hundreds of Federal Aviation Administration employees amid a surge in plane crashes, a leading U.S. consumer advocacy group warned Monday that the slash-and-burn approach of Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency is making the "next air travel disaster more likely."
While Musk recently said that DOGE will "aim to make rapid safety upgrades to the air traffic control system," critics have countered that the Trump administration's termination of FAA personnel, including critical air traffic control maintenance staff, poses major risks.
"Maybe in the DOGE boys' video game simulations, it doesn't matter if they lay off hundreds of staff from the FAA. In the real world, however, it will make flying less safe," Public Citizen co-president Robert Weissman said in a statement. "Just like having fewer people safeguarding the nation's nuclear arsenal will make the risk of a nuclear accident much greater."
Elon’s DOGE rampage will be a wake up call for what a decimated government really means. Cuts to FAA? Higher risk of plane crashes. Cuts to Forest Service? Higher fire risk. Cuts to the CDC? Higher pandemic risk. Cuts to the EPA? Higher toxic exposures risk — and on and on.
[image or embed]
— Public Citizen (@publiccitizen.bsky.social) February 17, 2025 at 11:03 AM
Weissman continued:
The Musk rampage through government is making it virtually certain that we will suffer through otherwise avoidable health, safety, and economic catastrophes. Cutting the Forest Service increases fire risk, cutting the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] and blocking information-sharing risks worsening infectious disease outbreaks, cutting the [Consumer Financial Protection Bureau] guarantees Big Bank and predatory loan ripoffs, cutting [Food and Drug Administration] staff increases the risk for dangerous devices, drugs, and food additives, cutting the [Environmental Protection Agency] will increase the risk of mass toxic exposures, and on and on.
"If permitted to proceed, the mindless Musk-Trump governmental annihilation is going to touch every American community, imposing tragedy upon tragedy," Weissman added.
In a Monday social media post, U.S. Congressman Don Beyer (D-Va.) said that "mass firings of FAA workers—at a time when they already have serious staffing problems—would be dangerous at any time," but "Musk and Trump doing this weeks after the deadliest crash in years is stupid beyond belief."
Public Citizen's warning came on the same day that a Delta Air Lines flight from Minneapolis to Toronto crashed and overturned on landing. The FAA said all 80 people aboard the flight were rescued. At least a dozen people were injured in the crash, three of them critically, according to the Toronto Star.
While the FAA firings were not a factor in Monday's accident, the Toronto crash was the latest in a recent surge in air disasters. Last month, 67 people were killed when an American Airlines jet and an army helicopter collided at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport in Washington, D.C. According to initial reports, only one air traffic controller was working both civilian and military flights when the crash occurred.
On January 31, seven people died when a medical transport jet crashed near Philadelphia, 10 people were killed in a February 6 Bering Air commuter flight crash in Alaska, and one person died when a private plane belonging to Mötley Crüe singer Vince Neil crashed during landing in Arizona last Monday after its landing gear failed to properly deploy.
We condemn the decision to fire these safety inspectors. Everywhere I go I am asked, “is it safe to fly?” My response is yes because thousands of frontline workers ask that all day long. If federal workers can’t do their jobs, we can’t do ours. 1/2 www.passnational.org/index.php/ne...
[image or embed]
— Sara Nelson (@flyingwithsara.bsky.social) February 15, 2025 at 1:59 PM
David Spero, national president of Professional Aviation Safety Specialists, the union representing more than 11,000 FAA and Defense Department personnel who install, inspect, and maintain air traffic control systems, said in a statement Saturday that the Trump administration's terminations "will increase the workload and place new responsibilities on a workforce that is already stretched thin."
"This decision did not consider the staffing needs of the FAA, which is already challenged by understaffing," Spero added. "Staffing decisions should be based on an individual agency's mission-critical needs. To do otherwise is dangerous when it comes to public safety. And it is especially unconscionable in the aftermath of three deadly aircraft accidents in the past month."
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Trump Blames DEI for Plane Crash, Report Shows Understaffed Air Traffic Control
One controller was doing the work of two people at the long-understaffed tower in the Washington, D.C. area.
Jan 30, 2025
A preliminary report on Wednesday night's crash involving a American Airlines commercial flight and a military helicopter revealed that the air traffic control tower in the vicinity of the accident was not staffed at "normal" levels, with just one controller handling a task that two employees ordinarily would have done in the high-stress job.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) report on Thursday said the staffing at the time of the crash was "not normal for the time of day and volume of traffic."
One controller was instructing helicopters near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport while also directing planes landing at and departing from the airport.
As The New York Times reported, controllers use different radio frequencies to communicate with helicopter pilots and those flying planes.
"While the controller is communicating with pilots of the helicopter and the jet, the two sets of pilots may not be able to hear each other," according to the Times.
Air traffic controllers have been forced to work longer hours and workweeks in recent years, amid budget constraints and high turnover. In 2023, the tower near Washington, D.C. had 19 fully certified air traffic controllers. The FAA and the controllers' union say the optimal number is 30.
The FAA report was released shortly after President Donald Trump presented his own theory, without evidence, of why the crash that killed 67 people happened.
Trump suggested at a press briefing that under the Biden administration, the FAA had overseen a "diversity push" with a "focus on hiring people with severe intellectual and psychiatric disabilities."
A reporter at the briefing asked whether Trump was saying the crash "was somehow caused and the result of diversity hiring" and called on him to offer evidence to support the claim.
"It just could have been," Trump said, adding that his administration has "a much higher standard than anybody else" for hiring federal employees.
Government Executive noted that the FAA began diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) hiring programs as early as 2013, which continued under the first Trump administration.
No identifying information has been reported about the air traffic controller who was handling the flight paths in question on Wednesday. American Airlines has also not released any personal information about who was piloting its aircraft; Army officials said the helicopter was piloted by one man and one woman, and a male staff sergeant was also on board.
Trump told reporters that he was confident that DEI hiring practices played a role in the crash because he has "common sense."
But critics including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) noted that Trump has taken several steps since taking office less than two weeks ago that could make air travel more dangerous for Americans in the long term.
"Trump gutted the aviation safety committee last week," said the congresswoman, referring to the Aviation Security Advisory Committee. "Air traffic controllers—already understaffed—got Trump's 'buyout' this week with a one-week ultimatum to decide. It's not DEI—it's him."
Rep. Rick Larsen (D-Wash.) also warned last week that Trump's federal hiring freeze could worsen understaffing among air traffic controllers.
"Hiring air traffic controllers is the number one safety issue according to the entire aviation industry," said Larsen at the time. "Instead of working to improve aviation safety and lower costs for hardworking American families, the administration is choosing to spread bogus DEI claims to justify this decision. I'm not surprised by the president's dangerous and divisive actions, but the administration must reverse course."
On Thursday, Larsen offered condolences for the families of the victims in the crash, and cautioned against speculating "on the causes of aviation accidents before we have the facts and the details."
"However, I know it's not DEI because it never is," said Larsen. "The National Transportation Safety Board will look at the causes and contributing factors of this accident. It is important to let the NTSB complete its work before we consider any potential policy response."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Here's How Much You Gave Last Year to The Pentagon (Hint: It Was a Lot)
Your tax dollars enriched Pentagon contractors at the expense of better healthcare, education, clean air and water, disaster management, and more.
Apr 11, 2024
Ever wonder where your taxes go? Each year, the Institute for Policy Studies releases a tax receipt so you can find out.
One item always stands out: the Pentagon—and the contractors who profit off it.
In 2023, the average taxpayer spent $2,974 on the Pentagon. Of that, just $705 went to salaries for the troops, who often have to rely on programs like food stamps. A much larger sum—$1,748—went to corporate Pentagon contractors. That’s more than the average American’s monthly rent, $1,372.
Maybe we should spend more on regulating companies like Boeing than subsidizing them?
From Lockheed Martin (the top federal contractor and longtime weapons maker) to SpaceX (which Elon Musk runs when he’s not spewing racist and antisemitic tropes), these corporations don’t need your support. And they aren’t operating with your well-being in mind.
Enriching them comes at the cost of better healthcare, education, clean air and water, disaster management, and more. Here are just five examples from the average tax bill.
1. Pentagon contractors ($1,759) vs. the Child Tax Credit ($110).
In 2024, the Pentagon budget is set to increase by $27 billion, bringing the department’s budget to about $825 billion. About half of that will go to for-profit contractors.
Meanwhile, an expansion of the Child Tax Credit during the pandemic succeeded in cutting the child poverty rate almost in half—progress that was almost immediately reversed when the expansion expired in late 2021.
Lifting kids out of poverty can have lifelong effects on their health, education, and employment. Isn’t that worth more than a tiny fraction of our spending on military contracts?
2. Lockheed Martin ($249) vs. renewable energy ($11).
Lockheed Martin is perhaps best-known as the maker of the always over-budget, never-quite-ready F-35 jet fighter, which has spontaneously caught fire three separate times. Despite claims that programs like this are job creators, Lockheed recently made moves to cut jobs.
Meanwhile, despite the necessity of addressing climate change and reducing our reliance on fossil fuels, the average taxpayer’s contribution to renewable energy programs tops out at just $11.
3. Boeing ($87) vs. the Federal Aviation Administration ($23).
From commercial flights that crashed to others that fell apart in midair, Boeing’s commercial safety record lately has been abysmal. Yet the company is also among the top five Pentagon contractors. Among other military aircraft, it’s the maker of the V-22 Osprey that crashed and killed eight service members in November.
The FAA, of course, is the understaffed, underfunded government regulator responsible for the safety of commercial flights. Maybe we should spend more on regulating companies like Boeing than subsidizing them?
4. Federal prisons ($32.29) vs. substance use and mental health programs ($31.69).
With about 2 million people incarcerated nationally, about one in three Americans will have an immediate family member who has been in prison or jail. Your federal income tax dollars support this system, which often treats substance use and mental health challenges as issues best confined to a prison cell.
By contrast, help for substance use disorder or mental health issues can still be profoundly hard to get, as any affected person or family member will tell you. What if we spent more on treating these health conditions than punishing them?
5. Foreign militaries ($112) vs. wildfire management ($14).
From Afghanistan and Iraq to Ukraine and now Gaza, it feels like the U.S. is always either starting a war, fighting a war, or subsidizing a war. These wars are increasingly unpopular—and they’re not making us any safer.
Meanwhile, a growing number of Americans have experienced the direct or indirect effects of wildfire in recent years. These disasters cost upward of $394 billion each year. Isn’t that threat worth addressing?
Pentagon contractors want us to think we need what they’re selling, but wrong-headed priorities like these mean we’re actually worse off. Spread the word: Every taxpayer deserves better
Keep ReadingShow Less
FAA Bill Includes 'Test Flight' for Banning Student Loan Forgiveness
"If Congress will stop debt relief for pilots now, they'll do it to nurses tomorrow, teachers the next day, and social workers the day after," campaigners said.
Apr 04, 2024
Campaigners have issued a "red alert" over language included in the 2024 Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act that could pave the way toward banning student loan cancellation.
The current draft of the routine bill bars executive branch officials from cancelling or forgiving student loans taken out to pursue flight training or education at the undergraduate level, the Debt Collective warned on Wednesday.
"They're trying to make relief illegal," the group posted on social media.
"Student debtors and their allies need to stick together and stick up for each other."
Buried 1,000 pages in, the language flagged by the Debt Collective comes under the heading, "Prohibition on mass cancellation of eligible undergraduate flight education and training programs loans."
"The secretary, the secretary of the treasury, or the attorney general may not take any action to cancel or forgive the outstanding balances, or portion of balances, on any federal direct unsubsidized Stafford loan, or otherwise modify the terms or conditions of a federal direct unsubsidized Stafford loan, made to an eligible student, except as authorized by an act of Congress," the text reads.
The Debt Collective named Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), and Rep. Rick Larsen (D-Wash.) as particularly responsible for the language.
"Forty-five million student debtors need to see this and get very, very loud," the group said.
While the language only prohibits the executive cancellation of a certain subset of loans, experts and advocates warned lawmakers would not stop there.
"Make no mistake, this is a test flight," author and Debt Collective co-founder Astra Taylor wrote on social media. "If they can make student debt cancellation illegal for some people, they will do it for others. Student debtors and their allies need to stick together and stick up for each other."
Taylor urged anyone concerned about the language to contact the legislators flagged by the Debt Collective.
The Debt Collective called the language a "test run."
"If Congress will stop debt relief for pilots now, they'll do it to nurses tomorrow, teachers the next day, and social workers the day after," the group said.
Former Ohio state Sen. Nina Turner, meanwhile, called out the lawmakers for hypocrisy.
"The same members of Congress who had PPP loans forgiven, want to make it illegal to cancel student debt," Turner wrote on social media, referring to the pandemic-era Paycheck Protection Program.
The question of who has the authority to cancel student loan debt has been a major stumbling block for the Biden administration's efforts to tackle the issue. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down President Joe Biden's student loan forgiveness plan in June 2023, arguing in part that the administration did not have the authority to forgive as much debt as it had without authorization from Congress.
Despite the ruling, the administration has found ways to forgive $143.6 billion for almost 4 million borrowers, though that's only a fraction of more than $1.7 trillion Americans owe in student loans.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Did Stock Buybacks Knock the Bolts Out of Boeing?
You’d think that Boeing would not compromise on safety, given that one small production error or software glitch could down a plane worth hundreds of millions of dollars while killing hundreds of people in one blow. But you’d be wrong.
Jan 23, 2024
On January 5th, a door plug blew out of the side of a Boeing 737 Max 9 plane flying for Alaska Airlines from Portland, Oregon, to Ontario, California. (A door plug is a section of the plane’s fuselage bolted in to take the place of an optional emergency exit. It is meant to be an integral part of the plane’s body.)
Miraculously, during the twenty minutes it took for the plane to circle back and land, no one was sucked out of the gaping hole. But for two decades leading up to the incident, wealth has been sucked out of the company via legalized stock manipulation to benefit Wall Street and Boeing CEOs.
Since 2013, the Boeing Corporation initiated seven annual stock buybacks. Much of Boeing’s stock is owned by large investment firms which demand the company buy back its shares. When Boeing makes repurchases, the price of its stock is jacked up, which is a quick and easy way to move money into the investment firms’ purses. Boeing’s management also enjoys the boost in price, since nearly all of their executive compensation comes from stock incentives. When the stock goes up via repurchases, they get richer, even though Boeing isn’t making any more money.
Rather than reinvesting more deeply in the company’s products, Boeing chose to pay off stockholders and Boeing executives.
As a result, Boeing has two missions: 1) Produce profitable and safe products for their airplane-buying customers, and 2) Produce stock buybacks for Wall Street and CEOs. Unfortunately, for the rest of us, these missions are in conflict.
Finding the money for stock repurchases inevitably leads to cost-cutting. Most often, the first move is to lay off as many workers as possible. But other more subtle strategies include cutbacks in preventive maintenance and environmental controls, the outsourcing of work to lower-wage firms, skimping on health and safety protections, and underfunding quality control. The goal is to become lean and mean, skating out to the very edge of cost reductions without jeopardizing the product. Or, well, at least not harming it too much.
You’d think that Boeing would not compromise on safety, given that one small production error or software glitch could down a plane worth hundreds of millions of dollars while killing hundreds of people in one blow. But you’d be wrong.
Boeing is a world leader in stock buybacks. Between 1998 and 2018, the plane manufacturer also manufactured a whopping $61.0 billion in stock buybacks, amounting to 81.8 percent of its profits. Add in dividends and Boeing’s shareholders received 121 percent of its profits. (Data compiled by William Lazonick and The Academic-Industry Research Network, from Boeing 10-K SEC filings.)
How much is that really? Well, according to Lazonick and Mustafa Erdem Sakniç, writing in The American Prospect in 2019, Boeing facing the obsolescence of its 737 planes, could have created an entirely new airplane from scratch with fully modern technology. Instead, the company decided to re-engineer the older model, name it the 737 MAX, and save $7 billion dollars. Perhaps not coincidentally, the $7 billion dollars “saved” is the amount of the stock buybacks Boeing made each year between 2013 and 2019.
Rather than reinvesting more deeply in the company’s products, Boeing chose to pay off stockholders and Boeing executives. In the three years before Boeing software glitches caused two 737 MAX crashes in 2018 and 2019 that killed 346 people, Boeing’s CEO Dennis A. Muilenburg received $95.9 million in gross pay. Lazonick and Sakniç report that nearly all of it was via stock incentives, since his annual salary never exceeded $1.7 million. (Perhaps again, not coincidentally, a Texas court ruled in October 2022 that the passengers killed in the two 737 MAX crashes are legally considered “crime victims.”)
And just to make sure that stock buyback production would always be a top CEO priority, Boeing announced that “beginning in 2014, a significant portion of our named executive officers' long-term incentive compensation will be tied to Boeing's total shareholder return as compared to a group of 24 peer companies.” If shareholder return is the metric used to judge executive performance, stock buybacks become an executive’s most valued tool.
What CEO could possibly resist pushing stock buybacks, given that nearly all of his or her income is based on stock incentives?
Of course, every CEO, especially in the airline industry, will say that safety is their top priority. If pressed about stock incentives, they say there is no conflict between stock buybacks and safety. They say that the door plug blow-out had nothing at all to do with years and years of massive stock buybacks, nor all the cost-cutting to find the money for those repurchases.
Give me a break!
What CEO could possibly resist pushing stock buybacks, given that nearly all of his or her income is based on stock incentives?
Between November 1998 and January 2024, Boeing filed 491 Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notifications (WARN) amounting to approximately 45,000 layoffs. This is in a company with about 140,000 employees. Might those layoffs have had something to do with why the FAA grounded 171 Boeing 737-9 MAX airplanes after the door plug blew out of the fuselage? Might that be a reason why the FAA is now investigating “manufacturing practices and production lines, including those involving subcontractor Spirit AeroSystems, bolstering its oversight of Boeing, and examining potential system change?”
And it gets worse, because Boeing’s subcontractor, Sprit AeroSystems, subcontracted the faulty door plug production to another facility based in Malaysia, reports the National Transportation Safety Board. Good luck with that investigation.
Will government regulators have the guts to expose the chain that connects Wall Street-induced stock buybacks to cost cutting to layoffs to subcontracting to safety problems? The jury is out.
While the door-plug investigation will certainly put the spotlight on Boeing, the problem is systemic. In research for my book, Wall Street’s War on Workers, we found that more than 30 million workers have lost their jobs in the last three decades due to mass layoffs. Money that could have been spent on research, development, safety, and employee compensation in all kinds of industries was instead used to enrich shareholders. Literally trillions of dollars in stock buybacks have killed jobs and corporate reinvestment, leading to countless production problems throughout the economy. And that’s in addition to how workers, their families, and their communities have suffered indirectly during mass layoffs.
Until stock repurchases are outlawed, as they essentially were before 1982, Wall Street and its CEO partners in corporation after corporation will continue to deploy what Lazonick correctly calls a license to loot.
It's a massive problem. Overall, approximately 70 percent of all corporate profits go into stock buybacks, up from 2 percent in 1982. (Data compiled by the Academic-Industry Research Network.)
Until stock repurchases are outlawed, as they essentially were before 1982, Wall Street and its CEO partners in corporation after corporation will continue to deploy what Lazonick correctly calls a license to loot.
Next time you stuff yourself into an airline seat that is ridiculously cramped, just remember that seat you’re sitting in was shaped by stock buybacks. And if you get a coveted exit row seat to stretch out a bit, you’d better think good thoughts about the underpaid, overworked, sub-contracted workers who may have made the door.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Khanna Calls Biden EPA, FAA Refusal to Join Hearing on Lead in Children's Blood 'Unconscionable'
"I would expect this of the previous administration, but not this one."
Jul 25, 2022
U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna on Monday called out the Biden administration for not participating in an upcoming congressional hearing about leaded aviation fuel harming human health and the environment.
"Many airplanes continue to utilize leaded fuel, putting the health and safety of Americans--especially children--at risk."
Khanna (D-Calif.), who chairs the House Committee on Oversight and Reform's Subcommittee on Environment, plans to hold the hearing on how the fuel "is poisoning America's children" on Thursday at 2:00 pm ET.
Along with announcing the event, Khanna sent a letter to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Michael Regan and acting Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Administrator Billy Nolen expressing his frustration that neither agency will be represented.
Khanna says in the letter that the subcommittee was recently told that the heads of the EPA and FAA were unavailable for the hearing, "so we offered to let the deputy administrators or other senior officials testify as a compromise. This option was rejected."
"To try and further accommodate you, we offered to change the scope of the hearing so that both your agencies would be comfortable testifying," the letter continues. "Unfortunately, both your agencies are flatly refusing to cooperate in any way with this hearing that is going forward next Thursday."
While the EPA did not respond to a request for comment, the FAA said in a statement that the agency "has told the committee it is more than willing to testify, but acting Administrator Nolen is unavailable due to a long-standing and full-day commitment on July 28 at the EAA AirVenture, the country's largest general aviation gathering."
"In fact, there he will speak about the agency's efforts to move safely to unleaded avgas," the statement added. "As the FAA has reiterated multiple times to congressional staff, the FAA remains committed to finding a date that works for everyone's schedules."
The FAA also said that "where a child lives, the color of their skin, or their economic status should not determine the quality of air they breathe. We share the committee's goal to create a lead-free future, and this effort has the commitment of the agency's top leaders."
The subcommittee's preview of the hearing highlights that airports are often located in low-income areas and communities of color, describes lead exposure from aviation fuel as "an ongoing environmental justice crisis," and says that this week's discussion will address "the urgency of permanently phasing out the dangerous substance."
"Lead is highly toxic and a probable carcinogen, causing health effects such as brain damage, learning disabilities, reduced fertility, nerve damage, and death," the panel noted. "Despite the dangers associated with it, many airplanes continue to utilize leaded fuel, putting the health and safety of Americans--especially children--at risk."
The subcommittee also charged that the EPA and FAA "have failed for many years to take meaningful action to curb the use" of leaded fuel while the aviation and fossil fuel industries have lobbied to delay efforts to phase it out.
The hybrid hearing, which will be livestreamed on YouTube and the panel's website, is set to include testimony from Marciela Lechuga, a resident Reid-Hillview Airport buffer zone in San Jose, California; Santa Clara County Supervisor Cindy Chavez; and Bruce Lanphear, a health sciences professor at Canada's Simon Fraser University.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Boeing's Perilous Bungling Requires New Leadership
Boeing has displayed an egregious pattern of mismanagement.
Dec 15, 2019
The Boeing executives and marketeers responsible for over-ruling Boeing engineers on the 737 MAX are still in charge of this very troubled aerospace company. Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg and the rubber-stamp Board of Directors, with two trophy ambassadors, are still running Boeing - thirteen months after the deadly 737 MAX crash in Indonesia and nine months after the deadly 737 MAX crash in Ethiopia that together took 346 lives. Boeing said in October that it would appoint a board member with deep air safety experience, but it has not happened yet. (Muilenburg is the only board member with an aeronautical engineering background)
Boeing has displayed an egregious pattern of mismanagement. The company is in trouble from contractors, the Department of Defense, and NASA. California Representative John Garamendi said Boeing had "serious quality issues" with the KC-46 aerial tanker used by the military and accused the company of "pushing profits over quality and safety." According to NASA's Inspector General Paul Martin, NASA "essentially paid Boeing higher prices to address a schedule slippage caused by Boeing's 13-month delay."
First-rate former Boeing engineers, including John Barnett and Ed Pierson, are exposing the reckless conditions at the Boeing 737 and 787 Dreamliner plants in Washington state and South Carolina.
Boeing managers and directors are still on the job and paying themselves handsomely. These reckless marketeers are able to get away with this because Congress and the White House have disabled the FAA and turned it from a safety watchdog into an industry lapdog, leaving Boeing free to self-certify its planes.
With intensifying investigation by the House Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure, under the chairmanship of Congressman Peter DeFazio, a stunning internal FAA risk assessment turned up. After the October 29, 2018 Lion Air Flight 610 was hijacked by powerful MCAS software which took control of the aircraft from its pilots. A December 2018 FAA memo concluded that there would be 15 catastrophic crashes globally over the life of the 737 MAX fleet - ranging 30 to 45 years. That would mean the deaths of at least 2900 human beings.
Dr. Alan Diehl, an aerospace engineer with extensive experience at the FAA, at the Department of Defense, and in private business, told the Wall Street Journal that this prediction "would be an unacceptable number in the modern aviation-safety world." The FAA analysis, surfacing very late in the wake of the two planes going down due to Boeing's criminal negligence, was conditioned on the 737 MAX not flying until there are design and software corrections.
Chairman DeFazio noted other design problems with the Boeing 737 MAX, including rudder vulnerabilities. Boeing leadership has displayed all sorts of derelictions, including refusing to adequately inform pilots about the problems with the 737 MAX, producing faulty training manuals, and refusing to insist on full simulator training. Not only that, but the 787 Dreamliner has been found to have inadequate protection in case of lightning strikes (another Boeing bosses over-ruling of their own engineer's warnings). Boeing also laid off hundreds of quality control inspectors in its factories, preferring to rely on machines.
The FAA's new chief, Stephen Dickson, recently warned Boeing to stop announcing ungrounding times for the approximately 400 737 MAX already in the hands of the airlines. He indicated that the FAA is stiffening its backbone a little by saying that the ungrounding schedule will be decided by the FAA. Boeing has just announced it was suspending production of the 737 MAX for the time being.
The next step for Dickson would be to ask FAA Deputy Administrator Daniel Elwell and Associate Administrator for Safety Ali Bahrami to resign. Elwell and Bahrami turned their backs on airline passenger safety, let Boeing dictate its own safety decisions, and kept the public and Congress in the dark. There is no way the FAA can recover its responsibilities so long as Elwell and Ali Bahrami are still in positions of any responsibility.
Bahrami admitted he wasn't even aware of his own agency's risk assessment of the Boeing 737 MAX, noted above.
Meanwhile, the families of the deceased continue to advocate that the Boeing 737 MAX be required to undergo full certification with full pilot simulator training. In their grief, these wonderful family members are fighting daily for the future safety of tens of millions of airline passengers.
Please see flyersrights.org for updates and your participation. You can find their comprehensive report at the following link: https://flyersrights.org/737-max/white-paper/.
And see a Democracy Now! Interview on Boeing's misdeeds: https://www.democracynow.org/2019/12/16/ralph_nader_boeing_737_max_jet
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy