|
 The leaders of the House and Senate transportation committees say
they're worried that unless the big airlines can bid, service
between Washington and some smaller cities may be lost.
The lawmakers made their concerns public Friday as consumer
advocates prepared to ask a federal judge to force the airlines into
deeper concessions in exchange for approving a merger that will
create the world's biggest airline.
The U.S. Justice Department sued to block the merger but settled
this month after American and US Airways agreed to give up gates and
landing rights at several big airports, notably Washington's Reagan
National Airport. Officials said those assets would go to low-cost
airlines because the big, so-called legacy airlines — the biggest
being United and Delta — had stifled competition.
Top Democrats and Republicans on the transportation committees
released a letter that they sent to Attorney General Eric Holder
urging that bidding be open to all airlines. They said that low-cost
carriers don't generally fly to smaller cities, so freezing out the
big airlines won't help consumers in those places.
The settlement was widely viewed as likely to benefit Southwest
Airlines and JetBlue Airways, two self-avowed low-cost carriers that
have indicated interest in getting some of the American and US
Airways landing rights at Reagan National.
However, Delta had also expressed interest in picking up landing
rights at Reagan National and two gates that American agreed to
surrender at Dallas Love Field. "We do believe that all airlines
should have an opportunity to bid on the divested assets," Delta
spokesman Trebor Banstetter said Friday.
Southwest spokesman Brad Hawkins responded that legacy airlines
already dominate Reagan and New York's LaGuardia airports. Letting
them bid on American and US Airways gates and slots "defeats the
very purpose of the divestiture — to create lower fares, more
competition, and better flight options for consumers," he said.
By settling the Justice Department lawsuit, American and US Airways
removed the last major hurdle to merging. A federal law called the
Tunney Act lets a court review government decisions on mergers and
gives the public 60 days to make comments to the Justice Department,
but the airlines are so confident in the outcome that they plan to
complete their deal in early December.
[to top of second column] |
Judges have rarely tinkered with antitrust agreements. In 1995, a
federal judge rejected a government agreement to settle antitrust
charges that Microsoft Corp. had unfairly competed against rivals.
An appeals court overruled the judge.
Charlie Leocha, director of the Consumer Travel Alliance, said he
will ask the Justice Department and the court to require American
and US Airways to give up additional airport gates beyond the ones
they've agreed to divest in Los Angeles, Chicago, Boston, Dallas and
Miami.
Albert Foer, president of the American Antitrust Institute, an early
foe of the American-US Airways merger, said his group also would
file a protest under the Tunney Act, but added, "Normally we don't
bother because it's not an effective law." He believes the Justice
Department would have killed the merger if it had taken its lawsuit
all the way to trial.
But Herbert Hovenkamp, an antitrust expert and law professor at the
University of Iowa, said he thinks the Justice Department got a
better deal than critics realize by gaining new gates and slots for
low-cost airlines.
"This settlement is a compromise," he said. "The Justice Department
might have gotten more" by going to trial, "but it might have lost
everything."
[Associated
Press; DAVID KOENIG, AP Airlines Writer]
Follow David Koenig at
http://twitter.com/airlinewriter.
Copyright 2013 The Associated
Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 |
