H.R. 19444

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 28
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 12, 2002
• Sequence Number: 50
• Publication Date: October 6, 1970
• Content Type: REGULATION

Approved For Rase 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114RQ 100100050-0
SKYJACKING
HEARING
COMMITTEE ON FINANCE
UNITED STATES SENATE
NINETY-FIRST CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
H.R. 19444
AN ACT TO AUTHORIZE FOR A TEMPORARY PERIOD THE
EXPENDITURE FROM THE AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST
FUND OF AMOUNTS FOR THE TRAINING AND SALARY AND
EXPENSES OF GUARDS TO ACCOMPANY AIRCRAFT OPER-
ATED BY UNITED STATES AIR CARRIERS, TO RAISE
REVENUE FOR SUCH PURPOSE, AND TO AMEND SECTION
7275 OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1964 WITH
RESPECT TO AIRLINE TICKETS AND ADVERTISING
0
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
61-5600 WASHINGTON : 1970
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For'Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-011 000100100050-0
COMMITTEE ON FINANCE
RUSSELL B. LONG, Louisiana, Chairman
CLINTON P. ANDERSON, New Mexico
ALBERT GORE, Tennessee
HERMAN E. TALMADGE, Georgia
EUGENE J. McCARTHY, Minnesota
VANCE HARTKE, Indiana
J. W. FULBRIGHT, Arkansas
ABRAHAM RIBICOFF, Connecticut
FRED R. HARRIS, Oklahoma
HARRY F. BYRD, JR., Virginia
JOHN J. WILLIAMS, Delaware
WALLACE F. BENNETT, Utah
CARL T. CURTIS, Nebraska
JACK MILLER, Iowa
LEN B. JORDAN, Idaho
PAUL J. FANNIN, Arizona
CLIFFORD P. HANSEN, Wyoming
Tom VAIL, Chief COUnSel
E V ELYN R. TRoMPsoN, Assistant Chief Clerk
(II)
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For Rase 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114RW100100050-0
CONTENTS
Page
Text of H.R. 19444 ------------------------------------------------ I
ADMINISTRATION WITNESSES
Volpe, Hon. John A., Secretary of Transportation, accompanied by: Hon.
James M. Beggs, Under Secretary, Department of Transportation;
Kenneth M. Smith, FAA Deputy Administrator; and Barclay W.
Webber, Acting Assistant General Counsel for Legislation- - - - - - - - - -
6
PUBLIC WITNESSES
Keesling, Thomas M., vice president, American Society of Travel Agents,
accompanied by Paul S. Quinn, general counsel, ASTA---------------
18
Seybold, Leo, vice president, Air Transport Association of America, ac-
companied by Walter Jensen, assistant vice president of operations and
engineering, ATAA----------------------------------------------
14
COMMUNICATIONS
Andrews, J. Floyd, president, Pacific Southwest Airlines, letter to the
chairman-------------------------------------------------------
25
De Lorenzi, John, managing director, public and government relations,
American Automobile Association, letter to the chairman-- - - - - - - - - - - -
24
Monroe, Robert E., congressional liason, Aircraft Owners and Pilots As-
sociation, letter to the chairman-----------------------------------
25
Murphy, Hon. George, U.S. Senator from the State of California, letter
to the chairman-------------------------------------------------
23
Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from the State of Alaska, letters to the
chairman-------------------------------------------------------
26
Ward, Robert B., executive vice president, National Business Aircraft
Association, letter to the chairman---------------------------------
23
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For Rase 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114RQ,(i100100050-0
SKYJACKING
U.S. SENATE,
COMMITTEE ON FINANCE,
Washington, D.C.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room 2221,
New Senate Office Building, Senator John J. Williams presiding.
Present: Senators Williams of Delaware, Bennett, Curtis, Jordan
of Idaho, and Hansen.
Senator WILLIAMS. The committee will come to order.
Today the committee is conducting a hearing on the President's
proposal for financing the antiskyjacking program announced by the
President on September 11. The bill before us, H.R. 19444, would
increase the domestic air passenger ticket tax from 8 to 8.5 percent,
and the international travel facilities tax from $3 to $5 for a temporary
period from October 31, 1970, through July 1, 1972, and the cost of
guards on airliners would be paid for out of the airway trust fund.
We will print the bill in the record and proceed with the witnesses.
(The bill follows:)
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved Fdelease 2002/05/09 2: CIA-RDP89-011114000100100050-0
919x CONGRESS
SESSiox
2a H
. R. 19444
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
OoronER, 1, 1970
Read twice and referred to the Committees on Finance and Commerce jointly
AN ACT.
To authorize for a temporary period the expenditure from the
Airport and Airway Trust Fund of amounts for the training
and salary and expenses of guards to accompany aircraft
operated by United States air carriers, to raise revenue for
such purpose, and to amend section 7275 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1954 with respect to airline tickets and
advertising.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 That section 208 (f) (1) of the Airport and Airway Revenue
4 Act of 1970 is amended by adding at the end thereof the
following new sentence : "Amounts in the Trust Fund shall
also be available, as provided by appropriation Acts, to pay
II
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For Rase 2002/05/09 :1' IA-RDP89-01114RQW100100050-0
8
9
10
2
1 those obligations of the United,States incurred before July 1,
2 1972, for the training, salaries, and other expenses of guards
3 having the same powers as United States marshals to accom-
4 pany aircraft operated by air carriers which are United States
5 citizens."
6 SEC. 2. Section 4261 of the Internal Revenue Code of
7 1954 (imposition of tax on transportation of persons by
air) is amended by redesignating subsection (e) as sub-
section (f) and by inserting after subsection (d) the fol-
lowing new subsection:
" (e) TEMPORARY INCREASE IN RATES.-Effective
with respect to transportation which begins after October 31,
1970, and before July 1, 1972-
" (1) in the case of amounts paid after October 31,
1970, and before July 1, 1972, the rate of the taxes
imposed by subsections (a) and (b) shall be 8.5 per-
cent in lieu of 8 percent, and
" (2) the rate of the tax imposed by subsection
(c) shall be $5 in lieu of $3."
SEC. 3. (a) Section 7275 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1954 (relating to penalty for offenses relating to certain
airline tickets and advertising) is amended to read as follows:
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved Fd'elease 2002/05/09 4CIA-RDP89-0111'000100100050-0
3
1 "SEC. 7275. PENALTY FOR OFFENSES RELATING TO CER-
2 TAIN AIRLINE TICKETS AND ADVERTISING.
3 " (a) GENERAL RULE.-In the case of transportation
4 by air all of which is taxable transportation (as defined in
5 section 4262) or would be taxable transportation if section
6 4262 did not include subsection (b) thereof-
7 " (1) the ticket for such transportation shall show
8 the total of (A) the amount paid for such transporla-
9 tion, and (B) the taxes imposed; by sections 4261 (a),
10. (b), and (c), and
11 " (2) any advertising made by or on behalf of any
12 person furnishing' such transportation (or offering to
13 arrange such transportation) which states the cost of
14 such transportation shall state the total of (A) the
15 amount to be paid for such transportation, and (B) the.
16 taxes imposed by sections 4261 (a), (b), and (c) .
17 " ('b) PENALTY.-Any person who violates any pro-
18 'vision of subsection (a) is, for each violation, guilty of a
19 misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not
20 more than $100."
21 (b) The amendment made by subsection (a) shall
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For Rase 2002/05/09 bCIA-RDP89-01114RQ&0100100050-0
4
1 apply to transportation" beginning after the date of the
2 enactment of this Act.
Passed the House of Representatives September 30,
1970.
Attest: W. PAT JENNINGS,
Clerk.
51-560 0-70--2
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved Fd?'Release 2002/05/09 CIA-RDP89-0111''x'}@000100100050-0
Senator WILLIAMS. Our first witness is the Honorable John Volpe,
Secretary of the Department of Transportation. Mr. Volpe, we are glad
to have you with us this morning and you may proceed.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN A. VOLPE, SECRETARY OF TRANSPOR-
TATION, ACCOMPANIED BY JAMES M. BEGGS, UNDER SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; KENNETH M. SMITH, FAA,
DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR; AND BARCLAY W. WEBBER, ACTING
ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL FOR LEGISLATION
Secretary VOLPE. Thank you very much, Senator Williams.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appreciate this
opportunity to testify in support of S. 4383. This bill is a very signifi-
cant piece of the administration's broad attack on the problem of air
piracy which President Nixon outlined in his statement of September
11.
The other major element in the President's program-joint action
by the international community-was begun last month in Montreal
at the special meeting of the Council of the International Civil Avia-
tion Organization. I represented the United States at this meeting
which met at our request to consider measures to cope with what has
become a major threat to international air transportation.
As a first step in joint action, we urged the Council to accept and
establish certain basic principles directed toward effective sanctions.
These principles are:
1. The state in which a hijacked aircraft lands has the obligation
to permit the passengers and crew to continue and to return the air-
craft and cargo to its owners.
2. The state to which the hijacker has fled has the obligation to
extradite or prosecute the hijacker.
3. Concerted multilateral sanctions should be taken against states
involving themselves in hijacking for purposes of international black-
mail which permit the detention of passengers, crew, or aircraft, or
which fail to extradite or prosecute persons responsible for unlawful
seizure of aircraft.
We are happy to report that just last week the council adopted a
landmark resolution based on our proposal, and directed the Legal
Committee of ICAO, which is meeting in London at the present time,
to consider an international convention giving effect to the purposes
of the resolution.
While we must achieve the cooperation of other nations if we are
to put a decisive end to air piracy, actions can and must be taken
unilaterally by the United States in the interim. Accordingly, the
President, after consultation with the congressional leadership,
directed that specially trained, armed Government personnel be placed
on U.S. carriers. He also directed the Department to have U.S.
carriers extend the use of electronic surveillance equipment and other
surveillance techniques to all gateway airports and other appropriate
airports in the United States, and, to the extent possible, in other
countries. The Federal Government will provide enforcement officers
to work with this equipment, to conduct searches when appropriate
and to make necessary arrests. The President also directed the
Departments of Transportation, Treasury, and Defense, the CIA,
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For FipJpase 2002/05/09 CIA-RDP89-01114RQp100100050-0
the FBI, and the Office of Science and Technology to accelerate
efforts to develop improved security and detection methods. Finally,
he directed the Department of State and other appropriate Govern-
ment agencies to consult with foreign governments and foreign carriers
to learn whatever we can from their experience.
In connection with this latter point I would like to mention that I
have just wound up a visit to several cities in Europe where I observed
firsthand the procedures in use at some of their busiest airports, and
conferred with civil aviation and airport officials about exchanging
information on further measures that can be taken to counter acts of
air piracy.
Since May 1, 1961, there have been 74 successful hijackings of U.S.
registered aircraft and 20 unsuccessful attempts. Sixty-seven of the
successful hijackings hve occurred since January 1, 1968. We have
had a total of 20 hijacking cases so far this year. The recent crimes
against passengers and aircraft in the Middle East leave no room for
doubt that the safety of the aircraft and the personal safety of itro
passengers and crew are very much in jeopardy. We must establish a
more effective deterrent and an expanded armed guard program is the
best short-run solution.
As you know, the Department, through the Federal Aviation
Administration, has for several years offered guard protection upon
the request of an air carrier. In the past the air guards have been
vested with law enforcement powers through designation by the
Attorney General as deputy U.S. marshals. S. 4383 would confer these
powers directly on all guards appointed by the Secretary. This is
considered desirable from an administrative standpoint given the
greatly expanded program to be undertaken.
To finance this program, we submitted to the Senate Appropriations
Committee a fiscal year 1971 budget amendment in the amount of $28
million. This will cover the costs of the program during the balance of
the current fiscal year and will permit us to bring on board and train
approximately 2,500 guards. The amendment was presented to the
Appropriations Committee with language making the funds available
contingent upon passage of the bill we are considering here today.
Turning to the revenue provisions of S. 4383, with which your
committee is primarily concerned, I know that you, Mr. Chairman,
and your colleagues, are fully aware of the stringent budgetary
situation confronting the Federal Government. The President has
repeatedly expressed his firm conviction that the executive establish-
ment should be operated on a fiscally responsible basis, and that the
costs of new programs should be met with new revenues or by re-
ducing or eliminating programs of lower priority. It is for this reason
that he has proposed the added taxes which I am here to discuss with
you today.
Because the armed guard service is being provided for the direct
benefit of the air carriers and their passengers, the President has
proposed that the costs of the program be borne by increasing the
level of the aviation user taxes. We believe this is entirely appropriate.
Of all transportation systems, air transportation is uniquely vulnerable
to the dangers of hijacking. The program proposed provides the users
of air transportation a very special protection, which is neither avail-
able nor necessary for users of other modes of transportation.
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved Fo'elease 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-0111000100100050-0
8
Specifically, we are proposing a one-half percent increase in the
8-percent ticket tax on domestic flights and an increase of $2 in the
$3 head tax now paid by passengers on international flights. The
burden of these tax increases on the air traveler will not be substantial.
For example, the average price of a domestic passenger ticket is
about $42. The one-half percent increase in the ticket tax would in-
crease the cost of the average ticket by approximately 21 cents. For
a flight to Paris from New York, where the ticket price is approxi-
mately $300, the increase of $2 in the head tax would translate into a
price increase of two-thirds of 1 percent.
We estimate that the accrued yield from these taxes will amount
to about $34 million in fiscal year 1971 and $57 million in fiscal 1972,
or a total of $91 million over the next 2 years. This is approximately
equal to the 2-year costs of the guard program.
The legislation also contemplates that the revenues will- be fun-
neled through the trust fund established by the Airporl and Airway
Revenue Act of 1970, enacted last May. This is not only administra-
tively convenient, but also appropriate since, in a broad sense, the
costs of the new guard program are airway costs. As you know, the
House passed a bill last week which would allow use of trust fund
money for the guard program only through June 30, 1972. It is our
firm intention to recommend the reduction or elimination of the added
taxes if the need for passenger security programs should diminish or
end. While it is difficult to foresee what the future may hold in this
regard, we believe that the limitation contained in the House bill
would not be unduly restrictive and we have no objection to it.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my prepared statement. I shall be
happy to answer any questions the committee may have.
Senator WILLIAMS. Mr. Secretary, I noticed your testimony is
primarily directed toward the Senate bill 4383, and we have before us
the House bill H.R. 19444 now. Do we correctly understand that you
endorse the House bill equally as strongly as the Senate bill?
Secretary VOLPE. Yes, sir.
Senator WILLIAMS. You are not suggesting any changes in it neces-
sarily?
SecretaryVOLPE. No; the termination of the tax increase on June 30,
1972, is acceptable. Removal of the prohibition against a separate
statement on the ticket of the air fare and ticket tax is certainly
acceptable, and there was one other small change.
Senator WILLIAMS. In the guards. The manner in which the guards
were appointed?
Secretary VOLPE. That is right.
Senator WILLIAMS. That is acceptable.
I have three or four questions here that the chairman wanted to
ask and I will read them later. First I will pass to the other members
to see if they have any questions.
Senator BENNETT. I have no questions.
Senator WILLIAMS. Senator Jordan.
Senator JORDAN. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, you suggested in your statement that the President
had a two-prong attack. First directed to the training of guards,
which you spent most of your time discussing, and the second had to
do with the carriers installing and using surveillance equipment trying
to prevent people with unfriendly hardware from getting on the
planes.
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For R&Jase 2002/05/09 : ~IA-RDP89-01114RQ 100100050-0
What cooperation are you getting from the carriers?
Secretary VOLPE. We are getting, I would say, excellent cooperation
from most of the carriers. I think all of them now understand that this
is not a problem that is peculiar to any one airline. We did have a
period there where one particular airline had more than its share of
hijackings and it was that airline that first decided to use the elec-
tronic devices which are now being used. The others have come along
and I have had no reports that any of the airlines have disagreed with
this.
We are working on a much improved magnatomoter, and we hope
within just a few months to have a magnetometer that will be as much
as 400 percent more effective than those now being used. However,
even with those now in use and where the behaviorial profile system
devised by FHA has been in use-and this covers a good many airports,
particularly our gateway airports-we have not had one single hi-
jacking-that is, where both the behaviorial profile system and the
magnatometers were in use at the particular gate for the particular
flights in question.
Senator JORDAN. So whore the surveillance system has been imple-
mented, it is showing direct results?
Secretary VOLPE. That is correct.
Senator JORDAN. How much does it slow down the boarding
process?
Secretary VOLPE. As far as the electronic devices are concerned,
it depends on which one you use. I saw some different types at Heath-
row Airport outside of London, and at Paris, Amsterdam and Frank-
furt. Depending on the type of device it hardly slows it down at all
except for the occasional person who might have some metal on him.
It also depends upon the sensitivity to which you adjust that electronic
device. You can set it down so low that it will pick up your fountain
pen. On the other hand, you can turn it up so it will pick up only
those objects that are apt to be dangerous objects. In these circum-
stances it hardly slows it down at all except for the one passenger in
50 _perhaps or 25 that might be pulled out for closer examination.
The search procedure which was being used at one of the principal
airports in Europe for some of their flights does slow it down con-
siderably and we would hope that that could be avoided. However,
until such time as we are sure that we have these electronic devices
at all of the potential locations for hijackers-and no one can say
where those potential locations are-even this step may be necessary.
Senator JORDAN. Is public acceptance for this kind of inspection
by the carriers generally favorable.?
Secretary VOLPE. The airport officials both here and in Europe
have indicated to me that they have had absolutely no squawk from
the passengers, because, in essence, what the passengers say is,
"I would rather be slowed down a little, have my flight leave a little
later and be sure that the person behind me doesn't have a gun
than to board a little quicker and be hijacked."
Senator JORDAN. This is good information.
It seems to me the correction of this difficulty lies in prevention
rather than in too much stress on armed guards. If we can prevent
people from getting on there who are potential troublemakers. then
the problem takes care of itself.
Secretary VOLPE. We have felt very definitely that our biggest
job is to prevent the hijacker from getting on the plane in the first
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved F elease 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-011 f 000100100050-0
10
place. If we do, then we won't need guards. Until such time, however,
as we are as certain as one can be under these circumstances that we
can prevent the potential hijacker from getting aboard the planes,
we feel the guard program is essential. As soon as we perfect our
ability to detect through our behavioral profile and the electronic
and other devices we are using persons who are apt to be potential
hijackers, and we are rather certain of our ability to detect them,
then certainly we would recommend that the guard program be
stopped.
Senator JORDAN. Is your Department spending any money in
research for improved surveillance equipment?
Secretary VOLPE. We are spending some money. The airlines them-
selves are spending some money and some of the manufacturers of
this equipment are spending money. So it is a combination of all
three, Senator.
Senator JORDAN. Thank you.
Senator WILLIAMS. Senator Hansen.
Senator HANSEN. Thank you.
First of all, I would like to compliment the distinguished Secretary
for a very fine presentation. I agree with the conclusions he has
reached. I find that public acceptance of this type of surveillance is
in hardy accord with what the Secretary just said. People don't mind
at all the slight delay in time given the assurance that comes from the
thought they are not going to wind up where they hadn't intended
going in the first place.
Let me ask you, if I may, some questions about the tax and how it
would be administered.
It is my understanding that the proposal will increase Federal tax
on airline tickets by one-half of 1 percent; is that right?
Secretary VOLPE. On domestic flights.
Senator HANSEN. And that on the foreign flights is it from--
Secretary VOLPE. An increase from $3 to $5.
Senator HANSEN. Right. We have had some complaints about the
fact that at the present time an airline ticket agent is prohibited
from stating on the ticket the precise amount of the tax; he can
convey this information orally to a customer but it cannot be put on
the ticket; and I understand the rationale for this was that it would
expedite the ticketing of persons.
Secretary VOLPE. The House-passed version of the bill, Senator,
incorporates a provision that permits a separate statement of the
ticket tax on the ticket. It doesn't make it mandatory. As it stands
now, a separate statement is unlawful. But the House-passed bill
incorporates a provision which permits the airlines to state on the
ticket the fare, the tax and then the total.
Senator HANSEN. To show all of this information?
Secretary VOLPE. Yes.
Senator HANSEN. If the customer asks for it.
Secretary VOLPE. The airline can do it on its own. Under the terms
of this bill the airline is permitted to do it. Under the previous bill
they could not state the tax separately on the ticket or in their
advertising.
Senator HANSEN. Do you support that provision?
Secretary VOLPE. Yes, I do, sir.
Senator HANSEN. The tax, this extra one-half of 1 percent plus the
increase in international airline tax from $3 to $5 will be sufficient
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For F & ase 2002/05/09 :1YIA-RDP89-01114RQ 0100100050-0
to pay for the cost of administering this program plus the cost of
having these Federal agents on board the aircraft?
Secretary VOLPE. As nearly as we can estimate, Senator, we believe
it will. We have estimated approximately 2,500 guards will be required.
and on that basis we believe that approximately $28 million will be
needed for the rest of this fiscal year and about $52 million for fiscal
year 1972. The taxes that we would derive from our bill through
fiscal year 1972-which would go into the airport and airway trust
fund-would approximate $90 million. So we believe there is sufficient
money involved to pay for the program.
Senator HANSEN. It is my understanding that presently the tax
is rounded off to the next highest dollar; is that right?
Secretary VOLPE. Yes, sir. The CAB took this action some 3 or 4
months ago, and the airlines were allowed to round off the figures to
not the nearest dollar, but to the next highest dollar.
Senator HANSEN. Then what you are saying then is that if the cost
of the ticket plus the tax, say, came to $35.20, the actual charge made
by the airlines presently would be $36; is that right?
Secretary VOLPE. I am not sure of that because the CAB I think-I
don't remember the language, Senator-but I have a hunch the
CAB may have to take some new action after this legislation is
enacted if the total figure is to be rounded off-unless the action
they took before provided for that in the event any new tax were
adopted.
Senator HANSEN. Mn Chairman, if I may, I would like to suggest
that the Secretary be permitted to check that out and make such
subsequent statement as may clarify my question.
Senator WILLIAMS. It will be included at this point.
Secretary VOLPE. We will have it to you this afternoon.
(The Department subsequently supplied the following information:)
We understand from representatives of the CAB that if S. 4383 were enacted and
tl.e tax on domestic tickets were increased from 8% to 8.5%, the actual charge now
made for a ticket (i.e., the tariff fare plus the ticket tax) would increase by the
amount obtained by multiplying the current tariff fare by .5%. To illustrate the
imxact of the proposed tax increase on the amount paid by the ticket buyer, and to
show how the actual charge for a ticket has been computed over the past few
months, the following example of a Chicago to New York one-way jet-coach flight
is provided:
Prior to July 1, 1970-(5 percent tax in effect)
Fare---
$51. 00
5 percent tax
2. 55
Actual charge----------------------------------------------
53.55
Effective July 1, 1970-(8 percent tax in effect, "rounding-up system" in use)
Pre-July 1fare ---------------------------------------------------
$51.00
8 percent tax-----------------------------------------------------
4.08
Total-----------------------------------------------------
Actual charge when "rounded-up------------------------------
55.08
After enactment of S. 4383
Pre-S.4383fare -------------------------------------------------- '$51.85
8.5 percent tax--------------------------------------------------- 4.41
Actual charge---------------------------------------------- 56.26
1 The $51.85 is computed by dividing $56 by 108 percent.
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved Forelease 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-011M0001 00100050-0
12
Senator HANSEN. It seems to me based on the assumption under
which I am laboring, instead of the tax being applied at roughly 8
percent, under the circumstances that I have just recited it could be
that the tax would go substantially higher if the cost of the ticket were
not too much, and the tax accordingly fell just a little bit over a dollar
and the cost were to go to the next highest dollar.
Secretary VOLPE. In other words, what you are saying is that if the
ticket cost $41.90 right now, the ticket price would be $42. You add
half of 1 percent to make it $42.41. If they have the authority to raise
the total to the next dollar the increase would not be 21 cents but a $1
increase.
Senator HANSEN. You are right. Well, would you favor writing into
the law the guidance that would be used by airlines in that it would be
their responsibility to go to the nearest dollar, whether it meant up or
down? I should think over a period of time this would average out and
result in a more equitable application as far as taxes are concerned.
Secretary VOLPE. This is, of course, a responsibility of the Civil
Aeronautics Board. I would rather not get into their affairs.
Senator HANSEN. This is by, regulation; is that what you are saying?
Secretary VOLPE. Yes; this would be an action of the Civil Aero-
nautics Board and I would prefer to leave that in their hands. Per-
sonally I would concur with your comment but we have no jurisdiction
over them.
Senator HANSEN. I think I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.
Senator WILLIAMS. Mr. Secretary, the chairman of the committee,
Senator Long, could not be here this morning and he left a series of
questions. I will ask the first one in his name and then the rest of them.
I will submit to you and you can submit the answers for the record.
We understand that you are in somewhat of a hurry this morning.
The first question to be asked is: Would it help solve the problem of
hijacking if we were to provide that when a plane lands with the hi-
jacker on it, it would be a criminal penalty for anyone to refuel it of to
otherwise aid in its takeoff?
Secretary VOLPE. That would be a law enforcement problem. sir.
I would say offhand that, generally persons who are involved in these
hijackings, or at least some of them, have either been people who
were mentally disturbed or emotionally disturbed. In some cases at
least, I question whether a law of that type would do anything to
prevent them from throwing that grenade and destroying the plane
and its passengers. Our hope is, as I indicated to Senator Hansen,
that that hijacker just will never get aboard if we utilize all of the
precautions and all of the additional techniques that we have been
developing, by the way, Mr. Chairman, not just in the last month
or two, but since February of last year, within a month after I came
into office.
As you know, in 1968 we had a rather substantial number of hi-
jackings and I asked our Federal Aviation Administration to establish
a task force that has constantly been at work on this problem, and
that is why we have had these magnanometers. And there was a
rather sharp decline in the number of hijackings the early part of
this year. This summer, of course, particularly with the incidents in
the Mideast, that has been reversed, but I don't know that a law of
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For Ra ase 2002/05/09 :1~IA-RDP89-01114RO100100050-0
this type would necessarily deter the hijacker from still forcing under
threat of a knife or a gun in the back of the stewardess or captain
that he get refueled.
Senator WILLIAMS. The rest of the questions I will have the staff
submit to you at this point and you can later submit the answers to
the record.
Secretary VOLPE. I will be very happy to, sir.
Senator WILLIAMS. No further questions and you will be excused.
Secretary VOLPE. Thank you very much.
(The Chairman's questions with departmental replies follow:)
Question. Mr. Secretary, when a plane is hijacked in the air, can't the pilot seek to
immobilize it by jettisoning its fuel so that it would be unable to ily any long distance?
Answer. Jettisoning fuel could further compromise the safety of the passengers,
crewmembers, and aircraft. This is because of the uncertain destination and other
operational considerations that could arise. While in some instances fuel could be
dumped to reduce range, some turbojet aircraft (such as some McDonnell-
Douglas DC-9 models) do not have the capability to jettison fuel.
Reportedly, in the recent rash of Near-East hijackings, the hijackers were
familiar with the aircraft cockpits and controls. Most probably, they would have
recognized any attempt by the crew to jettison fules and prevented that act.
The Eastern Airlines DC-9 that was hijacked in the vicinity of Boston
obviously had insufficient fuel for an Atlantic crossing. Nonetheless the hijacker
ordered the crew to fly to the East. Several other hijackings have taken place
where the aircraft had insufficient fuel to reach a desired destination, but the crew
was forced to land and refuel.
Question. Mr. Secretary as another possibility for immobilizing a hijacked plane,
can't we provide remote controls for the plane so that at the first hint of a hijacking the
plane can be put on remote control and the pilot thereafter would be unable to ma-
neuver it?
Answer. No. The ability to provide complete remote control of an airplane in
flight through landing is not now within. the state of the art technologically.
If complete remote control were technologically possible, we would have the
same problem we do when we seal the flight crew in the cockpit with no means
for anyone else to enter the crew compartment from the cabin. The hijacker
would still be able to threaten to do harm to the passengers or crew if the plane
were not released from remote control. In a majority of hijackings, threats to
passengers or crewmembers were used to force the diversion of the airplane
to the hijacker's desired destination.
Question. Mr. Secretary, why can't we pressure third party countries to aid us in
retaliating against countries which harbor skyjackers? For instance, why can't we
end commercial relations with a country which continues to trade and otherwise main-
tain relations with a country. which harbors skyjackers?
Answer. This is a question which falls within the jurisdiction of the Depart-
ment of State and we would defer to their views on this matter. However, we
believe the following statement of recent events will provide an indication of the
progress now being made in the international arena with respect to the applica-
tion of sanctions for hijacking.
In his statement of September 11, 1970, on the hijacking problem, the President
called upon the international community to take joint action to suspend airline
services with those countries which involve themselves in hijacking for purposes
of international blackmail. Subsequently, the Secretary of State requested a
special session of the Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization to
consider a resolution establishing the basis for application of sanctions in such
cases of hijacking. As pointed out in the Secretary's prepared testimony, the
Council did act upon the request of the United States and adopted on October 1,
1970, the attached Resolution upon which the Legal Committee of ICAO is
presently focusing its attention.
The Department of State pointed out in recent hearings on hijacking before
the House Foreign Affairs Committee that the United States is pressing for joint
action by States rather than taking unilateral action to impose sanctions for two
important reasons. First, hijacking for international blackmail purposes is a
51-560 0-70--3
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved Fd? elease 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-0111' 'R000100100050-0
14
threat to the entire international aviation community and all countries should be
called upon to partiepiate in meeting this threat. Secondly, joint action would be
most effective, and most clearly would represent universal condemnation of these
acts of blackmail.
FIRST RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 1, 1970 (LXXI-6)
The Council,
Finding that a heightened threat to the safety and security of international civil
air transport exists as a result of acts of unlawful seizure of aircraft involving the
detention of passengers, crew and aircraft contrary to the principles of Article 11
of the Tokyo Convention, for international blackmail purposes, and the destruc-
tion of such aircraft;
Recognizing that Contracting States to the Convention on International Civil
Aviation have obligated themselves to ensure the safe and orderly growth of
international civil aviation throughout the world;
Calls upon Contracting States, in order to ensure the safety and security of
international civil air transport, upon request of a Contracting State to consult
together immediately with a view to deciding what joint action should be under-
taken, in accordance with international law, without excluding measures such as
the suspension of international civil air transport services to and from any State
which after the unlawful seizure of an aircraft, detains passengers, crew or air-
craft contrary to the principles of Article 11 of the Tokyo Convention, for inter-
national blackmail purposes, or any State which, contrary to the principles of
Articles 7 and 8 of the Draft Convention on Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, fails to
extradite or prosecute persons committing acts of unlawful seizure for international
blackmail purposes;
Directs the Legal Committee to consider during its Eighteenth Session, if
necessary by extension of the session, an international convention or other inter-
national instruments:
(i) To give effect to the purposes set out in the preceding paragraph;
(ii) To provide for joint action by States to take such measures as may be
appropriate in other cases of unlawful seizure; and
(iii) To provide for amendment of bilateral air transport agreements of
contracting parties to remove all doubt concerning the authority to join in
taking such action against any State.
Senator WILLIAMS. The next witness is Mr. Leo Seybold, vice
president, Air Transport Association.
You may proceed.
STATEMENT OF LEO SEYBOLD, VICE PRESIDENT, AIR TRANSPORT
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA; ACCOMPANIED BY WALTER JENSEN,
ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT OF OPERATIONS AND ENGINEER-
ING, ATAA
Mr. SEYBOLD, Thank you, Senator Williams.
I have with me Mr. Walter Jensen, vice president of Air Navigation
and Traffic Control of the association.
My name is Leo Seybold. I am vice president of the Air Transport
Association of America, the trade and service organization representing
virtually all the U.S. certificated route air carriers.
The committee is considering an increase in the recently increased
domestic passenger ticket tax from 8 percent to 8% percent and an
increase in the new international passenger tax from $3 to $5. The
announced purpose of the additional taxes is to pay for armed U.S.
Government personnel to be placed aboard U.S. airline aircraft as a
result of a warlike emergency in which the airlines were made pawns of
international policy.
The airlines see no justification for the imposition of these new
taxes. Not only are the proposed taxes wrong in principle, but they
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For %ease 2002/05/091~CIA-RDP89-01114P 0100100050-0
are premature in timing and discriminatory in their application. The
taxes are wrong in principle because protection of citizens is the pri-
mary function of Government and the responsibility of all the people,
not just of the small group of citizens who may need protection at
the moment because they have been temporarily singled out for attack.
The taxes are premature in timing because substantive issues of avia-
tion safety, liability, and international law are raised by the guard
program and have not been examined by the Congress. The taxes are
discriminatory in their application because they would be levied on
many persons who could not benefit from the purpose for which they
are proposed to be imposed.
Until recently, hijacking, though troublesome, did not take on a
crisis atmosphere. No U.S. airline passenger has lost his life as a result
of hijacking. Only after the Palestinian guerrillas seized U.S. com-
mercial aircraft and U.S. citizens as a dramatic method of attacking
the foreign policy of the United States did an atmosphere of emergency
develop. To meet those attacks the President mobilized the 6th Fleet
and Air Force and other U.S. military personnel and equipment,
intensified diplomatic activity, ordered a speedup in detection and
surveillance methods, placed armed U.S. Government personnel on
certain U.S. air carrier fjights, submitted legislation authorizing such
personnel, and called for special taxes on air passengers to pay for
part of this protective activity.
The situation has changed materially from the tense situation in
which the emergency hijacking program was announced. In the Near
East a cease-fire has been agreed to and in this hemisphere, Cuba is
reported to have agreed to return all hijackers if the United States
w 11 do the same. Congress should now take an earnest look at the
hijacking problem to determine the most appropriate solution to it
on a long range basis.
In hijacking situations, airline efforts have always been directed to
the safety of the operation and the preservation of the lives on board.
The ultimate answer to the hijacking problem must lie on the ground,
not in the air. For some time we have been directing the major part
of our efforts toward preventing the hijacker from boarding the plane.
Airline experience with surveillance and detection systems is growing
and as the systems and equipment improve, we gain in knowledge
and sophistication to deal with the hijacker and keep him off the
plane in the first place. We will continue to pursue vigorously the
scientific, psychological, intelligence, and diplomatic programs which
are underway and which accentuate the preventative approach. We
emphasize the preventative approach because we believe the use
of armed guards should be considered as a temporary measure.
While continuing to emphasize improvements in the preventative
approach, the airlines also recognized the emergency and, hopefully,
temporary situation which seemed to justify the use of armed Gov-
ernment personnel aboard airline aircraft. In the past the airlines had
objected to the carriage of arms into the cabin, but the carriers are
accepting the armed guard service. The program has been proceeding
on an emergency basis without the authority requested in S. 4383.
We believe it appropriate, before any taxes are enacted, that the
authority of the Secretary of Transportation in this regard be clarified
as requested in his letter to the President of the Senate and as pro-
posed in S. 4383 which he submitted.
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For `release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-0111$000100100050-0
16
In addition to the clarification of authority, there should be a
clarification of the liability of the Government for the actions of
these guards. Several days ago, the Defense Department announced
that 800 military personnel will be trained to serve as sky marshals
aboard commercial aircraft. Under a contract between the two De-
partments, the Transportation Department will train the guards
and reimburse Defense for expenses. On the other hand, there is no
agreement between the Department of Transportation and the air-
lines on the terms and condition of carriage, the responsibility and
authority of such guards and their relationship to the crew or the
Government's liability for acts of commission and omission by such
guards.
As you know, the proposed taxes will raise about $57 million which
reportedly will pay for about 2,500 guards. We do not know how this
figure was arrived at nor who decided on it. If such figure were ap-
priate for the short-term emergency situation, it obviously would be
excessive for more normal times. To the extent that the program re-
quires less than a 2,500-man force, the proposed taxes would exceed
its cost.
TAXES ARE DISCRIMINATORY
The existing $3 international tax.is paid by every passenger whose
air travel is not subject entirely to the domestic ticket tax. Passengers
boarding foreign carriers in the United States are, of course, subject
to this tax to pay for facilities they use. Does the Administration's
proposal contemplate that U.S. armed guards ' will be allowed to be
placed on foreign flag aircraft? If not, and it must be assumed that
they will not, then should passengers on foreign air carriers be subject
to the $5 tax? Such passengers would clearly be paying for a specific
service which was not being provided them. If the United States can
charge passengers on foreign-flag aircraft for services not furnished,
could not foreign countries cavalierly charge U.S. airlines for services
they do not provide? If it should be decided that the tax should not
be applied to foreign flag passengers, there will be created a tax dis-
crimination against U.S.-flag carriers, since passengers on U.S. aircraft
will be expected to pay the tax. We have received numerous telegrams
from foreign flag carriers expressing strong opposition to the dis-
crimination inherent in imposition of this tax on their passengers
and urging that such programs should be paid from general funds.
The administration obviously does not contemplate attempting to
require foreign aircraft entering or departing the United States to
have armed guards aboard since the bill does not attempt to grant
such authority. We believe that at least two foreign countries have
their own guards aboard their own aircraft serving the United States.
We can hardly with fairness demand that the passengers of such air-
craft pay $2 extra for the privilege of having U.S. guards on such
aircraft.
The domestic ticket tax which is proposed to be raised one-half of
1 percent for all passengers also will be discriminatory. It is a fact
that most domestic hijackers have boarded aircraft at major metro-
politan airports. The likelihood of a hijacking attempt at many of
our smaller airports seems remote. Air taxi, helicopter, and most
local service airline passengers have little need for or prospect of
armed guard protection.
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For Rase 200210510g1 CIA-RDP89-01114RO p100100050-0
In addition, Congress should be concerned about the precedent in
the diversionary use of the 3-month-old Airport and Airway Trust
Fund to pay for police protection. It was established for airport devel-
opment and planning and for Federal airway construction, planning,
maintenance and operation and related administrative expenses.
The legislative history of the Airport. and Airway Development Act
of 1970 and the Airport and Airway Revenue Act of 1970 makes it
clear that the intent of Congress and of this committee was to
establish a means by which the deficiencies in facilities in the national
air transportation system could be met without diversion. Despite the
fact that the airline industry was headed for its worse financial year
in over two decades, it seemed necessary to levy all sorts of new or
added taxes on air transportation to provide funds for these facilities
It is now proposed that new taxes be levied and this. facilities fund
be tapped to pay for military and civilian personnel to provide police
protection and combat international piracy. Will the highway trust
fund shortly be asked to pay for State and local police patrolling the
highways? If the trust fund can be used for a purpose so unrelated to
facilities construction and operation, could not other, and yet less
related demands be made on the trust fund in future months? If the
trust fund is not kept for its intended purpose, before long the practical
effect will be to have no trust fund at all.
We strongly urge the committee to reject this proposal to increase
taxes on airline passengers to pay for the employment of Federal
armed guards on U.S. airlines.
The call for armed guards was issued in an atmosphere. of inter-
national crisis caused by disagreement with our foreign policy and the
singling out of the airlines as the point of attack. That atmosphere
has changed and the situation now calls for Congress to give deeper
consideration to the precise nature of. the hijack problem and the
proper, long-range solution thereof. The situation deserves more
consideration than the hasty enactment of more taxes on airline
passengers.
Guards were put on the airlines under emergency conditions and
presumably under emergency powers. Congress has not acted on or
even considered the requested amendment to the Federal Aviation
Act to authorize such power on a more permanent basis as contained
in section 1 of S. 4383.
The proposed taxes would be discriminatory since foreign-flag
passengers would pay for but would not have protection by such
guards.
Attacks on the United States should be defended and paid for by
all its people, not by the hapless few who are singled out by guerrillas
as convenient targets to be used as pawns in an international political
game.
Let me add one further thought. We do agree with the Secretary's
statement that the armed guard program is a short run solution to
the problem. Certainly the carrying of armed guards on U.S. airlines,
civil aircraft, should not be considered a permanent feature of air
transportation. Thank you very much.
Senator WILLIAMS. Thank you. Any ' questions?
Senator CURTIS. No questions.
Senator WILLIAMS. Senator Jor.dan?
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved FdMelease 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01 1 110001 00100050-0
1S
Senator JORDAN. No questions.
Senator WILLIAMS. Senator Hansen.
Senator HANSEN. I don't think 1 have any questions.
Senator WILLIAMS. Thank you very much.
Our next witness will be Thomas M. Keesling, vice president,
American Society of Travel Agents.
STATEMENT OF THOMAS M. KEESLING, VICE PRESIDENT, AMER-
ICAN SOCIETY OF TRAVEL AGENTS, ACCOMPANIED BY PAUL S.
QUINN, GENERAL COUNSEL, AMERICAN SOCIETY OF TRAVEL
AGENTS
Mr. KEESLING. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the
committee: I am Thomas M. Keesling, president of Travel Associates,
Inc., a travel agency with offices at 701 West Hampden Avenue,
Englewood, Colo., and vice president of the American Society of
Travel Agents, Inc. (ASTA) located at 360 Lexington Avenue in
New York City.
I would like to call your attention, please, to page 3 of my statement.
We are delighted to hear of Secretary Volpe's statement about the
progress of the ICAO meetings in Montreal concerning the adoption
of an antihijack resolution. This changes the substance of my com-
ments concerning the meeting in Montreal.
And in view of the limited time of the committee I will briefly
summarize it.
I appear before your committee today as travel agent as well as
spokesman for ASTA, the world's largest trade association in the field
of travel and tourism, with more than 3,200 travel agent members
located throughout the United States.
I am accompanied by Paul S. Quinn, a partner in the Washington
law firm of Wilkinson, Cragun & Barker, ASTA's general counsel.
The business before the committee this morning is H.R. 19444, a
bill to authorize the Secretary of Transportation to provide armed
guards to accompany aircraft operated by U.S. airlines and to au-
thorize an increase in the amount of domestic user taxes and inter-
national head taxes to pay for these armed guards out of the airport
and airway trust fund.
The bill would also amend the Airport and Airway Revenue Act
of 1970 to eliminate the prohibition against showing the amount of
the tax separate from the cost of the air transportation tickets and
in advertising. ASTA strongly supports this amendment and hopes
that the committee will act quickly to remove this prohibition.
I appear here this morning to make the following points with respect
to the antihijacking proposals:
ASTA reluctantly endorses the use of armed guards on U.S. air-
craft as a device to discourage hijacking, but believes that the com-
mittee should scrutinize carefully the procedures which should be
followed in connection with the selection and use of such guards.
There is no justification for imposing upon air passengers the full
burden of paying for the cost of armed guards to be used on aircraft.
Therefore, there is no need to increase 1 he user tax for domestic air
transportation or the head tax for international transportation at this
time.
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For RW&ase 2002/05/0919CIA-RDP89-01114RW100100050-0
Mr. Chairman, no one in the United States today or, in fact,
throughout the world, needs to be reminded that the heinous crime of
aircraft hijacking as a device to attain political ends, must be-stopped.
It is clear that none of us in government or in private industry has
done enough to prevent airline hijackings. An effective and concerted
effort by government and industry is long overdue. When a small band
of political fanatics can hijack four aircraft almost simultaneously,
with a value of more than $50,000,000, and hold hostage and terrorize
almost 300 passengers for up to 3 weeks, then something is seriously
wrong.
One of the specific proposals contained in the President's anti-
hijacking program calls for the placing of armed guards on certain
U.S. aircraft. This step could serve as an effective deterrent to hi-
jacking of aircraft. We therefore endorse it, but we do so reluctantly.
It is indeed sad that in these times of sophisticated modes of travel
among countries throughout the world and advanced principles of
international law designed to protect an individual's right to travel
unmolested, that it is necessary to resort to a form of frontier justice
in order to guarantee the safety of airline passengers.
We notice the Civil Aeronautics Board is not scheduled to testify
this morning.
A statement was made by the Chairman of the Civil Aeronautics
Board on September 17, 1970, Mr. Browne said: "When dealing with
acts of piracy, whether on the high seas or in the sky, the cost of pro-
tection should be borne by the entire public and not the traveler
alone." This view was restated by Mr. Browne when he appeared
before the Ways and Means Committee on September 21, 1970.
A crucial policy question is raised regarding the method of financin
armed guards on aircraft. On this issue, ASTA joins with the Civil
Aeronautics Board, the airline industry and others who believe that
if it is necessary to place armed guards on aircraft to protect the lives
and property of U.S. citizens flying on U.S.-flag carriers, that any
financial burdens incurred as a result of this action should be spread
among all of our taxpayers and paid for out of the general revenues of
the United States and not out of the special trust fund established by
the Congress for different purposes.
ASTA's opposition to the payment of armed guards out of the air-
port and airway trust fund, which would necessitate an increase in
domestic and international air taxes, is based upon the following
considerations:
Since the founding of our country, American citizens have had the
privilege of traveling unmolested in our sea lanes and elsewhere on
U.S.-flag ships through protection offered by our Navy and Coast
Guard. This same degree of protection should be accorded U.S.
citizens traveling on American-flag aircraft.
The rash of hijackings which prompted this legislative proposal was
purely political in nature and, as a consequence, innocent persons
traveling on U.S. aircraft were made pawns in a deadly game of
international political intrigue, and they and their fellow air travelers
should not be compelled to pay a ransom for this international black-
mail through the assessment of additional airline taxes.
While the use of armed guards may offer an interim degree of
security, it is only one part, and not the most important part, of an
overall program to deal with aircraft hijackings.
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved Fdftelease 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-011' M0001 00100050-
20
It is still unclear who is to serve as armed guards, how much in
actual fact it will cost to train and maintain the guards and how many
guards will be needed.
The Civil Aeronautics Board has authorized the airlines to carry
guardsfree and good arguments have been advanced for using trained
military personnel on active duty for this program. Therefore, it is
conceivable that the added cost for this program would be virtually
nil.
Hopefully, the use of armed guards will be on a short-term, interim
basis, and responsible Governments can be persuaded to participate
in the multifaceted program advanced by the administration, which
is now under consideration in Montreal.
U.S. air travelers and airlines are already paying tremendous
amounts of money into the airport and airway trust fund-and into
the General Treasury of the United States. It is not at all fair to impose
additional burdens on air travelers and airlines to pay for what is
clearly a responsibility of the Federal Government itself to protect
its citizens flying on U.S. aircraft.
When the Congress designed and established the airport and airway
trust fund and enacted increased taxes effective July 1, 1970, it was
done for specific clearly delineated purposes which did not include the
use of the trust fund to pay for a general obligation of the Govern-
ment. To misuse the trust fund as is being advocated at the present
time, even for a temporary basis, would set a very dangerous and
and undesirable precedent for the future.
Mr. Chairman, this year more than 4.5 million U.S. citizens will
travel by air to overseas destinations and overall, U.S. scheduled
carriers will carry more than 160 million passengers. Air passengers
and airlines contribute their fair share through income and corporate
taxes to the general treasury of the United States.
In addition, the U.S. citizens will pay this year $526 million in
domestic air taxes and more than $28 million in international taxes
into the airport and airway trust fund. Certainly, U.S. citizens who
choose to travel by air, particularly those using U.S.-flag carriers,
should be entitled to the full protection of our Government-which
next year has budgeted $73.9 billion for national defense-from out-
rageous acts of air pu acy and from being victimized by this new form
of international blackmail. Air travelers should be entitled to this
protection without having to pay an onerous fee, no matter how
slight, through the assessment of a special charge in the guise of in-
creased user taxes or international head taxes.
The Constitution of the United States grants to the Congress the
power to define and punish piracy. In 1790, Congress provided for
capital punishment of any person who commits the crime of piracy
of the high seas. In upholding the constitutionality of that law, the
U.S. Supreme Court in 1820 said:
The common law, too, recognizes and punishes piracy as an offense not against
its own municipal code, but as an offense against the law of nations, as an offense
against the universal law of society, a pirate being deemed as enemy of the human
race.
The Congress must continue to recognize its obligations to define
and punish this new form of piracy. Furthermore, the tradition should
be maintained that American citizens have a right to look to their
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For Rase 2002/05/09 21CIA-RDP89-01114RQW100100050-0
Government for safety and protection in these troubled times to
assure that they can continue to enjoy their inherent right to travel
freely among nations of the world.
I therefore urge this committee, on behalf of the 3,200 travel agents
whom I represent and the millions of Americans who travel by air,
but who are not represented here today, to support and encourage
our Government in its offorts for a comprehensive, meaningful and
long-range solution to the airline hijacking problem, but not to succumb
to the demands of imposing the full financial burden for antihijacking
programs on the shoulders of air travelers.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator WILLIAMS. Thank you very much. Any questions, Senator
Jordan?
Senator JORDAN. No.
Senator WILLIAMS. Senator Hansen?
Senator HANSEN. No.
Senator WILLIAMS. The meeting stands adjourned until 10 o'clock
tomorrow.
(Whereupon, at 11 a.m., the committee was adjourned until 10
a.m., Wednesday, October 7, 1970.)
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For Reese 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R(100100050-0
(Communications Received by the Committee Expressing an Interest in
H.R.19444)
COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC E WELFARE,
Hon. RUSSELL Long, Washington, D.C., October 6, 1970.
Chairman on Finance,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I certainly congratulate your Committee for the ex-
peditious manner in which it has scheduled hearings on H.R. 19444, which will
provide for the President's proposal to place armed guards on flights of United
States commercial air carriers. Your immediate scheduling of hearings is justified
by the urgency of the situation and the need for firm action against hijacking and
piracy in order to protect the travelling public and our aircraft. Certainly the
recent hijackings in the Middle East leave no room for doubt that strong steps are
needed.
The legislation passed by the House on September 30th authorizes the training
and hiring of 2,500 guards which is approximately the number of furloughed pilots
in the country at present. I am urging that the Committee either amend the House
bill or add appropriate language in the Senate report to call for the use of furloughed
pilots for these guard positions wherever possible and feasible.These pilots are
generally in excellent physical condition. Many of them are former military officers.
They are all qualified flight crew; they are familiar with the layout of the aircraft
and know the vulnerability of certain parts of it; they know the dangers up in
the air; and if needed, theywould be able to take over the operation of the aircraft.
Furthermore, most of these gentlemen have proven they can keep their cool when
the pressure gets the greatest.
I make this recommendation because I believe the pilots are uniquely qualified
by training and temperament to serve as guards on our aircraft. The public I am
certain will fly easier knowing that this difficult assignment was being carried
out by individuals with years of experience in flying. California, I am proud to
say, is the home of a large number of the nation's pilots. I know many of them and
I admire their skills and courage.
Using unemployed pilots as guards presents us with a good opportunity to
meet the needs of the country and the travelling public for highly trained sensitive
guards as well as the employment needs of the men involved. I therefore urge the
Committee to use the furloughed pilots in these guard positions.
Sincerely,
GEORGE MURPHY.
NATIONAL BUSINESS AIRCRAFT ASSOCIATION, INC.,
Re H. R. 19444; S. 4383.
Hon. RUSSELL B. LONG,
Chairman, Senate Finance Committee,
Old Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN LONG: We believe it was the intent of Congress, and
clearly the understanding and belief of the users in their support of the Airport
and Airways Revenue Act of 1970, that the user taxes deposited in the trust fund
would be used exclusively for the crucially needed development of the nation's
air space system.
Our members, operators and users of business aircraft, are paying substatnial
registration and fuel taxes into the trust fund for the purpose stated above. We
believe they will strongly object to the use of these taxes to pay for armed guards
aboard commercial aircraft. Our concern is based upon the statement of Chairman
Mills of the House Ways and Means Committee appearing in the September 30th
Congressional Record, page H9454, in answer to a question from Mr. Kazen:
"Mr. KAZEN. Suppose the one half cent or 1 percent is not enough?
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved FAf"Release 2002/05/09 ~gIA-RDP89-01112R000100100050-0
"Mr. MILLS. Then they can use some of the revenues derived from the basic
8 percent or the other taxes going into the fund. They are not by this bill limited to
the revenues from the one half of 1 percent. They do not have to use this revenue
for this specific purpose.-The new revenue goes into the fund, and the Committees
on Appropriations have to pass upon how much revenue in the fund will be used
to pay the expenses of guards." (Emphasis added.)
If the Administration decides that the Federal Government must provide
armed guards and asks the Congress for funds with which to pay these expenses,
we earnestly request the Congress to limit the fund source and payments to other
than the Trust Fund established in the Airways Act. Specifically, the head tax
and transportation tax proposed by the House should be clearly identified and
separated as such. In addition, the commercial carriers involved are operated
as U.S. mail carriers and thus any protection could be deemed of general public
benefit and thereby eligible for monies from the General Fund.
We do not believe that the registration and fuel taxes paid by private aircraft
operators for development of the national air space system should be used to
pay for armed guards aboard commercial aircraft.
We request that this letter be included in the record of the hearing on this
subject if possible.
Thank you.
Respectfully,
ROBERT B. WARD,
Executive Vice President.
AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION,
Washington, D.C., October 6, 1970.
Re Administration's Anti-Hijacking Proposal, H.R. 19444.
Hon. RUSSELL B. LONG,
Chairman, Committee on Finance,
U.S..Senate, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR LONG: The American Automobile Association supports counter-
measures to combat the ever increasing number of hijacked airplanes in the
interest of the traveling public.
While we have no official policy position regarding the placing of guards on
planes to combat the hijacking problem, we feel that the proposal as contained in
House passed H.R. 19444 merits support. We also recognize the need to develop
revenue to implement such a program and we believe that those who will benefit
from the protective measure of this proposal will not object to paying for it.
The American Automobile Association has 236 affiliated clubs throughout the
United States and Canada. These independent affiliated AAA clubs together oper-
ate a total of 853 offices. Of these offices, 374 are approved by one or more trans-
portation conferences as authorized agency sales outlets.
The services of all AAA Clubs in selling airline tickets are available to the gen-
eral public as required by law. This service is separate and distinct from regular
AAA membership services such as Emergency Road Service, Domestic Travel
Routing, Hotel Reservations and Bail Bond Service, etc.
The American Automobile Association and its affiliated Clubs are one of the
largest agents for writing both Domestic and Overseas airline tickets. The AAA
has overseas offices in London, Paris and Rome to service overseas travelers.
From this, it is apparent we have a vital interest in protecting the safety of not
only AAA members but the general public which purchases airline tickets through
our AAA offices.
Section 7275 of the Internal Revenue Code prohibits a travel agent from
showing on an airline ticket the amount of the 8% Federal Tax. It also prohibits
showing the amount of the tax in advertising.
From the numerous complaints we have received, plane travelers resent not
knowing how much tax is included in their air fare. In addition, this new require-
ment has caused our Travel Departments many complications in additional paper
work, as evidenced from more than 300 letters in our files protesting this prohibi-
tion.
We support the amendments in House passed H.R. 19444 to Section 7275 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 as amended. This section was added to the
Internal Revenue Code by the Airport and Airway Revenue Act of 1970 (PL
91-258, May 21 ,1970).
We request that this letter be made a part of the official hearing record.
JOHN DE LORENZI,
Managing Director, Public and Government Relations.
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved For Rase 2002/05/0925 CIA-RDP89-01114RW100100050-0
Hon. RUSSELL B. LONG,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.:
[Telegram]
SAN DIEGO, CALIF., October 6, 1970.
All of us in the airline industry are naturally concerned over the increased
number of hijackings and the resulting hardships on both passengers and carriers..
It is our feeling however, that H.R. 19225 and the placement of armed guards
on commercial flights will have little or no effect in curtailing such hijackings.
Primarily, the passenger will be assessed additional charges in the way of in-
creased transportation taxes with no assurance of complete protection. Further-
more, H.R. 19225 is not explicit as to its organization and goals. Will guards be
placed on only international flights? Will domestic as well as intrastate and
regional airlines be covered? If guards are not placed on certain routes or flights,
will passengers on these particular routes and flights still be required to share in
the burden of these costs? Also, it is our contention that it would be impossible
to properly canvas the multitude of flights and routes covered by this Nation's
carriers; in our operation 25 aircraft maintain a schedule of nearly 1,200 flights .
per week on an around-the-clock operation. The number of guards. needed to
meet this schedule alone would be. prohibitive. Finally, it is our contention that
the industry should and can police and control this situation. Your consideration
of the above points will be appreciated.
Respectfully,
J. FLOYD ANDREWS,
President, Pacific Southwest Airlines.
AIRCRAFT OWNERS AND PILOTS ASSOCIATION,
Washington; D.C., October 6,1970.'
Chairman, Senate Finance Committee,
New Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.
DEAR CHAIRMAN LONG: H.R. 19444 and S. 4392 have been referred to your
committee for consideration. The first provides for additional taxes on passengers,
expenditure of aviation trust funds for anti-hijacking aircraft guards and for
permitting the showing of passenger taxes on tickets and in advertising; the second
would provide for exemption of the first 2,500 pounds from the aircraft use tax
on gross weight of piston powered aircraft.
We strongly urge that the provisions of S. 4392 be incorporated in the reported
version of H.R. 19444.
Of the new taxes imposed by Public Law 91-258, none has precipitated a more
outraged reaction by users than the construction of the use tax on piston powered
aircraft which requires a tax of $25 for aircraft weighing 2500 pounds and a tax
of $75.02 for aircraft weighing 2501 pounds.
It is also apparent from some of the advices to constituents issued by Senators,
who were parties to the conference on the bill leading to the law, that it was their
initial understanding that the first 2500 pounds was to be exempt as provided
in S. 4392. Hence the action by Senator Cannon in introducing it to make the
correction.
Your favorable consideration will be appreciated and reported to AOPA's
158,000 members.
Cordially,
Hon. RUSSELL LONG,
Chairman Finance Committee,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
ROBERT E. MONROE,
Congressional Liaison.
U.S. SENATE,
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS,
Washington, D.C., October 8, 1970.
DEAR Russ: The President has sent to the Hill his program for protecting
the persons and property aboard a United States carrier aircraft from hijackers.
The bill has been introduced by Senator Cotton for himself and Senator Magnuson
as S. 4383 and referred jointly to the Finance and Commerce Committees. I
assume you will be taking up the increase in taxes provided to pay for the program.
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0
 Approved FdrRelease 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-011M0001 00100050-0
26
I would like to point out that no aircraft flying between the South 48 and Alaska
has ever been hijacked or is likely to be hijacked. It is thus unlikely that Alaskans
will receive much, if any, benefit from this program. Because of this situation,
I wonder if it would be possible to exempt Alaska from the increase in the inter-
national head tax. This could be done simply by inserting on page 4, line 6 of the
bill, after "1970," the words "other than transportation between points in Alaska
and elsewhere in the United States,". I would appreciate your giving this amend-
ment consideration when the committee discusses this bill.
With best wishes,
Cordially,
TED STEVENS,
U.S. Senator.
U.S. SENATE,
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS,
Washington, D.C., July 24, 1970.
Hon. RUSSELL LONG,
Chairman, Senate Finance Committee,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
DEAR Russ: As you know, in the recent Airport and Airways Development Act,
the $3 international tax was applied to flights between the contiguous 48 states
and Alaska and Hawaii. An examination of the effect of this tax on various air
fare tickets from Seattle to cities in Alaska indicates that the $3 figure is fair,
and even favorable in some instances, on coach and first-class flights. However,
in the case of student standby or other less-than-full-fare tickets, the $3 tax
results in a higher figure than the 8% tax.
I would appreciate the committee considering some way of adjusting the tax so
that less-than-full-fare tickets would pay a smaller percentage of the $3 tax,
i.e. a half-fare ticket would pay only $1.50 international tax.
'lease let me know what can be done to resolve this inconsistency.
With best wishes,
Cordially,
TED STEVENS,
U.S. Senator.
Approved For Release 2002/05/09 : CIA-RDP89-01114R000100100050-0