
White House scraps proposal requiring airlines to disclose bag fees - aaronbrethorst
http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/363956-trump-admin-scraps-obama-era-proposal-requiring-airlines-to-disclose
======
asabjorn
That is unfortunate. As a consumer the creative nickling and diming of
airlines not only creates a worse product, but it also makes it hard to figure
out what the real price of an airlines trip is.

------
netsharc
On the topic of jobs that will be replaced by AI, her job can be replaced by a
casette player:

> Mia Garlick, Facebook’s director of Asia-Pacific safety programs, said, “We
> are committed to helping ensure that journalists around the world feel safe
> on Facebook as they connect their audiences with meaningful stories. We
> permit open and critical discussion of people who are featured in the news
> or have a large public audience based on their profession or chosen
> activities, but will remove any threats or hate speech directed at
> journalists, even those who are public figures, when reported to us.”

------
grandalf
Wouldn’t the companies offering flight searches have a strong incentive to
include this information? I’ve been burned a few times after booking a flight
that did not disclose the hefty additional fees.

------
tanilama
Under the umbrella of business friendly? How surprising.

------
plandis
Can someone argue why this is beneficial for US citizens? I can’t find even a
round-about way where this will benefit your average consumer.

------
malchow
Your general point of: information requirements are a relatively superior way
to do consumer protection regulations: is certainly true enough.

Maybe this is just the result of lobbying, but people frequently fail to
compare the ex ante case with the proposed legislation; they just buy the
[putatively] pro-consumer excitement of the proposed legislation hook, line,
and sinker.

It looks as though this was a proposal that has now been scrapped.

So we've been living, till now, in a world not governed by this proposal.

In that world, have you ever been shocked at a bag fee? I haven't. I either
expect no fee (at United, where I have status), or expect one (everywhere
else).

And what about the bag fees that airline passengers paid from 1903 to 2010 _,
when they were totally legal with no disclosure obligations, and assessed even
against people bringing no bags at all on the plane? Were those high ticket
prices fair to the innocent people traveling light?

_ Estimating 2010 as the year when most airlines starting charging.

------
cletus
The sad thing here is that the GOP has seemingly given up all pretense of
doing anything for the people. This term in Congress will probably be looked
back upon as both a disaster for the country and a generational boon to the
GOP in terms of setting themselves up for political donations for many years
to come.

This is all made possible by an increasingly desperate and increasingly
irrelevant white "Christian" movement that seems to have completely bought
into the ends justifying the means to the point of electing a pedophile over a
Democrat (Alabama).

Interestingly this actually seems to be right out of Vladimir Putin's
political playbook. Putin's stranglehold on power was and is made possibly by
him placating a politically active conservative movement within Russia that
also feared sliding into irrelevance and that their beliefs and way of life
were under attack by what they perceived to be an increasingly hostile and
militant progressive class.

This simply won't change while the vast majority of people will vote for their
particular party no matter what. And that goes both ways.

------
akhilcacharya
This is exactly what people in coal country demanded.

------
Feniks
Lobbyists doing their work.

I bet we could find a few airliners in the campaign finances of the GOP.
Technically still public info I think? Although I doubt Americans even care at
this point.

------
gozur88
I don't fly, so I'm just kind of curious if, in the US, we've reached the
point where it's cheaper to mail your luggage to the destination if you have
time.

~~~
Fezzik
It may be close... my only point of reference is I recently shipped an older
50 lb Mac Pro from Oregon to the Midwest (I forget where, exactly) and that
was $42.00, with insurance, through USPS Priority Mail. I paid online which
gives you a discount, but shipping rectangular boxes is cheap.

------
notliketherest
Here's a novel idea: regulations should be created by the congress, not by the
President.

~~~
rgbrenner
The executive branch is granted authority by Congress to issue rules. This
saves the congress from writing every detail into each law.

It's similar to pork -- congress can write: spend $X on whatever; or they can
write: spend $1 on project A, $2 on project B, etc with a final total of $X.
If congress writes the first, then the executive branch will make the
decisions about the specifics of how $X will be spent.

If congress does not want the executive branch to decide, it's up to Congress
to put the details into the law, and restrain the authority of the agencies.
Federal rules can never override a law passed by congress.

~~~
rayiner
Aside from the unconstitutionality of the whole thing it’s fine.

~~~
rgbrenner
you're a lawyer, so can you explain for me? What makes administrative law
unconstitutional? Is Congress not allowed to delegate authority to the
executive branch?

~~~
jeremyt
There’s a whole book on it - ‘why administrative law is unlawful’

~~~
zuminator
You probably mean "Is Administrative Law Unlawful" by Philip Hamburger?

[http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/I/bo1743668...](http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/I/bo17436684.html)

~~~
jeremyt
Yes, rhetorical question.

------
techsupporter
Of course they are.

OF COURSE THEY ARE.

Why is it that every...single...time a rule that purports to give "more
information to the customer" is deemed "an unreasonable regulatory burden?"
The ENTIRE FUCKING POINT of capitalism is that market participants are
supposed to trade based on equality of information.

But no, not now. Customers aren't entitled to know what something will cost
before they buy it or in a way that enables comparisons. That's just
unreasonable. How can we possibly expect a business whose entire model is the
juggling of pricing and availability information for maximum profit to EVER be
able to figure out how to display the costs for ancillary services at point of
purchase?

Damn.

~~~
vintageseltzer
"Representatives" in the U.S. government no longer represent the citizens at
all — they represent the lobbyists that pay for their votes.

Logically, this behavior should result in the representatives being voted out
of office.

However, the two party system combined with the unbelievably high cost of
running for office makes it nearly impossible for representatives who don't
fall in line with the status quo to receive the campaign financing necessary
to be elected.

It's a rotten system and won't go away until campaign finance laws are
reformed.

~~~
mulmen
Completely agree with you here. I also want to reinforce your conclusion.

I used to think the two party system was flawed because it is so hard to get
anything done. I see now that is a feature and under the current
administration we are lucky to be in such a slow moving system.

The solution here truly is in campaign finance and other forms of voting
reform such as addressing gerrymandering. If we put the people back in charge
of the government I think everything else will fall into place.

~~~
Feniks
My country has 20 parties in Parliament and the sky doesn't fall.

But that would mean an entirely different political culture.

~~~
mulmen
How much is spent on your elections and how are voting districts created and
votes counted?

