----------------
On 6/30/2003 3:53:55 PM KCFlyer wrote:
----------------
On 6/30/2003 3:53:55 PM KCFlyer wrote:
----------------
On 6/30/2003 3:17:42 PM texflyer wrote:
I don''t see SWA rushing to Washington to get the WA overturned. If they REALLLLY wanted too,SWA could easily do it. They like it the way it is.
----------------
The story I''ve always heard is that Southwest remains "passionately neutral" on the subject of the Wright Amendment, in accordance with a "gentleman''s agreement" made several years ago. On 6/30/2003 3:17:42 PM texflyer wrote:
I don''t see SWA rushing to Washington to get the WA overturned. If they REALLLLY wanted too,SWA could easily do it. They like it the way it is.
----------------
----------------
I guess the thing that bothers me most about the WA is the sheer arbitrariness of using state boundaries as a limit.
A distance radius would seem more logical.
Just for fun, I did a quick study with a ruler and road atlas: Using a 500-mile radius as a limit, all present airports qualify, MCI, STL, and MEM easily fall within the imaginary limit, BNA just squeaks in, while DEN just barely misses.