all, failing airlines are bad for shareholders, labor, communities that own and operate airports, and manufacturers. Participants also appeared unanimous in knocking down the straw man that government action is tantamount to taking the industry back to the pre-deregulation days of 30 years ago. In addition to operating air traffic control and funding aviation infrastructure, government regulates aviation issues as diverse as safety, ownership and control, airport rates and charges, reporting of delays, and price transparency. In addition, there are international rules and standards that govern international air services, aircraft emissions, airport ground handling, noise and others. The real question is what government should do, what if anything in that regulation should change, and how the nation should fund aviation infrastructure going forward. The Secretary asked forum participants to submit the five issues they believe should be in the scope of the Committee's review. To get the conversation started, here are mine: 1. NextGen (air traffic control modernization): we need a strategy to specify the capabilities; a road map for how capabilities will be deployed; a better process for FAA to manage the program; and a funding strategy to pay for what all of the industry asserts needs to be done. 2. Funding (the Airport and Airway Trust Fund and taxpayer contributions): the FAA has barely two weeks of reserve in the Trust Fund to pay for future obligations. This at a time when the sources of funding (i.e., the revenue generated from ticket taxes and other fees) are dropping