Senate Votes Down Bill To Regulate Airplane Legroom

A bit over a month ago I wrote about a bill introduced by New York Senator Chuck Schumer, who wanted the Federal Aviation Administration to establish seat-size standards for commercial aviation. His argument was that people are being packed into planes like sardines, and that if the FAA didn’t step in to stop it, the airlines would keep reducing the space allocated to each seat.

Everyone wants more space on a plane, but the problem is that people aren’t consistently willing to pay for it:

  • Many airlines now offer extra legroom economy seating, or at a minimum, sell exit row seating, meaning passengers who value more space can pay for it
  • The whole reason airlines like Spirit can offer such low fares is because of how many seats they manage to fit on planes; decreasing the number of seats on a plane would raise fares, which decreases the ability consumers have to customize their travel experience
  • Keep in mind that the FAA has to certify seats and evacuation procedures, so the FAA already has the duty to prevent airlines from installing unsafe configurations; this bill wasn’t about safety

American-737-Economy-Class

Well, the bill was voted on yesterday (Thursday), and it failed. Interestingly the vote went down party lines, with the vote failing by a margin of 54-42.

Per The Washington Post, here’s what Senator Schumer said on the Senate floor prior to the vote:

“Flying is not pleasant anymore,” he said. “You’re crammed in. I’m not that tall. I’m a little under 6-foot-1, and what I do when I fly is I take out the magazine and the airsickness bag and the little folder that tells you where the exits are to gain a 16th of an inch more legroom, so my knees don’t bang into the seat in front of me.”

“This is a place where the public is clamoring for change,” he continued. “I got more feedback on [the amendment] than most other things. You don’t have to be 6-foot-4 to understand the problem.”

Bottom line

I’m not surprised to see the bill shot down, though I’m a bit surprised to see this went down party lines, since I didn’t really view this as a Democrat vs. Republican issue. We all want more legroom, but we also all want the lowest possible fares. Back in the day American proved people aren’t willing to pay a mild premium for more legroom throughout economy, when they offered More Room Throughout Coach. They couldn’t get away with charging even a slight premium.

Fewer seats translates to higher fares, and I don’t view that as being good for consumers. Especially when the option is already there to pay for extra legroom seating on a vast majority of planes.

What do you make of this bill being shot down in the Senate?

Conversations (20)
The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.
Comment as a member

Membership is free and takes no more information than commenting as a guest. Earn status points for good contributions, and see fewer ads as your status grows.

Type your response here.

If you'd like to participate in the discussion, please adhere to our commenting guidelines. Anyone can comment, and your email address will not be published. Register to save your unique username and earn special OMAAT reputation perks!

  1. Loading comments…
Recent Comments
The latest from the OMAAT community.

The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.

tara Guest

They will squeeze us in like sardines until we collectively say no and stop flying. I am in general conservative and don't like excessive government control, but I think this amendment was a good one. As some have pointed out, some markets have no competition. You either take it up the rear or you don't fly, not very good choices.

0
‼ 0
tara Guest

Is Schumer trying to claim that he flies coach? I think not. "One Republican, Sen. Susan Collins (Maine), voted for the amendment; three Democrats — Thomas R. Carper (Del.), Claire McCaskill (Mo.) and Jon Tester (Mont.) — opposed it. Sens. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Bernie Sanders (Vt.) did not vote." Not sure what Durbin's excuse is. Obviously Cruz and Sanders are too busy campaigning to DO THEIR JOBS. We're paying them... for what? Is Rubio back to work yet? Because he was blowing off just about every vote.

0
‼ 0
dmodemd Guest

We don't have sufficient competition. Most non stop routes have only one airline serving them and you have to make do with what they provide.

0
‼ 0
Chris Jensen Member

@credit - Dummy - No one was talking about anyone's width, we are talking about the privilege of not having your knees and legs crushed. I am 6'2" tall. I do not fit inside most coach seats because of my height. And before you snap back with "pay more for premium economy", there are not enough of those seats for all the tall people on planes. So quit making snide remarks about people's weight when you do not know anything about the other person. Maybe you are a squirt that can fit in a child seat, but many of us cannot. And we are being penalized for it.

0
‼ 0
john Guest

Lgislation to set minimum legroom is a small issue. The Congress should pass legislation that allows the public to use state-law remedies when they have disputes with airlines.

0
‼ 0

Save posts to read later

Saving posts is a member feature. Become an OMAAT member to build a reading list you can come back to from any device.

Become a member
Meet Ben Schlappig, OMAAT Founder
5,883,136 Miles Traveled

43,914,800 Words Written

47,187 Posts Published