Congress

Cruz: Previously Considered You For Board Of Amtrak, A Position You Were Qualified For

By HYGO News Published · Updated
Cruz: Previously Considered You For Board Of Amtrak, A Position You Were Qualified For

Cruz: Previously Considered You For Board Of Amtrak, A Position You Were Qualified For

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) delivered a devastating comparison during FAA Administrator nominee Phil Washington’s Senate Commerce Committee hearing, noting that the Biden administration had previously considered Washington for the Amtrak board — “a position you were qualified for” that “might well have received bipartisan support” — while now asking the Senate to confirm him for the FAA despite his lack of aviation expertise. Cruz then asked a technical question about conflicting angle-of-attack sensor readings that contributed to the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines crashes, which Washington could not answer, citing his non-pilot status.

The Amtrak Contrast

  • Previous consideration: Administration had considered Washington for Amtrak board.
  • Transit alignment: Amtrak role would align with Washington’s transit experience.
  • Bipartisan potential: Cruz acknowledged it “might have received bipartisan support.”
  • Qualification match: Amtrak role better matched Washington’s background.
  • Clear contrast: Clear contrast with mismatched FAA role.

The Buses and Trains Framing

  • Transit experience: Washington had extensive bus and train experience.
  • Metro Denver: RTD Denver leadership in transit.
  • Los Angeles Metro: LA Metro transit leadership.
  • Rail vs. aviation: Fundamental difference between rail and aviation.
  • Surface vs. air: Surface transportation distinct from aviation.

The Technical Question

  • Angle of attack sensors: Critical aircraft safety sensors.
  • Conflicting readings: Technical scenario involving conflicting sensor data.
  • Pilot response: Proper pilot response to conflicting readings.
  • Safety critical: Safety critical decision-making.
  • Expertise required: Deep aviation expertise required to answer.

The Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines Crashes

  • MCAS system: Boeing 737 MAX MCAS system involved in both crashes.
  • 2018 Lion Air: Lion Air Flight 610 crashed in October 2018, killing 189.
  • 2019 Ethiopian: Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 crashed in March 2019, killing 157.
  • Sensor failures: Angle of attack sensor failures played key roles.
  • Systemic failures: Crashes revealed systemic safety failures.

Washington’s Honest Answer

  • Non-pilot admission: Washington admitted he was not a pilot.
  • Cannot answer: Said he couldn’t answer the technical question.
  • Human reaction frame: Initially suggested “human reaction needs to take over.”
  • Intellectual honesty: Demonstrated intellectual honesty.
  • Political damage: Political damage from clear expertise gap.

The Pattern of Questioning

  • Technical depth: Cruz demonstrated technical depth.
  • Cumulative impact: Cumulative impact devastated nomination.
  • Substantive critique: Substantive critique of qualifications.
  • Policy purpose: Genuine policy purpose beyond politics.
  • Aviation safety focus: Focus on aviation safety implications.

The MCAS System Context

  • Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System: Flight control system.
  • Safety critical: Safety critical system for 737 MAX.
  • Failure modes: Multiple potential failure modes.
  • Pilot training: Pilot training implications.
  • Regulatory failures: FAA regulatory failures contributed.

Boeing Accountability

  • Regulatory capture: Concerns about regulatory capture.
  • Certification process: 737 MAX certification process scrutinized.
  • Corporate culture: Corporate culture concerns.
  • Legal settlements: Settlements with victim families.
  • Ongoing oversight: Continuing oversight challenges.

The Administration’s Defense Difficulty

  • Expertise gap: Clear expertise gap impossible to deny.
  • Political defense: Limited political defense options.
  • Military service: Military service emphasized as asset.
  • Diversity frame: Diversity framing of candidate.
  • Insufficient arguments: Arguments insufficient against technical critique.

The FAA Modernization Challenge

  • Certification reform: Aircraft certification reform needs.
  • Workforce development: Aviation workforce development.
  • Technology evolution: Rapid technology evolution.
  • International coordination: International regulatory coordination.
  • Safety culture: Safety culture throughout industry.

The Confirmation Politics

  • Senator performance: Senators’ performances in hearings.
  • Media coverage: Sustained media coverage.
  • Public record: Public record established.
  • Professional communities: Professional community responses.
  • Political consequences: Political consequences for administration.

Alternative Confirmation Paths

  • Technical credentials: Technical credentials could have helped.
  • Industry experience: Industry experience could have helped.
  • Aviation specificity: Aviation-specific experience important.
  • Mixed backgrounds: Some successful FAA leaders had mixed backgrounds.
  • Political capital: Political capital needed for non-traditional nominees.

Key Takeaways

  • Sen. Ted Cruz noted Washington had previously been considered for the Amtrak board — a position matching his transit experience.
  • Cruz acknowledged the Amtrak role “might well have received bipartisan support” given Washington’s qualifications.
  • Cruz’s technical question about angle-of-attack sensors revealed Washington’s inability to answer aviation-specific questions.
  • The Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines crashes referenced by Cruz involved MCAS sensor failures.
  • Washington honestly admitted he was not a pilot and couldn’t answer technical flight questions.
  • The hearing exposed fundamental mismatch between nominee’s background and FAA Administrator role requirements.

Transcript Highlights

The following quotations are drawn from an AI-generated Whisper transcript of the hearing and should be considered unverified pending official transcript release.

  • “My understanding is this administration previously considered you for the board of Amtrak. That could well have been a position you were qualified for, and you might well have received bipartisan support to serve in that role.” — Sen. Cruz
  • “Buses and trains are very different from planes.” — Sen. Cruz
  • “What happens when you get a different reading from two different angle of attack sensors?” — Sen. Cruz
  • “Well, Senator, I’m not a pilot. I don’t know if I can answer that particular question.” — Phil Washington
  • “Those are all people who know something about aviation and safety.” — Sen. Cruz
  • “I see a record where you’ve got experience with buses, you’ve got experience with trains.” — Sen. Cruz

Full transcript: 152 words transcribed via Whisper AI.

Watch on YouTube →