Columnist Jon Ralston: How noisy jets are nothing compared to the cacophony of politicians

Friday, Dec. 16, 2005 | 8:14 a.m.

Jon Ralston hosts the news discussion program Face to Face with Jon Ralston on Las Vegas ONE and also publishes the daily e-mail newsletter RalstonFlash.com. His column for the Las Vegas Sun appears Sunday, Wednesday and Friday. Ralston can be reached at 870-7997 or through e-mail at ralston@vegas.com.

During the season where wishes can come true, local elected types better be careful what they wish for.

As denizens of the valley cover their ears because of supposedly intrusive airplane noise problems if flight paths are changed, every politician in sight is yelling to be heard. Like a collective Mighty Mouse chorus -- "Here I come to save the day!" -- the elected officials are crooning what could prove to be a siren song that ultimately will not soothe the savages.

Some are more hyperbolic than others, with the reigning king, Mayor Oscar Goodman. "If there's a public safety issue, I promise you, I will not sleep," Goodman told KLAS Channel 8 on Wednesday. And on Thursday on 94.1 FM radio with Mark and Mercedes, His Honor reiterated that he is "not getting involved" in the noise issue and that "all I care about at this point" is public safety.

Others have tried to be more judicious, including Rep. Shelley Berkley, who met with Federal Aviation Administration officials and would say only that the changes are not a done deal. Las Vegas Councilman Steve Wolfson has the barbarians at his gate because their gated communities are in his ward, but he insists he is only doing his due diligence and has asked the city attorney for options.

The fact is that the locals and McCarran International Airport officials can't do much about this except file administrative appeals and lawsuits.

And then what? This is the fastest-growing area in the country and the airport's growth has been phenomenal. Does anyone think that the flight path can be adjusted so people will not be affected? Or that trying to do so won't cause takeoff delays, which opens an entirely new can of whiners?

Much of what we see is a visceral reaction by politicians when thousands of people get upset about anything. It's called The Genuflection Reflex. The problem is that when you are so busy groveling, you can't see much and can miss the long view.

Here's the harsh reality: Although the local politicians especially are right to listen to their constituents' concerns and see what the options are, if they create unreasonable expectations, they are likely to feel the populace's wrath sooner or later.

A little context here might be helpful: The FAA, a few years back, forced the airport to change the flight path and eliminate the right-hand turn for westbound flights -- the same one they are trying to re-institute now.

McCarran officials warned the feds back then that they would reduce the capacity of the airport -- did I mention how fast the volume was growing? -- but the FAA followed all the rules, so there was no recourse.

"We wouldn't be here today (if they had listened)," airport boss Randy Walker said this week on "Face to Face." "The FAA is trying to fix something they created in the first place."

And as the current brouhaha shows, the FAA has the public relations skills of Tom DeLay. And by now, many of these protesters might actually be acclimated to whatever noise they might soon hear -- noise for all the Summerlin hectoring crew that will be coming from aircraft a mile off the ground.

Some politicians, most notably Nevada's two senators, have been more perspicacious, having some knowledge of the process and the realities. That ignorance has not seemed to bother some pols. In contrast, Harry Reid even went so far as to say he wouldn't second-guess the FAA. At least not yet.

So is this about noise or safety?

Goodman told his radio interviewers -- who seemed skeptical -- that he has "been told" there are safety issues with adding the right turn. Really? Perhaps this came to him in a vision from The Ghost of Flight Paths Past?

But what Reid and John Ensign have said is that the FAA is the right agency to be making these determinations. And for politicians to let their responsive reflex morph into a pandering reflex is not just irresponsible, it also is much more hazardous, including to them, than anything the new flight paths would create.