BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

HK

wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 09:29:18 -0500, Eisboch wrote:

After I posted the above I thought about it a little more and I think my
expressed opinion was wrong. Carter probably *would* have been forced
to take similar action. The strike was illegal and the ramifications
were both immediate and potentially disastrous to the nation. Any
responsible president would be forced to uphold the law in a situation
like that.

Eisboch

I think you were right the first time. I think Carter had a contingency
in place to survive the strike. I don't think he would have fired the
controllers.

It has been argued that the firings were an ambush, a chance for Reagan
to look tough. Note the letter to Robert Poli, head of PATCO, written in
Oct, 1980. I wonder what changed.

Dear Mr. Poli:
I have been briefed by members of my staff as to the deplorable
state of our nation's air traffic control system. They have told me that
too few people working unreasonable hours with obsolete equipment has
placed the nation's air travellers in unwarranted danger. In an area so
clearly related to public safety the Carter administration has failed to
act responsibly.
You can rest assured that if I am elected President, I will take
whatever steps are necessary to provide our air traffic controllers with
the most modern equipment available and to adjust staff levels and work
days so that they are commensurate with achieving a maximum degree of
public safety....
I pledge to you that my administration will work very closely with
you to bring about a spirit of cooperation between the President and the
air traffic controllers.
Sincerely,
Ronald Reagan

What changed...was that Reagan needed a way to look tough, as I
previously stated.