特朗普政府向加拿大取经

Thirty six years ago, the phrase “air traffic control” aroused strong passions. The reason? In 1981, just after Ronald Reagan became president, thousands of air traffic controllers went on strike. But Reagan broke the unions in a move that became a powerful symbol of the new free-market, deregulated era.

36年前，“空中交通管制”这个词曾引发强烈愤怒。原因何在？1981年，在罗纳德?里根(Ronald Reagan)就任总统后不久，数千名空管人员开始罢工。但里根整垮了工会，此举成为一个自由市场、放松管制新时代的强有力象征。

The air traffic control issue could become symbolic again — with a 21st-century twist. This week, Donald Trump summoned business leaders to the White House, where he reiterated his pledge to create a trillion-dollar infrastructure plan to unleash economic growth. The US president seems to visualise this in terms of concrete; or, more accurately, bridges, roads and that (in) famous wall. But Gary Cohn, head of the Council of Economic Advisers, has a different spin: his first priority is to take the air traffic control system away from the Federal Aviation Administration and place it in a non-profit entity, funded by public and private finance.

空中交通管制问题可能再次具有象征意义——带有21世纪的特点。最近，唐纳德?特朗普(Donald Trump)把一些商界领袖叫到白宫，他重申了创建一份1万亿美元基础设施计划以释放经济增长的承诺。美国总统似乎在用混凝土来构想这份计划；或者更准确地说是桥梁、道路和那道名声不佳的隔离墙。但是白宫国家经济委员会(National Economic Council)主席加里?科恩(Gary Cohn)的观点不同：他的优先事项是让空中交通管制系统脱离美国联邦航空管理局(FAA)，把它归入一个非盈利实体，由公共和私营部门资金融资。

The hope is that this will unleash investment, such as the adoption of GPS technology to replace the land-based system. “Air traffic control is probably the single most exciting thing we can do,” Mr Cohn declared, arguing that embracing GPS and digital technologies could slash US flight times so dramatically that “we will save over 25 per cent of the jet fuel in this country”.

他希望这将释放投资，例如采用GPS技术替代基于地面的系统。“空中交通管制很可能是我们现在能做的最令人兴奋的一件事，”科恩表示，他辩称，引入GPS和数字技术有望如此戏剧性地缩减美国航班飞行时间，以至于“我国将节省25%以上航空燃油。”

This initiative might show how the White House is being forced to scale back reform ambitions in the face of Congressional opposition towards measures such as healthcare reform. It would be hard to persuade Trump voters that air traffic control reform is “the single most exciting” infrastructure pledge on the table.

这一举措可能表明，面对美国国会对医疗改革等措施的反对，白宫正被迫收缩其改革雄心。很难说服特朗普的选民相信，空中交通管制改革是目前“最令人兴奋的”基础设施承诺。

But another way to interpret Mr Cohn’s comments is that it confirms that some in the White House are trying to turn Mr Trump’s grandiose promises into practical policy. And investors and business leaders (not to mention voters) should welcome reform.

但还有一种解读科恩言论的方法：它证实，白宫的一些人正试图把特朗普的宏大承诺转化为现实的政策。投资者和商界领袖（更别提选民了）应该欢迎改革。

The current system is desperately old-fashioned, so much so that industry studies suggest that introducing GPS might deliver a $30bn annual efficiency boost to the economy. Second, shifting the discussion about infrastructure away from Mr Trump’s obsession with concrete towards digital technology is welcome — and overdue.

现有系统过时得让人绝望，以至于行业研究显示，采用GPS可能会给美国经济带来每年300亿美元的效率提振。其次，将基础设施讨论从特朗普对混凝土的迷恋转向数字科技是可喜的，而且早该如此。

Third, the initiative is something that might win wide support. Most Republicans love the idea. So do business leaders: Doug Parker, chief executive of American Airlines, for example, said this week that wants an overhaul of the “antiquated” system, and suggested that a new non-profit entity should do this by issuing bonds. And he pointed out that a flight from Dallas Fort Worth to Philadelphia takes about 30 minutes longer than it did in 1979 because the US air traffic system has not kept pace with the rest of the world.

第三，该计划可能会赢得广泛的支持。多数共和党人喜欢这个创意。企业领导人也是如此：例如，美国航空(American Airlines)首席执行官白伟德(Doug Parker)最近表示，他希望彻底改革这个“过时”的体系，他还表示，新的非盈利实体应该通过发行债券来这么做。他指出，从达拉斯沃思堡国际机场(Dallas Fort Worth)到费城的航班所需时间比1979年多出约30分钟，因为美国空管系统没有赶上世界其他地区的步伐。

Even unions may get on board, notwithstanding their previous opposition. This is because the FAA’s budget has been so unstable in recent years that it has hit air traffic controllers too.

就连以前表示反对的工会都可能赞同改革。这是因为最近几年，美国联邦航空管理局的预算一直不稳定，也影响到了空管人员。

Then there is a fourth factor: the reforms show that parts of the administration are ruthlessly non-ideological about the sources of their reform ideas. In this case the inspiration partly comes from Canada. “We lost control of the skies over the Atlantic and Pacific Ocean because Canada has adopted a GPS system,” Mr Cohn laments.

接下来还有第四个因素：此类改革显示，特朗普政府中的一些人对于改革创意的来源是超越意识形态的，在这方面不留情面。在本例中，其灵感在一定程度上来自加拿大。科恩叹息道：“我们失去了对大西洋和太平洋空域的控制，因为加拿大采用了GPS系统。”

There is so much fascination (or wounded pride) about Ottawa’s experience, that Elaine Chao, transportation secretary, has visited Canada to study the system. And that may pave the way for the import of other Canadian ideas.

美国对渥太华的经验如此着迷（或者说自尊受损），以至于美国交通部长赵小兰(Elaine Chao)专程赴加拿大研究这个体系。这可能会为引入加拿大的其他创意铺平道路。

Notably, Ottawa has launched a C$130bn infrastructure initiative, featuring a new $35bn infrastructure bank that is supposed to use public funds to catalyse private sector investment into infrastructure projects. “We think we will raise $4 to $5 in private capital for every tax dollar invested,” Bill Morneau, Canadian finance minister, told investors in New York this week. This idea may be emulated, not least because many Republicans are opposed to using too much public debt to fund Mr Trump’s infrastructure plans.

引人注目的是，渥太华方面推出了1300亿加元的基础设施计划，包括打造一家新的350亿美元的基础设施银行，拟利用公共资金刺激私营部门投资于基础设施项目。加拿大财长比尔?摩尔诺(Bill Morneau)最近在纽约告诉投资者：“我们认为，每投资1加元纳税人资金，我们将筹集到4至5加元的私营部门资金。”这种想法可能会被效仿，特别是因为很多共和党人反对利用过多公共部门债务为特朗普的基础设施计划买单。

It would be premature to get too optimistic about the economic impact of these ideas. Canada’s system of government embraces sensible bipartisan policymaking. But even Ottawa has found it hard to turn its infrastructure promises into tangible projects as quickly as it hoped. It will be far harder in the US’s fractured — and fractious — system.

现在就对这些构想的经济影响持过于乐观的态度还为时尚早。加拿大的政府体系接纳理性的两党政策制定。然而，就连加拿大也发现很难像希望的那样，迅速将基础设施承诺转变为实际项目。在美国割裂且吵闹的体制中，难度会大得多。

If Mr Cohn can make his air traffic control plans fly, that would create a symbolic victory of sorts. And, as Reagan knew, symbolism sometimes matters; particularly with that tricky issue of business mood.

如果科恩能够将其空中交通管制计划付诸实行，那将带来一个具有象征意义的成功。正如里根知道的那样，象征意义有时很重要；尤其是对于那个棘手的商业信心问题。