Airline Competition and Passenger Rights Act of 2001
Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 7, 2001
Airline Competition and Passenger Rights Act of 2001 - Amends Federal aviation law to require the Secretary of Transportation to consider whether a foreign air carrier has engaged in any unfair or deceptive practice or unfair method of competition in air transportation or the sale of air transportation in the preceding five years before issuing a certificate authorizing such carrier to provide foreign air transportation.Revises provisions prohibiting an air carrier, foreign air carrier, or ticket agent from engaging in unfair or deceptive practices or unfair methods of competition in air transportation or the sale of air transportation. Extends such prohibition to any major air carrier that prohibits, limits, or otherwise restricts a code share partner from entering into a code share agreement with another air carrier or foreign air carrier.Prescribes a maximum civil penalty for engaging in unfair methods of competition.Authorizes an air carrier to transfer a slot (take-off and landing rights at an airport) to another air carrier only upon approval of the Secretary.Directs the Secretary to investigate each hub airport (that has at least .25 percent of the total annual boardings in the United States) to determine whether, in the preceding five years, a dominant air carrier (that accounts for more than 40 percent of the total annual passenger boardings) at such airport has: (1) charged higher than average fares for interstate air transportation to or from such airport; (2) engaged in an unfair method of competition in response to a new entrant air carrier (that accounts for less than ten percent of the total annual boardings) at such airport; or (3) limited competition by a new entrant air carrier at the airport by restricting access of the new entrant to gates, slots, or other essential facilities at such airport on reasonable and competitive terms. Authorizes the Secretary, upon an affirmative determination, to order such carrier to increase opportunities for competition at such airport.Requires the Secretary, upon a determination that an air carrier is a dominant air carrier (that has at least 20 percent of the annual passenger boardings) at an airport, to: (1) issue an order requiring the airport operator to reallocate ten percent of the airport gates and facilities leased to a dominant air carrier to new entrant air carriers; and (2) if the airport is a high density airport, reallocate 20 percent of the slots of the dominant air carrier to new entrant air carriers. Directs the Secretary to withhold five percent (ten percent in subsequent years) of an airport's apportionment of airport planning and development funds for noncompliance with such requirements.Prohibits any action of an air carrier or foreign air carrier that fails to: (1) inform the consumer of the lowest available fare; (2) provide the consumer with full access to all available fares; or (3) inform the consumer about a flight segment that was, at least 40 percent of the time, either canceled or delayed by 30 minutes or more past its scheduled arrival time.Prohibits any air carrier or foreign air carrier action that: (1) prohibits a person from only using a portion of the purchased air transportation; or (2) assesses an additional fee on such person or any ticket agent.Prohibits any air carrier or foreign air carrier action that fails, in the case of a termination, cancellation, nonrenewal, or substantial change in the competitive circumstances of the appointment of a ticket agent, to provide the ticket agent with prior notice of such action (except in cases of insolvency).Sets forth provisions: (1) requiring air carriers to ensure access to necessary services and conditions, including water, restroom facilities, and the ability to deplane for all passengers; (2) prohibiting air carriers from preventing or hindering passengers from exiting an aircraft; (3) requiring air carriers to provide passengers with explanations for any delay, cancellation, or diversion of a flight segment (including prohibiting false or misleading explanations); (4) making air carriers liable to passengers for excessive departure or arrival delays of the aircraft; and (5) requiring air carriers to provide specific remedies for overbooked flights.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.907 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.907 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.907 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.907 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.