Reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank — with targeted reforms

Should our government help U.S. businesses export their American-made products? Most Americans would say "yes."

Should it provide foreign companies with favorable financing unavailable to their U.S. competitors? Most Americans would say "No!"

As Congress decides the fate of the Export-Import Bank, the U.S. credit agency that offers attractive financing terms to purchasers of American products, we have an opportunity to keep what's right and correct what's wrong. Congress needs to couple bank funding with common-sense reforms that won't put American companies and workers at a competitive disadvantage.

As a commercial airline pilot for the last 29 years flying for a major U.S. carrier, I've become concerned about the Ex-Im Bank. The bank has rapidly expanded its financing for widebody aircraft (big, long-range planes) that will be used on international routes directly competing with U.S. airlines. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently reported that 42 percent of the Ex-Im Bank's total exposure is in the aircraft sector; 28 percent of the total is financing widebody aircraft. That amounts to nearly $40 billion worth of subsidies our government gives foreign competitors. It allows select foreign airlines an unfair advantage over our carriers, who are not eligible for this cut-rate financing.

Worse still, many of the purchasers of these subsidized aircraft are state-owned or state-­supported airlines that have easy access to the capital markets and don't need financing.

By providing below-market financing for foreign companies purchasing widebody airplanes, the Ex-Im Bank saves U.S. airlines' competitors approximately $20 million over the life of a single aircraft. These savings come on top of other home advantages that foreign state-supported companies enjoy, including a tax-free business environment, a less-restrictive regulatory structure, the injection of state capital into their business, and infrastructure, which may include lower fuel costs.

We already see the end results of this unlevel playing field: U.S. airline companies are losing their share of the international market, and U.S. airline workers are losing their jobs. Recently, Air India, using an Ex-Im-funded plane to undercut competition between Mumbai and New York, forced Delta out of the market entirely.

The U.S. government shouldn't be stacking the deck against American companies and American workers. That's why many senators and representatives from both parties, and many U.S. companies large and small, agree that business as usual at the Ex-Im Bank is no longer acceptable. Reform has to happen, because the Ex-Im Bank must help all U.S. businesses compete internationally.

How can we reform the Ex-Im Bank while maintaining its mission of promoting American exports? For starters, here are three ideas:

• First, eliminate the financing of widebody aircraft for creditworthy foreign, state-owned or state-supported airlines.

• Second, require that the Ex-Im Bank conduct impact studies to make sure its financing of purchases by foreign companies does not have a negative effect on American companies.

• Third, expand the focus of the bank to emphasize the small U.S. businesses that have demonstrated an actual need for support.

Many of the Air Line Pilots Association's more than 51,000 pilot members proudly operate Boeing aircraft on the routes we fly. U.S. airlines and Boeing share a common desire to compete and prevail in the marketplace.

But all of us must be allowed to compete on a level playing field. If the international aviation market is allowed to function without market-distorting subsidies, there is no doubt that Boeing products will continue be flown the world over, preferably by well-trained American pilots working for profitable U.S. airlines, supporting jobs and communities, like Minneapolis, here in the United States.