Vice President Joe Biden was only partially right when he compared LaGuardia Airport to one he would find in “some third world country.” In fact, many airports in developing countries are significantly better than LaGuardia, although you can probably find some that are just as bad.

For example, the Gilberto Freyre International Airport, located in Recife, Brazil, was recently upgraded in anticipation of the 2014 World Cup and was quite attractive and functional even before the upgrade. And in places like Dubai and Qatar, governments are investing huge amounts to build the best and most modern airport facilities in the world, the kind of facility that New York City would have built, say, 75 years ago.

Conditions at LaGuardia today, on the other hand, can only be described as pathetic, particularly in the central terminal, Terminal B. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which manages LaGuardia and New York’s other major metropolitan airports, has recognized the “insufficiencies in several areas of the [Central Terminal Building] and its support facilities,” but the proposed review is still stuck in limbo. (1) Meanwhile, under longstanding Port Authority policy, many of LaGuardia’s prized takeoff and landing slots are occupied at short-haul flights serving a limited audience and using small regional jets or turboprops.

There is a kernel of truth to the argument, advanced by JetBlue and several other airlines that use the central terminal, that there is little point in increasing the pressure on LaGuardia by allowing longer flights that, in many cases, will require larger planes. But overall, the argument falls apart under scrutiny.

The discussion arose after the Port Authority announced that it was studying the so-called “perimeter rule,” according to The Wall Street Journal. (2) The rule, which went into effect in 1984, limited flights from LaGuardia to destinations within 1,500 miles, with the exception of Denver. If the Port Authority decided to lift the rule, it would open up the possibility of flights between LaGuardia and West Coast destinations like Los Angeles and Seattle.

Airlines opposing the change argue that since jets making transcontinental flights would displace smaller planes making shorter trips to smaller cities, it will increase the number of passengers at LaGuardia’s already overcrowded facility. Why put pressure on a system that is already overloaded? While this argument is not entirely without merit, it also misses a larger point.

The biggest limitation on LaGuardia’s utility isn’t its outdated terminals, though that doesn’t help, but the limited number of takeoffs and landings the airport can accommodate each day. To get the most benefit for the largest number of passengers, we must allow the largest planes that are practical to take advantage of most of those spaces. Airlines like JetBlue and Southwest that fly out of Terminal B already use midsize planes that can fly coast-to-coast, like Airbus A320s and Boeing 737s. Those planes currently fly to places like Orlando and Atlanta. The only thing stopping them from making long-haul flights now is the Port Authority’s self-imposed 1,500-mile limit.

The historical logic behind this restriction dates back to a time when LaGuardia was viewed essentially as a terminal for connecting flights to places like Washington, DC and Boston. We can understand the theory, at least. Even then, though, the logic makes little sense when you step back and consider that these two places (and perhaps Baltimore) are the only cities commuters can get to efficiently from Manhattan by train. With LaGuardia being the closest airport to midtown Manhattan, it’s no wonder some travelers continue to endure poor terminal conditions for the convenience of proximity.

Comfort, of course, is relative. It may be worth considering that to avoid delays and congestion at LaGuardia and New York City’s other major airports, other travelers are already prepared to pay higher prices and travel a bit further to fly out of MacArthur Airport. Long Island Airport, Westchester County Airport, Stewart International Airport in Newburgh, New York, and even occasionally in Philadelphia.

It has taken the Port Authority a long time to revise LaGuardia’s perimeter rule. But then again, the Port Authority exists primarily as a patronage mill and slush fund for the governors of New York and New Jersey, and only secondarily to improve transportation efficiency in the New York metropolitan area. Therefore, we can only hope that the Port Authority, within a reasonable time, will fund improvements to the mess known as LaGuardia’s Terminal B. In the meantime, it makes sense to put as many travelers as possible through that old-fashioned toothpaste tube for at least less letting them travel to places they really want to go.

New York’s three major airports exist today in various states of decrepitude, with the isolated exceptions of terminals financed by private airlines, such as Delta’s refurbishment of its LaGuardia space in Terminals C and D, and JetBlue’s Terminal 5 in the John F. Kennedy Airport. . Unless and until these airports can receive the more extensive attention needed to bring them up to date, the best travelers can hope for is more seats to go to places they’d rather fly to, so they can get out of the airport as quickly as possible.

Sources:

1) Port Authority of NY and NJ, “LaGuardia Airport Redevelopment Program”

2) The Wall Street Journal, “After Decades, LaGuardia Airport May Allow Long-Haul Flights to Los Angeles, San Francisco”