The United States Congress supports Institutional Lying with it's support of the FAA a prime example. According to a recent PBS report a 1996 change to FAA's charter removed the mandate to promote aviation. A recent post at AviationWatch explains :
The law isn't what it says it is
Posted by: "Howard Beckman" email@example.com
Mon Jun 21, 2010 8:41 am (PDT)
Remember how gratified we were when the Congress did away with the FAA's
"dual mandate" in the 1996 FAA Reauthorization Act (Public Law 104-264,
Sec. 401)? The dual mandate to the FAA had been to maintain safety and
"promote aviation". After numerous scandalous disclosures about FAA's
practice of allowing airlines to monitor their own safety practices, the
Congress yanked the "promote aviation" prong. But did it?
Thanks to a documentary aired recently on the PBS Frontline series ("Flying
Cheap"), I learned to my astonishment that, while the cheerleading mandate
was removed from the language of the statutes, it was done with a wink to
insiders. Tucked into the conference report (House Report 104-848) was
language that told another story. Here is the excerpt (I added boldface):
Joint Explanatory Statement of the Committee of Conference
29. Dual Mandate
Section 401: Amends sections 40101(d) to make safety and security FAA's
highest priority and to strike promotion language in two other paragraphs.
Amends 40104(a) to strike promotion language.
Section 407: Amends section 40104 to require FAA to encourage the safety of
air commerce in addition to the development of civil aeronautics.
Section 401: House changes to section 40101(d) and Senate changes to
section 40104(a). The Managers have adopted provisions from both the House
and Senate bills to clarify that the FAA's highest priority is safety and
security. The managers do not intend for enactment of this provision to
require any changes in the FAA's current organization or functions.
Instead, the provision is intended to address any public perceptions that
might exist that the promotion of air commerce by the FAA could create a
conflict with its safety regulatory mandate.