[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 206 (Thursday, December 21, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S19074-S19076]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             ICC TERMINATION ACT OF 1995--CONFERENCE REPORT

  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I submit a report of the committee of 
conference on H.R. 2539 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The report will be stated.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The committee on conference on the disagreeing votes of the 
     two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 
     2539) to abolish the Interstate Commerce Commission, to amend 
     subtitle IV of title 49, United States Code, to reform 
     economic regulation of transportation, and for other 
     purposes, having met, after full and free conference, have 
     agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective 
     Houses this report, signed by a majority of the conferees.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the Senate will proceed to 
the consideration of the conference report.
  (The conference report is printed in the House proceedings of the 
Record of December 18, 1995.)
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to pass, S. 1396, 
the Interstate Commerce Commission Sunset Act of 1995. This bill, 
reported out of the Commerce Committee by a unanimous vote, eliminates 
the Interstate Commerce Commission [ICC], terminates numerous existing 
ICC functions, and establishes an Intermodal Surface Transportation 
Board to carry out the remaining rail and motor carrier regulatory 
functions.
  With this bipartisan bill, the Congress will have completed the work 
begun with the Motor Carrier Act of 1980, to free the surface 
transportation industry from unnecessary and outmoded regulation, while 
continuing to protect shippers of all commodities and household goods 
from possible abuse by carriers. In addition, this bill sunsets the 
Federal Maritime Commission by January 1, 1997, and will move that 
agency's necessary functions to the new Board. Thus, the bill will 
eliminate two Federal agencies, combining their remaining functions 
into one Intermodal Board that is smaller than either of the former 
agencies.
  The passage of this bill is of some urgency. The ICC will run out of 
money within a few weeks, and its elimination without an orderly 
transition of its key functions is likely to disrupt affected 
industries. The rail industry and household goods carriers, in 
particular, want to ensure the continuity of the current regulatory 
scheme.
  For the most part S. 1396 accomplishes the goal of orderly 
transition. I note that a very similar bill, H.R. 2539, passed the 
House of Representatives by a vote of 417 to 8 late last week. I expect 
that the differences between the two bills can be resolved quickly. S. 
1396 is a good bill. It is, as reflected in the committee vote, a 
bipartisan effort to develop a transportation oversight program that is 
appropriate to the 21st century. I urge, and hope my colleagues will 
support, its consideration and passage.
  Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I rise to support this landmark conference 
report to eliminate the Interstate Commerce Commission [ICC], and to 
reduce regulation on the transportation sector, and to transfer the 
responsibilities of the Commission to a new independent Intermodal 
Surface Transportation Board [ITSB], and the U.S. Department of 
Transportation.
  I am pleased to lend my enthusiastic support to this legislative 
package of two bills to reform the Nation's transportation laws and to 
embrace the labor protection reforms endorsed by the House in the 
Whitfield amendment. If both are enacted, I expect this legislation to 
win Presidential approval.
  I support this conference report with only two reservations. To reach 
agreement, difficult, painful and significant compromises had to be 
made. Two areas which continue to concern me are Carmack amendment 
review and the transfer of the Federal Maritime Commission 
responsibilities to the new board. While the conference report embraces 
solutions to perceived problems in these issue areas. which are 
different from both S. 1140 which I introduced earlier this year and 
the Senate-passed bill; given the need to bargain, I believe that fair, 
defensible compromises have been made.
  Regarding the Carmack amendment, while I would have preferred the 
Senate provision to study the Carmack cargo liability system prior to 
enacting changes to current law, our House counterparts were firmly 
fixed in their 

[[Page S19075]]
position for dramatic and immediate reform. The compromise reached is 
one which very closely follows the Carmack procedures in force when 
tariffs were filed with the ICC.
  My second reservation concerns the decision of the conference to 
delay consideration of transferring the responsibilities of the Federal 
Maritime Commission to the new board. The Senate bill embraced my 
vision of an intermodal agency which provided one-stop shopping for all 
surface transportation. This action is, however, a vision delayed, not 
denied. When the Senate debates reforms in the Ocean Shipping Act next 
year, I will continue my push to transfer the responsibilities of the 
FMC to the new board. Notwithstanding these reservations and necessary 
compromises, I do endorse and urge my colleagues to support this 
conference report.
  This legislation builds on a bill I introduced earlier this year 
known as the Transportation Streamlining Act. Following the 
introduction of that act, Senator Pressler and I and our staff worked 
long and hard to find broad areas of agreement and compromise. The work 
product of that negotiation is S. 1396. This conference report 
represents the latest chapter in a thoughtful and deliberate effort to 
reform and deregulate America's great transportation sector.

  As one of the few Members of Congress with regular contact with 
America's oldest independent regulatory agency, I again acknowledge the 
commitment and hard work of the Commission and all of its employees. A 
grateful Nation owes a debt of gratitude to these dedicated public 
servants for over a century of hard work. Their vigilance has made the 
current transition to a more market-oriented transportation system 
possible.
  One might ask, why there is a need for a successor agency to the ICC? 
Simply put, if there were no forum to resolve disputes, oversee 
standard contract terms, establish national standards and assure fair 
treatment for shippers and communities; the great, efficient and 
productive transportation sector will spin into chaos. The failure to 
enact this legislation will produce just such chaos. Efficiency would 
be replaced with litigation. Certainty would be replaced with buyer 
beware. The result would be great harm to the notion of interstate 
commerce.
  The new ISTB within the Department of Transportation will continue to 
be the fair referee between shippers, carriers, and communities. It 
will provide interested parties with one-stop shopping and administer a 
significantly streamlined body of law which assures that the public 
interest is protected in transportation policy.
  This transfer of responsibility and streamlining of authority will 
reduce costs both to taxpayers and the private sector and assure that 
key transportation safety responsibilities do not fall between the 
cracks.
  Mr. President, our Nation takes for granted the blessings of 
America's great transportation system. Every part of the Nation has 
accessible transportation service. As the Congress continues its 
efforts to keep regulation to the minimum necessary to protect the 
public interest, let us not forget what a valuable asset we have and 
how critically important it is that the Congress carefully choose the 
correct course.
  I urge my colleagues to vote today to modernize America's 
transportation policy and enact the pending conference report.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, the Senate will now consider the 
conference report to H.R. 2539, the ICC Termination Act. The Senate-
passed version of this legislation is S. 1396, the Interstate Commerce 
Commission Sunset Act of 1995, which I introduced on November 3, 1995. 
My bill was adopted by unanimous consent in the Senate on November 
28th. Swift passage of this conference report is necessary to provide 
for an orderly closure of our Nation's oldest regulatory agency.
  As my colleagues know, this legislation was crafted in response to 
the fiscal year 1996 budget resolution which assumes the elimination of 
the Interstate Commerce Commission [ICC] and the fiscal year 1996 DOT 
appropriations bill, H.R. 2002, which provides no funding for the ICC 
after December 31, 1995. This means that just over 1 week from now, the 
ICC will close its doors forever. This conference agreement ensures the 
agency's sunset will be accomplished in a reasoned fashion and that 
certain core and vital functions will continue.
  The conference report authorizes the sunset of the ICC effective 
January 1, 1996. It also eliminates scores of obsolete ICC regulatory 
functions. Finally, it transfers residual functions partly to a newly 
established independent Surface Transportation Board within the 
Department of Transportation and partly to the Secretary of 
Transportation.
  Mr. President, this is historic legislation. The ICC is America's 
oldest independent regulatory agency. It was established in 1887--108 
years ago. The ICC originally was created to protect shippers from the 
monopoly power of the railroad industry. Throughout subsequent years, 
the ICC's regulatory responsibilities were broadened and strengthened, 
and expanded to other modes. Today, the ICC has jurisdiction over the 
rail industry, certain pipelines, barge operators, bus lines, freight 
forwarders, household goods movers and some 60,000 ``for-hire'' motor 
carriers.
  During the past decade, a series of regulatory reform bills 
significantly deregulated the surface transportation industries, 
reducing the ICC's authority. Even with this considerable deregulation, 
however, the ICC continues to maintain a formidable regulatory 
presence. It determines policy through its rulemaking and adjudicative 
proceedings to ensure the effective administration of the Interstate 
Commerce Act, related statutes, and regulations. Clearly, the positive 
and necessary adjudicatory role of the ICC should not simply cease at 
the end of the year. This legislation will ensure such limited core 
functions continue.
  Mr. President, this conference report identifies which ICC functions 
can and should continue to be performed by a successor. While that 
premise is the report's central theme, the agreement also takes into 
account the fact that the new successor--a 3-member Surface 
Transportation Board--will have a very limited budget. Overall, it 
provides a reasoned approach designed to ensure continued protections 
for shippers against industry abuse--protections vitally important to 
shippers in places like my home State of South Dakota--while at the 
same time, assure continued economic efficiencies in our Nation's 
surface transportation system.
  As with any conference report, this is the result of compromise on 
the part of both the House and Senate. Throughout this process, 
however, I have been guided by the need to retain sufficient 
protections for shippers while reducing unnecessary regulatory burdens 
on our Nation's rail and trucking industries. This legislation meets 
that objective.
  Mr. President, Senator Dole received a communication yesterday 
afternoon from Secretary of Transportation Federico Pena and Secretary 
of Labor Robert Reich stating the President would veto this legislation 
if we did not adopt a provision supported by rail labor imposing 
mandatory labor protection on small railroad mergers. In my view, the 
Clinton administration acted in an irresponsible fashion by threatening 
significant regulatory reform and protections for our shippers, farmers 
and ranchers.
  A veto would create a regulatory black hole on January 1. Statutory 
and regulatory requirements would remain on the books, but no 
Government agency or official would be in place to administer them. 
This legislation would maintain critical functions affecting the rail 
and trucking industries that protect small shippers and others from 
market abuse. A veto would be in complete disregard of the needs of 
farmers and small agricultural shippers who rely on adequate 
transportation service provided by these surface transportation 
industries.
  Therefore, with extreme reluctance we agreed to the administration's 
demand to modify the legislation to meet the completely unfounded 
concerns of rail labor. Thus, the conference report to H.R. 2539 is 
accompanied by a concurrent resolution which strips the class II/class 
III railroad merger provision agreed to in conference that created an 
option to merge such railroads under current law. The administration 
insisted we use language from the House-passed bill requiring that 
class 

[[Page S19076]]
II/III mergers proceed only under a special new rule which lowers labor 
protection from 6 years to 1 year, but which states collective 
bargaining agreements may not be avoided by allowing a shifting of work 
from a union carrier to a nonunion carrier.
  In my view, the language in the House-passed bill is drafted in such 
a way as to potentially create serious questions. Therefore, I can 
assure my colleagues we will be revisiting this issue in the next 
session of Congress. The language is designed to prevent a carrier from 
shifting work from unionized workers to nonunionized workers to avoid 
contracts as a part of a merger implementation.
  My point is the Board established in this legislation must use the 
preemption provisions of the legislation to review how laws should be 
accommodated to enable these mergers to occur in a timely fashion and 
in a way that best serves the public interest in continued and 
effective rail transportation. This revised section is not intended to 
create a special rule of law that allows labor unions to delay or veto 
mergers between class II and class III railroads. After all, they do 
not have such power in any other segment of American industry.
  The provisions of this bill must be read in totality. Again, Mr. 
President, I want my colleagues and the new Board to understand this 
change to the conference report is not intended to give rail labor a 
veto over the transportation needs of communities and shippers who 
would benefit by a merger between class II and class III railroads.
  Mr. President, on balance this conference report is the result of 
nearly a year's worth of bipartisan study, discussion and work. It 
represents a reasonable compromise. I want to thank the conferees, 
their staffs and the staff of the Commerce Committee for all their 
dedicated work and long hours in producing this final legislative 
package. The legislation before us will eliminate a host of outdated 
and unnecessary laws while ensuring continued protection for America's 
shippers. I urge its adoption.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
conference report be agreed to and that the motion to reconsider be 
laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  So the conference report was agreed to.

                          ____________________