[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 96 (Wednesday, June 26, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H6964-H6973]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATION ACT, 
                                  1997

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 460 and rule 
XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 
23675.

                              {time}  0109


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole 
House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 
3675) making appropriations for the Department of Transportation and 
related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1997, and for 
other purposes, with Mr. Bereuter in the Chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having 
been read the first time.
  Under the rule, the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Wolf] and the 
gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Sabo] will each be recognized for 30 
minutes.
  The Chair recognize the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Wolf].
  (Mr. WOLF asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  In the interests of brevity, Mr. Chairman, and because everyone, 
including the staff, ought to be able to go home, I will include my 
remarks.
  Mr. Chairman, today I am proud to present to the House H.R. 3675, the 
transportation appropriations bill for fiscal year 1997. I believe this 
is a very good bill which will improve aviation and highway safety, 
provide essential funding for highways and other infrastructure 
improvements across the country, and maintain the Federal Government's 
commitment to help localities and Amtrak with assistance in their 
operating budgets. This is a balanced bill, created in a bipartisan 
manner under difficult budget constraints.
  Before I go any further, Mr. Chairman, I want to recognize the huge 
contributions of the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Coleman] in putting 
together this bill, and past bills, in a truly bipartisan fashion.
  This will be the gentleman's last transportation appropriations bill, 
and I want to say how much I appreciate his diligence and hard work, 
and his true concern for transportation safety and infrastructure 
around this country. He will be sorely missed, and we all wish him 
well.
  As all of us know, Mr. Chairman, the coming fiscal year will be very 
difficult, as we continue to tighten our belt on the way to a balanced 
budget. This is even more painful with each passing year, because the 
easiest budget reductions have already been made. Yet this body has 
shown its strong and unwavering commitment to eliminating the deficit 
by the year 2002, so some continued sacrifices will be needed.
  Before I get into specifics of the bill, let me put the larger budget 
numbers in perspective. This year, our 602(b) allocation in new outlays 
is $11.4 billion, which is the same level as last year. This might not 
seem too difficult until you realize that just to fund things like the 
employee pay raise, normal inflation in employee medical insurance and 
other benefits, and general inflation in goods and services, the 
Department of Transportation would need $250 million more than it 
received in fiscal year 1996.
  And if you use the President's budget as the baseline instead of the 
current level of funding, even greater reductions are required, because 
the budget proposed a large increase in new outlays. Combined with the 
money we need to pay off debts from past years, our budget allocation 
puts us $359 million in outlays below the administration's request. So 
very difficult choices had to be made below the level of their request.
  This bill sets priorities with the limited resources we have 
available. What are those priorities?
  Safety: Maintaining and improving safety is the number one priority 
in this bill, above everything else. The recent aviation accidents have 
convinced many of us that more needs to be done, and there are other 
troubling signs as well. Fraudulent and unapproved aircraft parts now 
get inside our commercial airliners all too often. And our aging air 
traffic control equipment raises concerns.
  Last year, air traffic centers all over the country experienced 
breakdowns in important radar and communication systems. And air 
traffic controllers are getting stretched thin as air traffic increases 
without consistent growth in staffing.
  To deal with these problems, the bill before the House today raises 
funding for air traffic control operations by about 6 percent, 
providing funds for 250 additional air traffic controllers and 373 new 
staff in aviation safety inspection and oversight. The bill also adds 
$139 million, not in the President's request, for new air traffic 
control equipment and systems to improve safety and airway capacity.
  Because of the extremely serious questions surfacing now over 
aviation safety and the FAA's oversight, the bill appropriates $2.4 
million for a blue-ribbon commission to perform a comprehensive review 
of aviation safety, financing, and acquisition. Over the past few 
weeks, we've seen FAA inspectors and the Transportation Inspector 
General testify before the House and Senate about safety problems. We 
read about internal FAA memos raising safety alarms which go ignored by 
management.
  And we know how long it takes the FAA to procure and install new 
safety equipment. These problems must be addressed in a comprehensive, 
non-political and professional way.
  This high level commission will be bipartisan, and will have adequate 
funding to analyze in-depth the aviation safety situation in the United 
States, the FAA's financing problems, and its organization. I intend to 
offer an amendment to the FAA authorization bill which provides the 
authorization for this commission when that bill is before the House 
later this summer. The chairman of the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee agrees with me on this approach. He supports 
this language, and I am pleased that the appropriations bill provides 
funds for this important activity.
  And we must do more in other safety areas as well, or at least hold 
the line in the face of

[[Page H6965]]

oncoming budget cuts. The National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration [NHTSA], for example, performs critical work in research 
and public education to make our highways safer.
  Earlier advances in reducing highway fatalities in this country have 
slowed in recent years, and in some states, fatalities are going back 
up with repeal of the national speed limit a few months ago. So the 
Committee bill places priority on protecting NHTSA's budget, and the 
related motor carrier safety grants program in the Federal Highway 
Administration.
  Similarly, the second highest number of transportation fatalities in 
this country occur on our Nation's waterways, and we have received 
strong appeals from the States to raise funding for boating safety. So 
the bill raises funds significantly for this program--a 50 percent 
increase--and requires the Coast Guard to take a more active posture in 
helping to reduce boating deaths around the country.
  Current Operations: The bill also tries to maintain funds for the 
various operating budgets, and for operating grants, at close to last 
year's levels. We do not have the resources to start major new 
initiatives. But we have tried to maintain the current level of 
operations. Coast Guard operations is funded at approximately last 
year's level.
  Transit operating assistance is at the 1996 level of $400 million, 
which was difficult since the budget resolution passed by this House 
assumes that we phase out these grants. And Amtrak operating is at the 
budget request level. To enhance safety, the bill provides a 6 percent 
increase in FAA operations, but to help finance the increase, we 
include $30 million in FAA user fees. These funding levels will 
maintain current levels of operations except at the FAA, which will be 
increased.
  Investing in Infrastructure: The bill places a high priority on 
investing in the Nation's infrastructure. With great difficulty, we 
have found a way to finance the federal-aid highways program at the 
current level, which will provide funds for road construction in every 
State. Once again this year, we have included no highway demo projects 
in the bill, allowing us to put more resources into the hands of the 
States to decide themselves which projects have the highest need. 
Likewise, we are not earmarking funds for airport construction grants.
  Regarding the Central Artery highway project in Boston, we considered 
placing a cap on the total cost of that project this year, due to the 
spiraling costs. However, we have recently received information and 
assurances from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the Department of 
Transportation that the program is now under control. So although we 
will continue to monitor this project, I am pleased with the progress 
made at this time, and the bill includes no provisions restricting 
funds for this project.
  Mr. Chairman, we have tried hard to minimize reductions in capital 
programs, but that has not been possible in every program. The proposal 
includes $4 billion for transit grants, the same as the current level. 
It includes $1.8 billion for FAA facilities and equipment, essentially 
the same as the budget request. It includes approximately the same 
level of funding as last year for Coast Guard acquisition, although 
additional resources will be available to augment their appropriation 
through sales of Coast Guard airplanes and shore stations which are no 
longer needed.
  Two capital programs have been hit harder than others in this bill, 
and they are very good programs. These are airport grants and Amtrak.
  We provide $1.3 billion for airport grants, 4 percent below the 
administration's request and $150 million below the 1996 level.
  Likewise, Amtrak capital programs are funded at $200 million, a large 
reduction from $345 million provided for 1996. In addition to this 
appropriated level, Amtrak has just under half a billion dollars in the 
bank that it can use during the next year to fund such high priority 
items as electrification and procurement of high speed trainsets. This 
level of funding does not prejudice Amtrak from receiving consideration 
for funding in future appropriations bills.
  I know these reductions will cause some Members concern, and I agree 
that these are good and meritorious programs. If there is any way to 
raise the figures for Amtrak and airport grants as we go through the 
process without harming safety programs or other critical needs, I am 
open to those suggestions. We have to make the difficult cuts as well 
as the easy ones, and I know these are difficult.
  Finally, the bill is very clean of extraneous legislative provisions, 
and we have tried to work with the legislative committees to ensure 
their support for the bill. To my knowledge, the rule just adopted 
addresses the remaining concerns of the legislative committees. There 
are no major controversial policy changes in the bill. Therefore, I 
believe the bill can move forward without delay, and without undue 
controversy.
  Mr. Chairman, I believe this is an excellent and balanced bill that 
puts an emphasis on our highest responsibility--protecting and 
enhancing transportation safety. From a financial standpoint, it is the 
best we could do given the budgetary circumstances we are under. It was 
developed in a truly bipartisan fashion, and received little 
controversy or debate at either the subcommittee or full committee 
levels. I believe it deserves the support of this entire body, and I 
ask for its approval.
  Mr. Chairman, I include for the Record the following material:

[[Page H6966]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH26JN96.000



[[Page H6967]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH26JN96.001



[[Page H6968]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH26JN96.002



[[Page H6969]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH26JN96.003



[[Page H6970]]

  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. SABO asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the fiscal year 1997 
Transportation appropriations bill and ask unanimous consent to revise 
and extend my remarks.
  At the outset, I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Wolf] 
for working with me and other Members on several issues of particular 
interest to me and to other Members on this side of the aisle. He has 
been cooperative and fair. I also want to thank the staff--John Blazey, 
Rich Efford, Stephanie Gupta, Linda Muir, and Lori Beth Feld, for their 
assistance and hard work on this bill. Also Kristen Hoeschler, Cheryl 
Smith, and Christy Cockburn of the minority staff.

  I also want to note that the distinguished gentleman from Texas [Mr. 
Coleman] would ordinarily be managing this bill on our side of the 
aisle today. He could not be here due to his mother's poor health in 
Texas. But, we look forward to his return and his stewardship of this 
bill for the minority when we move to conference with the Senate.
  The fiscal year 1997 Transportation bill is within the 602(B) 
allocation for the subcommittee. It is also well below the amounts 
allocated to the Transportation bill in last year's conference report--
as a result, the funding choices were quite difficult, and several of 
the new initiatives advanced by the administration were not included in 
the bill. Nevertheless, in large measure, the bill provides adequate 
funding for basic transportation safety and infrastructure priorities.
  The bill provides $4.9 billion for FAA operations, including $30 
million in new FAA user fees, and $2.6 billion for Coast Guard 
operations. These amounts will fund essential safety operations at 
these agencies, although not all of the administration's requests were 
funded.
  The bill provides $17.55 billion for the Federal-Aid Highways 
Program, which will maintain the current level of funding for highway 
maintenance, repair, renovation, and construction. These funds will 
help ensure that we continue a minimum level of investment to maintain 
and improve the condition of our Nation's roads, highways and bridges.
  One innovative initiative of the administration to expand highway 
capacity and provide congestion relief through cost effective 
technology is the Intelligent Transportation Systems [ITS] Program. The 
ITS Program has matured from a high risk R&D initiative to the point 
where the program is ready to test the feasibility of integrating 
advanced technologies for traffic control and management systems in 
several cities across the country. I know first hand the potential of 
these ITS technologies for improving air quality, reducing congestion 
and conserving energy through the Guidestar Initiative that has been 
underway in Minnesota for several years.
  This bill provides $228 million in funding for ITS Initiatives. I 
would have liked a higher funding level, but I believe we are headed in 
the right direction. These technology investments certainly have the 
potential for significant payoffs in future years and deserve continued 
support.
  The bill provides $400 million in direct loans over 3 years for 
another important administration initiative--the Alameda rail corridor 
in California. This economic Development/Transportation Improvement 
Project has significant regional and national benefits.
  In the area of transit, the bill provides $2.05 billion for transit 
formula grants, including $400 million for transit operating 
subsidies--the same amounts as last year. Mr. Chairman, transit 
operating subsidies were slashed last year by $310 million or 44 
percent. As a result, many bus and rail operators have had to cut 
service and raise fares, and otherwise diminish services to the working 
poor, the elderly and others who depend on mass transit. I am pleased 
that this bill holds the line on additional mass transit reductions.
  The bill also includes $1.7 billion for discretionary bus, rail 
modernization, and transit new start grants--the same amount as 
provided in 1996. These funds will help localities replace old, energy 
inefficient buses and modernize transit systems throughout the country.
  The bill provides $1.3 billion in fiscal year 1997 funding for the 
Airport Improvements Grant Program--a $150 million cut or 10 percent 
reduction below this year's level. This funding level was the best we 
could do given the 602(b) allocation given the subcommittee. I believe 
that we will revisit this issue in conference with the Senate.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to briefly mention some concerns about several 
other provisions in the bill:
  The bill cuts essential air service by nearly 50 percent which will 
severely disadvantage the rural communities that depend on these 
subsidies.
  The bill hits AMTRAK very hard. In total, considering both capital 
and operating funds, AMTRAK takes one of the largest reductions in the 
bill--a cut of 28 percent. Funding for the northeast corridor--AMTRAK's 
most profitable service--is completely eliminated. Clearly, AMTRAK 
cannot sustain the severe reductions in this bill, and I expect that 
this issue will be revisited in conference.
  Mr. Chairman, I also do not agree with the committee's recommendation 
to deny $500,000 in funding for the Domestic Auto Content Labeling law. 
The American Automobile Labeling Act specifically requires the 
Department of Transportation to ensure that automobile manufacturers 
label new vehicles to display their domestic content. The U.S. Trade 
Representative is relying on the DOT to conduct periodic audits to 
monitor the compliance of Japan and other foreign governments with the 
1995 Trade Agreement on autos and auto parts.
  Under this agreement, Japanese automakers committed that they would 
increase their purchases of American automotive parts. However, without 
the baseline audits for which this bill denies funding, there will not 
be a mechanism for assessing whether these commitments are, in fact, 
met. The domestic content law will help promote jobs for U.S. workers, 
and provide consumers with information that will help them to buy 
American. The majority's decision to delete this funding was a bad 
decision, and should be reversed when we deal with this issue in 
conference with the Senate.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. 
Obey], the ranking member of the committee.
  (Mr. OBEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I also simply want to extend my appreciation 
to the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. Wolf], the chairman of the 
committee, for the manner in which he has proceeded to produce a bill 
which I think will meet a bipartisan test. I would also simply note the 
absence of the gentleman from Texas, [Mr. Coleman], who could not be 
here today due to an illness in his family in Texas, that this will be 
the last transportation bill that Mr. Coleman would be serving this 
House on in the capacity of ranking member. We appreciate the very 
effective work that he has done.
  I rise in support of this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, last year, the Transportation appropriations bill was 
one of the appropriations bills where we were able, for the most part, 
to bridge partisan differences and reach agreement on a bill that could 
be signed into law. I believe that we should be able to accomplish that 
same goal on the bill we consider today providing fiscal year 1997 
funding for priority transportation programs.
  I want to extend my appreciation to the gentleman from Virginia , 
[Mr. Wolf] for his efforts to work out reasonable compromises on the 
bill and to address transportation spending priorities under a 602(b) 
allocation that provides $650 million less in budget authority and $1.3 
billion less in outlays than was allocated to the conference version of 
the 1996 transportation appropriations bill last year.
  I also want to note the fine work of the gentleman from Texas, [Mr. 
Coleman,] on this bill. Unfortunately, Mr. Coleman could not be here 
today due to illness in his family in Texas. This bill will be the last 
transportation bill that Mr. Coleman will shepherd through this body as 
the ranking minority member of the transportation appropriations 
subcommittee. I know we will all miss the good humor and great ability 
with which he carries out his responsibilities.
  The bill has several positive elements which I want to note. I am 
pleased that the bill provides a stable funding level for the Federal-
Aid Highways program at $17.55 billion--the 1996 funding level. I would 
note that the conference agreement on the budget resolution which 
provided $4 billion more for nondefense discretionary spending over the 
House budget resolution allowed the subcommittee to receive an 
additional $325 million in outlays which helped to avoid a cut in 
funding for the highway program. I would have strongly supported an 
increased in highway funding to get closer to the full ISTEA 
authorization had additional funds been allocated to the subcommittee.
  The bill also provides funding for transit infrastructure and 
operating assistance to the current level of $2.0 billion, including 
$400 million for transit operating assistance. These funds are 
essential for the mobility of the elderly, the poor and disabled, and 
those in rural America, who are dependent on bus and mass 
transportation to work, shop and live.
  Mr. Chairman, at my initiative, the committee report on the bill 
requests the Federal Aviation Administration to review the safety

[[Page H6971]]

and airworthiness of the ATR-47 and ATR-72 aircraft to make certain 
that they are safe to fly in the conditions in which they are being 
flown. The ART 72 is the airplane involved in the 1994 tragic crash in 
Roselawn, Indiana which killed 68 people. The National Transportation 
Safety Board will be issuing its report next month on the causes of 
this accident. My language will help ensure that the FAA undertakes the 
necessary reviews so that we can be confident that the FAA has taken 
all steps possible to ensure the safety of those who travel aboard 
these airplanes.
  Mr. Chairman, these are some very positive aspects of the bill. I do, 
however, believe that the bill falls short in two areas about which I 
have some concerns.
  A small, but significant item in the bill relates to the deletion of 
$550,000 requested by the administration for the implementation of the 
domestic content labeling law. This law requires new passenger vehicles 
sold in the United States to be labeled to show their domestic content. 
Without these funds, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 
will be unable to conduct the necessary audits to evaluate industry 
compliance with the requirements of the law.
  The deletion of these funds amounts to a de facto repeal of a law 
that is needed to monitor the implementation of the June 28, 1995 
United States-Japan Agreement on Autos and Auto Parts. This agreement, 
its implementation and its enforcement is a central part of the 
administration's trade policy toward Japan and its plans for opening 
the Japanese market.
  For approximately 10 years, the United States government has been 
pressuring the Japanese automobile companies to increase their 
purchases from United States auto parts suppliers, particularly for 
those vehicles assembled in the United States. The domestic content 
labeling law provides the United States Government a recognized and 
credible methods for benchmarking the United States parts content of 
Japanese cars and light trucks. The $500,000 reduction in the bill in 
penny-wise, but pound foolish in terms of our ability to monitor and 
enforce this agreement to ensure that the Japanese live up to their 
commitments.
  Mr. Chairman, I also disagree with the $500,000 cut in funds 
requested by the FAA for the contract tower program. The reduction in 
the bill assumes additional savings will be realized if contract air 
traffic controllers are paid less than locally prevailing wages. The 
$500,000 in assumed saving will result in a real cut in the program, 
since the Department of Labor has already determined that there 
insufficient justification for the waiver assumed in the bill. I do not 
agree with the suggestion implicit in the bill that we should not pay 
these contract air traffic controllers a decent wage. I will also 
support the amendment by Mr. Collins relating to changing the age 60 
rule for commercial pilots.
  Mr. Chairman, the basic elements of this bill are sound. It contains 
several flaws that I believe we can correct as the bill moves through 
floor, Senate, and conference action. I urge the adoption of the bill.
  Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Foglietta].
  (Mr. FOGLIETTA asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. FOGLIETTA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the bill.
  Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, let me just reiterate and thank the gentleman from 
Minnesota [Mr. Sabo], and the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], and 
let me pay tribute to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Coleman], who is 
retiring. This is the last bill he will be handling on the floor. He 
cannot be here because of a very serious illness in the family.
  Let me just also thank the gentleman from Minnesota for mentioning 
the staff. I would like to include all of those staff names in my 
extension, because all of the ones that he mentioned have done an 
outstanding job, and quite frankly, without the very capable, very 
competent, bright bipartisan staff, it would have been impossible to do 
this. I take my hat off, and want the staff to know that I personally 
appreciate the good work they have done.
  Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 3675, the 
Transportation appropriations bill for fiscal year 1997. On a whole, 
Mr. Chairman, this is a good bill. Had we more money, it could have 
been a great bill; however, given our self-imposed national emergency 
and the tight budget constraints of the committee, Chairman Wolf and 
the members of the subcommittee crafted a fine product.
  I would like to thank the chairman for his efforts in crafting the 
legislation and for consulting with me in advance of the subcommittee 
markup. In addition, the chairman did not include any outrageous 
provisions which would invoke the opposition of the minority. These two 
events have enabled H.R. 3675 to be one of the least controversial 
appropriations bills.
  The 1997 Transportation bill considered today is within the revised 
602b allocation for the Transportation Subcommittee. I might note that 
the bill is $650 million in new budget authority below last year's 
conference level for the 1996 bill. Obviously, this year's allocation 
is not enough to keep up with the pace of inflation nor to fund cost of 
living increases, much less to fund the needed increases in 
infrastructure investment without making substantial decreases 
elsewhere. The chairman worked hard to guarantee that safety would not 
be impacted by the constraints of the budget.
  While this is a good bill, there are provisions of concern to the 
minority and to the administration. They include Amtrak's capital 
account; the operating accounts of the Federal Aviation Administration 
[FAA] and the Coast Guard; funding for domestic auto content labeling; 
and wage determination for level one air traffic control towers.


                                 Amtrak

  I know many members of the majority join the administration and the 
minority in their concerns over the deep cuts in Amtrak's capital 
account. By cutting this account, it is my belief that we endanger the 
progress Amtrak in making in streamlining its operations. While Amtrak 
has made progress in reducing its operating grant needs, it must 
continue to invest in its infrastructure to attain the operating 
efficiencies necessary to provide the level of service required to 
attract passengers and revenue.


                             FAA Operations

  The subcommittee was unable to fully fund the administration's 
request for FAA and Coast Guard operations accounts.
  Within the FAA operations account, the administration is particularly 
concerned about the reduction in staff offices and the National 
Airspace System [NAS] hand-off. The amount provided for stafrf offices 
in the bill is $1.2 million less than in fiscal year 1996 and, $2 
million less than requested. The FAA has indicated that if it does not 
have $1.2 million of this amount restored, it will have to lay off 70 
workers.
  By not fully funding the President's budget request for the National 
Airspace system hand-off, the subcommittee is effectively mandating 
that new equipment not be installed at several facilities and instead 
be warehoused.


                         Coast Guard Operations

  With respect to the Coast Guard, the Commandant has taken enormous 
strides to streamline its operations. While the committee provided a 
portion of the additional funds requested, it stopped far short of 
providing the majority of these funds. In addition, the priorities were 
shifted so that the funding does not mirror the Coast Guard's request. 
To quote the Secretary of Transportation, ``[t]he subcommittee's 
reductions are inconsistent with the concept of a streamlined Coast 
Guard and will have a direct adverse impact on the maintenance and 
operational activity at front line Coast Guard units.'' The Secretary 
continues by noting that the reduced investment in Coast Guard assets 
will exacerbate efforts to reduce operating costs in the long run.


                     Domestic Auto Content Labeling

  The minority continues to be concerned about the decision not to 
provide funding to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 
[NHTSA] for domestic auto content labeling. The American Automobile 
Labeling Act specifically requires the Department of Transportation to 
promulgate regulations and to implement the law.
  The U.S. Trade Representative is relying on NHTSA's work to serve as 
the baseline for monitoring compliance of the United States-Japan auto 
trade agreement that was negotiated in 1995. Under this agreement, 
Japanese automakers committed that they would increase their purchases 
of American-built automotive parts. However, without the work of NHTSA, 
there will not be a mechanism for assessing the levels of U.S. content 
in Japanese motor vehicles. Ensuring compliance with this trade 
agreement would promote jobs for U.S. workers.
  Not funding this initiative will have ramifications beyond the 
enforcement of the American Automobile Labeling Act, and I hope that we 
can work together to amicably resolve this issue.


                           Wage Determination

  My final concern has to do with wage determination for level one air 
traffic control towers. On May 4, 1994, the FAA signed a memorandum of 
understanding with the National Air Traffic Controllers Association 
which ensure that no level one air traffic controller will lose

[[Page H6972]]

his or her job as a result of the contracting-out program. The MOU 
provides that affected level one controllers will have the opportunity 
to receive additional training and be reassigned to a higher level 
tower or be guaranteed the right of first refusal to work for the 
private contractor at the equivalent of the Government wage.
  The subcommittee assumes that the Department of Labor will issue 
waivers to the FAA so that contractors can keep the costs down by 
paying controllers at these smaller towers less than the prevailing 
wage. It is not within the purview of this subcommittee to direct the 
actions of the Department of labor. It is not at all clear that these 
savings can be realized. The minority supports reasonable compensation 
for a day's work and disagrees with the policy implications this cut 
entails.
  I would like to note that there are several positive aspects of this 
bill. Although the subcommittee was unable to fund the Airport 
Improvement Program at last year's level, we were able to maintain 
funding for both the highway trust fund and transit operating 
assistance at last year's level. This bill emphasizes safety by 
providing an additional 100 airline operations inspectors, 54 new air 
worthiness inspectors, as well as increased funding of the Boat Safety 
Grants Program and highway safety programs, such as safety belt and 
helmet use grants.
  I would also like to commend the chairman for not earmarking any 
highway demonstration projects. The chairman made a decision to refrain 
from earmarking and has been steadfast in adhering to that decision 
regardless of pressure he may have received from both sides of the 
aisle.
  In closing, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the subcommittee 
staff for their efforts in crafting this legislation, I would 
especially like to thank Cheryl Smith and Christy Cockburn for their 
hard work.
  Overall, this is a decent bill, Mr. Chairman, and I commend it to my 
colleagues for their favorable consideration. I look forward to working 
with the Chairman to address each of these concerns prior to sending 
the final legislation to the President.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this important 
legislation, which appropriates the funds to help build the Nation's 
highways and other modes of transportation.
  I commend Chairman Wolf for his hard work on this legislation.
  Transportation carries not only the people of the world, but also the 
ideas of the world. Better roadways, safer bridges, smarter highways, 
all contribute to a better world.
  I am not an expert in bridge building but I know that we must build 
bridges with the next generation. That means providing them with the 
material to construct a better life for their children.
  A balanced budget is one of those materials we will pass on to the 
next generation. And I commend the chairman for making this legislation 
fiscally responsible.
  Better roadways are another material we will pass on to our children, 
and this legislation makes the necessary improvements to our Nation's 
transportation systems to keep us competitive into the next century.
  In my hometown of Houston, this legislation increases funding for 
Intelligent Transportation Systems. These state-of-the-art systems pave 
the way for the even smarter, more effective transportation systems of 
tomorrow. Already, ITS has proved to be an integral part of Houston's 
mobility, and will only contribute in greater ways to the ability to 
move goods and people in an efficient manner using existing 
infrastructure.
  This bill also contains funding for other forward-looking 
transportation systems, including the Advanced Technology Transit Bus 
and Houston Metro. I am especially proud of Houston Metro for being one 
of the most effective and cost-efficient transit systems in the Nation.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for this legislation and keep America on 
the cutting edge of transportation technology.
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the 
Appropriations Committee for the Yeoman's job of meeting the numerous 
funding requests in this tough fiscal environment. Many of us take for 
granted and do not recognize the arduous task the Committee faces each 
time they are asked to balance fiscal responsibility with economic 
development.
  I would also like to thank the chairman and the members of the 
committee for having the vision to provide the funding for the Alameda 
Corridor, to support the $400 million in direct loans, as requested by 
the President through the Federal Highway Administration.
  The Alameda Corridor will provide this country with a fast and 
efficient gateway to Pacific Rim trade and will bolster our ability to 
compete in the burgeoning economic area. Once completed the Alameda 
Corridor will generate more than 70,000 local jobs and close to 200,000 
new jobs nationwide. The expanded trade, created by the construction of 
the corridor, through the ports, will create new jobs related to 
manufacturing, production, and the shipping and trucking of goods.
  Today's funding environment requires a strong public-private 
partnership to finance projects of this nature. With over 75 percent of 
the cost of the project funded by State and local sources, the Alameda 
Corridor truly exemplifies the kind of public-private partnership that 
this Congress has long urged States and localities to pursue for 
important infrastructure projects.
  I would like to thank the members of the California delegation for 
working together in bipartisan manner to effectively move the project 
through this body and to bring to fruition plans and blueprints that 
were conceived long before many of us were sworn into office. Let 
history reflect that the success of the Alameda Corridor is rooted in 
the bipartisanship that has helped to bring us to this point. I look 
forward to continuing to work with my colleagues from both parties and 
with President Clinton to see the Alameda Corridor through to its 
completion.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Chairman. I rise in strong support of H.R. 3675. I 
would like to thank Chairman Wolf and Ranking Member Coleman for their 
assistance in eliminating an environmental and safety hazard posed by 
abandoned barges in my district. I appreciate all the help both the 
majority and minority staff provided in addressing this issue. I would 
also like to thank city of Baytown Mayor Alfaro, Harris County 
Commissioner Jim Fonteno, Texas State Representative Fred Bosse, the 
San Jacinto River Association, and the Banana Bend Civic Association 
for bringing this longstanding problem to my attention.
  Mr. Chairman, this legislation provides funding for removing barges 
abandoned in the San Jacinto River and the Houston Ship Channel. Last 
February I asked the Coast Guard to develop a plan for the disposal of 
the barges under the authority of the Barge Removal Act. This Federal 
law, passed in Congress in 1992, grants power to the Coast Guard to 
remove any abandoned barge after attempts to identify the owner have 
been exhausted. I believe that these environmental and navigational 
hazards have to be removed immediately under this provision to prevent 
further damage to life and property.
  Again Mr. Chairman, I offer my strong support for this legislation 
and urge its immediate passage.
  Mr. FAZIO of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 
3675, the transportation appropriations bill for fiscal year 1997. I 
would like to thank the chairman, Mr. Wolf, for shepherding this bill 
through the Appropriations Committee with little or no controversy. I 
would also like to take this opportunity to say that it has been an 
honor and a privilege to serve with Ron Coleman who is leaving this 
body at the end of this Congress. Ron epitomizes the best 
characteristics of public service and his leadership will be missed by 
us all.
  While this bill is imperfect, I think that the chairman has done a 
good job at balancing the diverse transportation needs of this country. 
I am particularly pleased that the committee has recognized the need to 
upgrade airline safety by funding additional positions at the FAA.
  I am also pleased that the committee has included two projects that 
are very important to the transportation needs of my district.


                      Bus Acquisition--Yolo County

  Last year the Yolo County Transit Authority [YCTA] was able to 
replace six of its aging and heavily polluting diesel-fueled buses with 
fully equipped compressed natural gas buses. Because the six buses 
approved by the committee last year constituted a little less than half 
of the county's total request, I am pleased that the committee has 
supported my request to fund the remaining buses.
  Yolo County is part of the Sacramento nonattainment air basin and 
would face serious sanctions if aggressive efforts are not taken to 
reduce emissions. Compressed natural gas buses have made a significant 
impact on the air quality in Yolo County. YCTA already operates four 
compressed natural gas buses and has seen its emissions reduced by over 
50,000 pounds due to the operation of these buses.


                          South-Line Extension

  Also included in this legislation is $6 million for final design of 
an extension of Sacramento's light rail system. The extension will run 
southward from the existing rail hub in the downtown business district, 
toward two community colleges, two hospitals, several major employment 
centers and redeveloping areas, and many of the region's most 
disadvantaged neighborhoods. These areas comprise the most transit 
dependent sections of Sacramento, where no light rail service is 
available today.
  In closing, Mr. Speaker, I want to express my thanks to the committee 
for their fine work and urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I would like to note that this bill does 
not contain any earmarking of funds for high-priority highway

[[Page H6973]]

projects, often referred to as demonstration projects.
  The reason I make note of this particular fact is that whenever funds 
are earmarked for highway projects, some in the media, and some in this 
body, call it pork barrel.
  In fact, the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee, my good 
friend, advised Members earlier this year not to even bother testifying 
before his subcommittee on highway project requests.
  Yet, to be sure, as it turns out there are numerous earmarks for 
other types of transportation projects.
  For example, the bill earmarks over $724 million for 39 transit new 
start projects.
  The report accompanying this bill earmarks $333 million for 87 bus 
projects under what is supposed to be a discretionary program.
  In addition, the report directs $36.2 million to 16 specific 
intelligent transportation system projects.
  I could go on and on.
  My colleagues, those earmarks alone amount to almost $1.2 billion 
being directed by this bill toward specific projects.
  $1.2 billion.
  Ah, but not a one of them a so-called highway demonstration project.
  For some reason that I have been unable to understand, the pork 
barrel label is only applied by the media and some in this body to the 
earmarking of funds for highway projects.
  Meanwhile, the earmarking of funds for transit and ITS projects is 
met with mute silence.
  Now, to be clear, I had no project requests before the subcommittee.
  I was not seeking highway project earmarks, or for that matter, 
transit or ITS project earmarks.
  And, I see nothing wrong with the Congress exercising its judgment 
and directing funds to a specific transportation project. These are, 
after all Federal funds and not State or local moneys.
  However, I do want to illustrate the dual standard that is now being 
applied.
  I want to point this out because we are now operating under this dual 
standard.
  You can go to the Appropriations Committee to get an earmark of funds 
for a transit project, that serves a locality, but you cannot go to the 
Appropriations Committee for funding for a highway of an interstate 
nature that needs an extra boost to be completed.
  You can go to the Appropriations Committee to get an earmark of funds 
for a bus station in some small town, but not for a four-lane highway 
that crosses State lines.
  Mr. Chairman, this dual standard simply makes no sense.
  And, as we all know, dual standards are never fair.
  Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
LaHood) having assumed the chair, Mr. Bereuter, Chairman of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that 
that Committee having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 3675) 
making appropriations for the Department of Transportation and related 
agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1997, and for other 
purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________