[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 116 (Thursday, August 1, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9448-S9449]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION APPROPRIATIONS BILL

 Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, last night I voted against the 
Department of Transportation appropriations bill. I would like to take 
a minute of the Senate's time to explain my reasons for my vote. I had 
intended to give the following remarks on the Senate floor last night. 
However, due to the late hour, I chose not to keep the Senate any 
longer than necessary and instead therefore ask unanimous consent that 
my statement appear in the Record at this time.
  First, Mr. President, let me commend the chairman and the ranking 
member of the subcommittee for all their hard work on this important 
bill. Their diligence in bringing this bill up and passing it so 
quickly is ample evidence of their abilities.
  I wish I were able to state that I could support their bill--
unfortunately, I am not. As with other appropriations bills which I 
have voted against, I believe that we must begin to stop the practice 
of earmarking funds. Earmarking is not fair and disproportionately 
effects where the taxpayer's money is being spent.
  For example, Mr. President, the discretionary grants account of the 
highway trust fund earmarks hundreds of millions of dollars for fixed 
quideway systems. The bill goes on to list where the money should be 
spent. To no one's surprise, the motherload of the funds goes to States 
represented by appropriators.
  I am also very concerned that the proviso noting that funds are 
available for fixed guideway modernization notes that such funds will 
be available notwithstanding any provision of law. This language was 
added as a Senate amendment. I would inquire why the Senate felt this 
proviso was necessary?
  I would hope that there was no intention here to insulate items from 
the line item veto or any other budget cutting tools. I would hope the 
managers of the bill assure me that such a result was not their 
intention.
  Mr. President, I want to return to the subject of developing a system 
to determine national priorities. I have discussed this issue before 
and would like to return to it now. In the area of military 
construction, Senator Glenn and I have worked with the Department of 
Defense to develop a system where the Pentagon prioritizes their 
construction needs.
  At the insistence of my good friends, Senator Shelby, the courts have 
done the same. I want to point out that until Senator Shelby took over 
the Treasury-Postal Subcommittee, courthouse construction in the 
country was based on no rational plan and hundreds of millions of 
dollars were wasted. Thanks to Senator Shelby, the courts--against 
their will--now prioritize which courthourses should be built. This 
enables the Congress to spend the taxpayer's money in a more 
responsible manner.
  I would hope we could institute a similar process for the Department 
of Transportation and the many projects and other earmarks funded by 
this bill.
  Mr. President, such a system not only gives Members of Congress the 
information needed to make better

[[Page S9449]]

choices about how to spend appropriated dollars, but will hopefully 
take some of the politics out of the spending process. I hope we will 
move in this direction in the future.
  Again, although I intend to vote against this bill, I want to thank 
the bill's managers, especially the chairman of the subcommittee, 
Senator Hatfield.

                          ____________________