[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 141 (Thursday, October 3, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12232-S12239]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           REVENUE DIVERSION

  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I want to bring to my colleagues attention a 
very grave situation involving the illegal diversion of revenues at Los 
Angeles International Airport. As I understand it, the Mayor of Los 
Angeles transferred $31 million from the airport treasury to city 
coffers last week. Senator McCain and I have worked together on 
legislation to prevent illegal revenue diversion. During our 
deliberations, we were very aware of the City of Los Angeles' efforts. 
I want to make clear that the action taken last week is clearly 
illegal. The amount paid is apparently based on an age-old dispute over 
how much the airport owes the city. I understand that the debt has 
already been repaid to the city once.
  The Secretary of Transportation must recognize that he has the tools 
to enforce the law against illegal revenue diversion. First, he has the 
power to withhold grants for other, nonaviation purposes. The Federal 
Aviation Reauthorization Act contains even broader discretion for the 
Secretary and I urge him to send the message, loud and clear, that 
revenue diversion will not be tolerated. Under our bill, the Secretary 
may withhold grants and apportionments from any airport sponsor, or any 
multimodal transportation agency to which the sponsor is a member, if 
the sponsor diverts revenue illegally off of the airport. Furthermore, 
the Secretary is empowered to redeposit that money with the airport. 
The Secretary should exercise this authority and restore the money to 
LAX so that the important safety and security work needed on the 
airport can move forward.
  Finally, I want to state that H.R. 3539 contains a pilot program for 
five airports. It would allow the Secretary to approve a long-term 
lease, which would include permitting revenue diversion. The conferees 
were very concerned about the ability to divert revenues under a 
privatization scheme. However, Los Angeles was the real concern. As a 
result, we limited the number and type of airports eligible for the 
pilot program. The Secretary should be aware that a large airport that 
continually frustrated the clear intent of Congress would clearly not 
meet the criteria for privatization contained in H.R. 3539.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I want to express my support for the 
conference report before the Senate which will help improve the safety 
and security of air travel in this country. I wish to commend Senator 
Pressler, Chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee and Senator McCain, 
Chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee for their diligent work in 
bringing this bill to completion prior to the adjournment of the 104th 
Congress.
  In the past 5 months, the Federal Aviation Administration [FAA] has 
come under intense scrutiny. After ValuJet flight 592 was swallowed by 
the silt and tall grass of the Everglades in May, the issue of FAA's 
ability to ensure the safety of the traveling public was brought into 
question. On July 17, the explosion of TWA flight 800 minutes after 
leaving New York's Kennedy Airport heightened public concern over not 
only the safety of our airplanes but the security of our airports as 
well.
  This conference report cannot answer all of the questions surrounding 
these two devastating tragedies, but it does give the FAA the guidance 
and many of the tools it needs to regain the public's trust. And it 
reaffirms the commitment of the Congress to end that status quo at the 
agency.
  First and foremost this bill will once and for all eliminate the 
question of the FAA's mission. On June 18, the Secretary of 
Transportation, Federico Pena, called on Congress to ``* * *change the 
FAA charter to give it a single primary mission: safety and only 
safety.'' By removing the ``dual and dueling missions'' of safety and 
air carrier promotion, both the FAA and the public will know that 
safety is the sole mission of the agency. I introduced S. 1960 earlier 
this year with Chairman Pressler to carry out the Secretary's request, 
and the Senate-passed version of this bill included provisions I 
authored that established a process for elimination of the mandate. I 
am pleased that the conference report will lay this issue to rest, once 
and for all by allowing the FAA to focus solely and deliberately on 
assuring the safety of air travel.
  Another important aspect of this bill addresses an area that has been 
tragically overlooked--the needs of the families of crash victims. The 
loss of a loved one in any accident is devastating. But this loss 
should not be compounded by the careless treatment of their family, and 
we have all heard heartbreaking stories of family members who learned 
of the death of their loved one from CNN because the airline could not 
or would not verify that they were on the plane. I believe that we can 
and must change the way families of plane crashes are treated. This 
bill will take some very important steps--such as requiring airlines to 
have a disaster plan in place, putting the National Transportation 
Safety Board [NTSB] in charge of overseeing family advocacy and 
requiring that airlines have adequate toll-free phone lines available 
for families in order to ensure they can get through when emergencies 
occur. We still need to do more, but these provisions are a necessary 
first step.
  Regardless of the outcome of the investigation into the causes of the 
crash of TWA flight 800, the fact that it could have been downed by a 
bomb shocked us all. The conference report returns our attention to the 
need to address the serious issue of security at our airports. Again, 
it is only a first step, and the 105th Congress will be tasked with 
following through on the guidelines we have laid down in this bill, as 
there is much that needs to be done and many questions the FAA still 
has to answer about why we do not have one explosive detection device 
ready for installation at our airports--despite the provisions of the 
1990 Aviation Security Improvement Act which required their 
installation by 1993.
  Mr. President, I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting 
passage of the FAA reauthorization conference report.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, the Senate Commerce Committee and its 
Aviation Subcommittee have worked hard to put together the Federal 
Aviation Authorization bill. The conference report on H.R. 3539 
represents a fair compromise on many issues. My colleagues, Senator 
McCain and Senator

[[Page S12233]]

Ford, have spent a lot of time and effort to develop the legislation. 
It is a complex bill that seeks to provide a future foundation for the 
Federal Aviation Administration [FAA], for air service to small 
communities, and for our Nation's airports. The bill addresses the 
fundamental needs to the national air travel system. Passengers must be 
sure that safety is the FAA's primary mission, that security measures 
are improved, that we have enough safety inspectors with the tools to 
do their job, and that our Nation's airports have the money to remain 
safe. This bill does that. The bill also establishes a series of task 
forces to determine the best way to fund the agency.
  Key provisions in the bill will make the FAA a more autonomous 
agency--with the ability to make its own decisions concerning 
regulations, personnel, and procurement. The bill changes the funding 
formulas for the Airport Improvement Program, providing more money for 
those airports most in need of Federal help. The beneficiaries, mainly 
smaller airports, will receive higher entitlements. In South Carolina, 
some airport projects are underway and need funding to continue. Other 
worthy projects in my State cannot begin without money from the Airport 
Improvement Program. Security, a critical issue, also is addressed. The 
bill for example, requires that security screening companies be 
certified by the FAA. The bill will facilitate the installation of 
explosive detection equipment.
  There is one section in the bill on privatization that the conferees 
spent a good deal of time discussing. The provision continues to 
trouble me. Under the legislation, an airport can be privatized and 
still receive a Federal grant. If the private sector believes it can 
suddenly revitalize airports with claims of new money, why does the 
Federal Government have to provide corporate welfare? The Federal 
Government has a clear interest in our Nation's airports. We have 
helped design them, have provided all sorts of equipment to make them 
safe, and have funded them. The U.S. Government and U.S. taxpayers have 
an investment in them. The provision that allows airport privatization 
permits airports to be turned over to a private company. The Federal 
Government does not get a dime back, while a private company can make a 
profit partly from the Federal investment. This is wrong.
  H.R. 3539 incorporates much of the text of S. 1994, the FAA reform 
bill, reported by the Commerce Committee last June. Those provisions 
call for an independent review of the precise needs of the FAA, 
followed by the submission of a funding proposal to finance the agency. 
We know that the Federal budget will continue to be cut, but some 
programs must be funded--like the FAA. The financing reform sought by 
the bill will help us figure out a better way to provide needed 
funding--whether it is by placing it off budget, by fees, or by taxes. 
The goal is to make sure money collected from passengers on air 
carriers goes to the FAA.


                           Aviation Security

  Aviation security is an extremely complex issue. It involves 
technology, personnel, intelligence information, national security, and 
a recognition that there are people willing to commit heinous crimes 
aimed at our Government and our citizens. The bill provides for a 
safety commission. I want to make clear that the commission is intended 
to complete the work of the Vice President's task force.
  Investigators in New York have not yet identified the cause of the 
crash of TWA flight 800, and numerous options are being considered. We 
have to let the investigators complete their mission. The National 
Transportation Safety Board, the Navy, the FBI, and State and local 
personnel are working hard to determine the cause of the accident. We 
do know this, however--the public deserves the best technology operated 
by the best trained individuals, to reduce the risks of a terrorist 
attack.
  Another thing is clear--security is going to be costly. The FAA has 
estimated that it will cost as much as $2.2 billion to install up to 
1,800 machines at 75 airports. Today, there are approximately 14,000-
18,000 screeners, paid an average of $10,000 to $15,000 per year. These 
screeners are one line of defense, but a critical one in the fight 
against terrorism. They need training, and they need to be paid in 
accordance with their responsibilities. The present turnover rate among 
these employees is extremely high. Unless we change the way we provide 
security, we cannot upgrade it. All the technology in the world still 
requires a person to watch a screen, listen to alarms, and be able to 
recognize materials that should not go on board an aircraft.
  No matter what we do, safety comes first. Nothing should go onto an 
aircraft without being screened. Cargo, company material, and baggage 
all should be subject to inspection.
  Security changes may require a fundamental alteration in the way air 
carriers provide services. Longer lines can be expected. Unfortunately, 
it is a price we must pay to deal with people in this world willing to 
stop at nothing.
  Mr. President, let me thank our Commerce Committee Democratic staff--
Sam Whitehorn, Clyde Hart, Jim Drewry, Kevin Curtin, Becky K. and 
Sylvia Cikins for all their hard work in the resolution of these 
issues.
  I urge my colleagues to adopt the conference report.
  Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, I do not wish to delay adjournment of the 
Senate nor hold up passage of the Federal Aviation Administration [FAA] 
authorization bill. Absent the provision we have been discussing these 
past few days, the FAA bill could pass the Senate with near unanimous, 
if not unanimous, support. However, I cannot acquiesce in this ploy to 
circumvent normal Senate procedure, and thus will vote against cloture 
at this time. There have been no hearings on the so-called express 
carrier provision. Until it was presented to us as a non-germane 
provision in an unamendable conference report, it was never debated on 
the floor of the Senate. The provision was not included in either the 
House or the Senate version of the FAA authorization bill, nor had it 
been approved as part of any other legislation passed by the House or 
the Senate. Hence I believe it was most irregular for the conference 
committee to even have taken up this issue, much less to have inserted 
it into this conference report.
  If the debate on the Senate floor these past few days has told us 
anything, it has told us quite clearly that this rider is anything but 
a noncontroversial technical issue. Hearings should be held, the 
ramifications of this change in the law should be fully explored, 
interested parties should be given an opportunity to express their 
views, and Members of Congress should be able to offer amendments.
  Mr. President, it is my understanding that there has been no 
designated express carrier operating for some 20 years and that Federal 
Express was not when the ICC existed, and is not now, an express 
carrier. Hence the action of the Congress in deleting this obsolete 
designation, in the course of terminating the Interstate Commerce 
Commission, last year still seems entirely appropriate. If there is a 
case to be made for the resurrection of this outdated designation, then 
let us see a separate piece of legislation, let us see some hearings, 
let the normal legislative process make the case for why the change is 
needed. The very process by which this matter is finally presented to 
the Senate--in a conference report at the very end of the session--
makes me suspect that the issue deserves a much closer look than we are 
able to give it in this setting.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I would like to thank Senator Ford, the 
ranking member of the Commerce Subcommittee on Aviation, and Senator 
McCain, the chairman of that committee, for all the time and effort 
that they have put into the FAA reauthorization bill. The fact that the 
Senate unanimously approved the bill last month is a testament to their 
ability to work together with the common goal of improving the safety 
and security of our air transportation system.
  Like many of my colleagues, I question whether the Federal Express 
provision should be included in the FAA reauthorization bill. I think 
this controversial issue merits further consideration at another time. 
When the 105th Congress convenes next year, I am hopeful that the 
Senate Labor Committee will hold hearings on this matter.
  But the facts are these: We cannot remove this provision without 
killing

[[Page S12234]]

the FAA reauthorization bill. We must pass this bill before we adjourn 
for the year. And the FAA's ability to enhance safety and security at 
our Nation's airports is contingent upon enactment of this important 
legislation.
  The House has already passed the conference report to the FAA 
reauthorization bill as well as the omnibus appropriations bill. For 
all practical purposes, the other Chamber has closed its doors for the 
remainder of the year. There should be no misunderstanding. Our House 
colleagues have no intention of returning to Washington to consider 
additional legislation. Any change that we make to the FAA 
reauthorization bill at this point would most certainly require 
unanimous consent in the House. Needless to say, convincing the House 
to give unanimous consent to amending the conference report to the FAA 
reauthorization bill is simply not possible.
  Whether we agree with the Federal Express provision or not, we must 
pass the conference report to the FAA reauthorization bill. At the 
latest, the Senate should have been passed this legislation on Monday, 
and we cannot delay passage of this bill any longer.
  Our colleagues on the Senate Commerce Committee have worked for more 
than 2 years on this bill. The committee cannot and should not be 
forced to start that process all over again in a new Congress. We must 
finish our work today and provide the FAA with the tools it needs to 
improve the safety and security of our air transportation system.
  The FAA reauthorization bill includes several safety provisions that 
should have been authorized earlier this week. Among those, the bill 
authorizes $2.28 billion in fiscal year 1997 and $2.3 billion in fiscal 
year 1998 for the Airport Improvement Program. As my colleagues well 
know, this critical funding allows airports throughout the country to 
make much-needed safety improvements. Without authorization, however, 
construction on these important projects will remain idle.
  The bill also allows the FAA to respond directly and more promptly to 
safety problems without needless bureaucratic delay or second-guessing. 
The bill also establishes a framework for airlines to obtain background 
information on a pilot's previous employer. The National Transportation 
Safety Board recommended these background checks as a result of a 
number of airplane accidents that were caused in part by pilots with 
poor performance records. Again, without authorization, these important 
safety provisions will not be implemented.
  The FAA reauthorization bill also includes a number of important 
security provisions proposed by the Senate Commerce Committee, Vice 
President Al Gore's commission on aviation safety, and many other 
Members of the Senate. For instance, the bill gives the FAA the 
authority to permit criminal background checks on baggage screeners at 
our Nation's airports.
  The bill also gives the FAA the authority to facilitate the interim 
deployment of advance aviation security technology including explosives 
detection equipment. And the legislation calls for an evaluation by the 
National Academy of Sciences on explosives detection and aircraft 
hardening technology. Furthermore, the bill would authorize the FAA to 
conduct vulnerability assessments of individual airports and permit 
airlines to conduct improved passenger profiling. Again, without 
authorization, these critical security measures will not be 
implemented.
  Mr. President, this bill also includes several provisions that are 
particularly important to rural America. Perhaps most importantly, the 
bill authorizes the FAA to tax foreign airlines that fly over the 
United States and designates half of that revenue, estimated at $100 
million annually for the Essential Air Service [EAS] program. EAS is 
crucial to the economic stability of small communities in South Dakota 
and across the country. Unfortunately, EAS funding has been reduced in 
recent years, and service to EAS recipients has suffered accordingly. 
Enactment of the overflight tax will provide a much-needed new funding 
mechanism for the EAS program.
  The bill also requires the Secretary of Transportation to conduct a 
study of fares charged by commercial air carriers traveling into non-
hub airports in small communities. This study is critical to 
determining whether passengers in rural areas pay a disproportionately 
greater price for air service than passengers who fly between urban 
areas. Like my colleague, Senator Dorgan, I believe they do, and I look 
forward to the results of that study so we can focus on ways to improve 
airline service to rural communities. Again, without authorization, 
neither the EAS provision or the rural air fare study will move 
forward.
  Mr. President, the bottom line is that we must pass the conference 
report to the FAA reauthorization bill. Whether we agree with the 
Federal Express provision or not, we must pass this important bill 
today. We cannot wait any longer. We must pass this bill so that the 
FAA has the ability to enhance safety and security at our nation's 
airports. We must pass this bill to ensure that rural America receives 
the kind of air service it rightfully deserves. I urge my colleagues to 
support the passage of the conference report on the FAA reauthorization 
bill.
  Mr. KERRY. H.R. 3539, the FAA Reauthorization conference agreement, 
is, primarily, a good bill--a very good bill--and one whose contents 
are of great importance to the people of this country. Several Senators 
including Senator Hollings, Senator Pressler, Senator Ford, and Senator 
McCain have worked for many months to craft this important legislation. 
They deserve great credit for shepherding the bill through the Commerce 
Committee and then obtaining passage with a vote of 99-0 on the Senate 
floor. These Senators and their fine staffs--specifically, I would like 
to recognize the work of Sam Whitehorn on the minority side--produced a 
non-controversial, sensible bill that addresses a critical need of our 
Nation.
  We need to pass an FAA Reauthorization bill because of the pivotal 
role that the FAA plays in our Nation's transportation infrastructure. 
We ask the FAA each year to ensure the safety of all civil aviation and 
to oversee the continued development of our national system of 
airports. Through a comprehensive program that includes a vast air 
traffic control network, and thousands of maintenance inspections of 
our Nation's civilian airlines, the FAA carries out the important task 
of ensuring the safety of the millions of Americans that utilize air 
travel each year. Significantly, this conference agreement provides to 
the FAA the necessary tools to carry out these important tasks. It 
provides $9.54 billion in total budget authority for the FAA for fiscal 
year 1997 including $5.16 billion for operations, $2.28 billion for the 
Airport Improvement Program, and $2.1 billion for facilities and 
equipment. This total figure represents an increase of $1.39 billion 
over the FAA's total budget authority for fiscal year 1996 and an 
increase of $1.33 billion over the administration's budget request.
  In addition, Massachusetts needs Congress to pass an FAA 
reauthorization bill because we rely so heavily on air transport for 
both people and cargo and because the Airport Improvement Program is so 
crucial to our State. From Logan Airport in Boston to the smaller 
airports located in Nantucket, Hyannis, Martha's Vineyard, Worcester, 
New Bedford and Provincetown, airports and air transport are critical 
to the economic and social travel needs of the people of Massachusetts. 
This legislation is good for the people of Massachusetts. It contains 
additional AIP funding for Massachusetts airports in fiscal year 1997 
beyond the amounts these airports are entitled to receive under current 
law. And it also increases the amount of discretionary funding that the 
State of Massachusetts can distribute to airports and related projects.
  This conference agreement also contains an important provision to 
improve the security of our Nation's airports that will result in 
greater safety for commercial flights originating at U.S. airports. I 
have been pushing the FAA for several years to begin to use existing 
advanced technologies, far more capable than x rays and metal 
detectors, to screen passenger baggage for explosives before it is 
placed on aircraft. The conference agreement instructs the FAA to move 
forward in this respect. Rather than awaiting the advent of a new 
sensor technology that can meet all desired sensor standards perfectly 
or nearly perfectly, the FAA is instructed to procure and implement

[[Page S12235]]

use of the best currently available technology--which is the approach 
taken by virtually all major European airports. There is simply no 
reason of which I am aware for the United States not to take this 
important step.

  Unfortunately, this important legislation, which is strongly 
supported by Senator Kennedy, Senator Simon, Senator Feingold, and all 
others in this Chamber, became mired in a dispute over a four-line 
provision--tacked on to the bill in conference--that is unrelated to 
the otherwise important and bipartisan task of reauthorizing the FAA. 
This provision amends the Railway Labor Act to make it substantially 
more difficult for certain Federal Express employees to organize. I do 
not support this provision which amends labor law in a controversial 
way on a bill that is totally unrelated to labor law, and, because of 
the addition of that provision, I voted against the cloture motion to 
end debate on the FAA conference agreement. I hoped the Senate would 
reject cloture, confident that if cloture was not invoked, this FAA 
legislation would have been brought back to the floor without the 
controversial provision, and passed by unanimous consent. That is what 
I believe the Senate should have done.
  Now that cloture has been invoked, and another effort to remove the 
provision because it was outside the scope of the conference committee 
was rejected by the Senate, we confront the great importance of passing 
an FAA reauthorization bill before this Congress adjourns. Once again, 
I compliment those who led the Senate in assembling the aviation 
provisions of this bill. It is a good bill that will contribute much to 
our Nation. I will vote for it.
  Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of passage of 
the conference report to H.R. 3539, Federal Aviation Authorization Act 
of 1996. This conference report contains provisions crucial for the 
safe and efficient operation of our Nation's airports. This 
authorization will enable vital funds to be allocated to our airports 
under the Airport Improvement Program for the construction of necessary 
runways and taxiways, installation of navigational aids, and 
acquisition of land for noise abatement measures. The bill also permits 
funds to be used for essential enhancements of airport facilities and 
equipment, and supports substantial Federal Administration [FAA] 
operations.
  Mr. President, in addition to these authorizations to improve our 
airports infrastructure and language to improve aviation security, this 
conference report contains provisions which seek to resolve an 
important question as to the status of the Metropolitan Washington 
Airports Authority [MWAA]. The Airport Authority, created by Congress 
in 1987, has been successfully fulfilling its obligations of maximizing 
the development of Washington Dulles International Airport, while fully 
utilizing the resources at Washington National Airport.
  However, Mr. President, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that the 
Airport Authority's congressional review board is unconstitutional. 
Without Congress eliminating this unconstitutional review board, the 
Airport Authority would not be able to continue to exercise its vital 
functions such as adopting an annual budget, awarding contracts, and 
issuing bonds. This conference report eliminates that unconstitutional 
board, and therefore enables the Airport Authority to move forward.
  I am pleased that this provision was included, while not interfering 
with the perimeter rule, which allows nonstop flights into and out of 
Washington National only if the flight is 1,250 miles or less. This 
rule is critical in helping maintain the delicate balance between 
Washington National and Dulles International Airports. Retaining this 
perimeter rule will maximize the almost $2 billion of capital 
improvements underway at these two airports. And I appreciate the 
assistance of Senator Rockefeller and Senator Hollings and their staff 
in ensuring that this perimeter rule was preserved.
  Mr. President, this FAA conference report is filled with provisions 
that not only benefit the metropolitan Washington area, but airports, 
large and small, throughout the nation. I am pleased with the 
overwhelming support the conference report has received and I'm looking 
forward to the benefits of this bill in Virginia.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I expect we will vote momentarily on the 
final passage. I want, just before that, first of all, to thank all the 
Members for their indulgence during the period of these past days. This 
issue is really not about the FAA and the conference report, outside of 
this very special provision. I expect to support the conference report 
in just a few moments.
  I thank all the Members for their courtesies over the period of the 
last days, those colleagues of mine who supported a common position, 
and our worthy opponents who carried the day. I believe this particular 
provision would not have carried in a Democratically controlled 
Congress of the House and Senate, but the Senate has spoken now. The 
issue of workers' rights is going to very much be the issue on November 
5. We have one vote today and another vote on November 5. I just hope 
they will understand who is on their side.
  I again thank all of those in the Senate for their attention and for 
their courtesies on this matter. I hope at the earliest time we will go 
to a final vote on the FAA conference report. I intend to support it.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Now that we are going to a final vote, I would like to 
make just a 60-second comment.
  I thank Senator Pressler, the chairman of the Commerce Committee, 
whose leadership in FAA reform has been steady and tireless. I thank 
Senator Hollings, the ranking member of the committee, and Senator 
Ford, who worked from the beginning, 2 years ago, to bring meaningful 
reform to the FAA and provide for the critical long-term and stable 
funding which is so necessary for modernizing the air traffic control 
system, and hopefully putting an end to the more than 420 power outages 
last year.
  I also thank my friend, the Senator from Alaska, Senator Stevens, who 
worked with me and Senator Ford to craft the compromise we are voting 
on today.
  Finally, let me thank the countless number of General Accounting 
Office staff, the administration, Secretary Pena, the Secretary of 
Transportation, David Hinson, the FAA Administrator, and especially 
Linda Daschle, who worked tirelessly, literally hundreds and hundreds 
of hours, through late nights and many weekends, to build a better FAA 
through major reform, I am especially grateful for her outstanding 
work.
  Mr. President, others who are very deserving of recognition, 
including aviation expert Dr. Jack Fearnsides, Ken Mead of the General 
Accounting Office, Katherine Archuleta, Secretary Pena's Chief of 
Staff, Bert Randall, Assistant Chief Counsel of FAA, Paul Feldman, 
Special Assistant to the Deputy Administrator of FAA. And, of course, 
Sam Whitehorn of Senator Hollings' staff, Tom Zoeller of Senator Ford's 
staff, Mitch Rose and Earl Comstock of Senator Stevens' staff, Mike 
Reynolds, Lloyd Ator, Mike Korens, Tom Hohenthaner and Paddy Link of 
Senator Pressler's staff.
  I would like to personally thank the tireless efforts of those on my 
staff, Chris Paul and Mark Buse, who have worked so hard to make this 
bill a reality, and many others who have contributed so much.
  Again, I want to pay special thanks to my dear friend, Senator Ford 
of Kentucky, who realized from the beginning, along with me and others, 
that the only way you pass this kind of legislation, this kind of 
fundamental reform, is through a bipartisan effort and in partnership 
with the administration, in whichever party alignment that may be.
  I cannot help but express my appreciation to him for the many years 
of cooperation that we have had together, especially on this issue--it 
has characterized our relationship now for more than 10 years.
  Mr. FORD. Thank you.
  Mr. McCAIN. We may do more things together in the future, but I am 
not sure we will ever do anything this significant.
  I understand the yeas and nays will be asked for. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my distinguished

[[Page S12236]]

colleague from Arizona, Senator McCain, the chairman of the Aviation 
Subcommittee, in bringing this conference report before the Senate.
  Let me also join with him in paying compliments to our staff and to 
the many individuals who have assisted us. As Senator McCain has said, 
we have worked long and hard for 2 years now. It has been a bipartisan 
effort. We have had our disagreements, but we have not been 
disagreeable. We have pushed and pulled, and finally we have come to 
the point now where this bill is about to be passed.
  The conference report before us today reauthorizes various programs 
of the Federal Aviation Administration, namely the Airport Improvement 
Program [AIP]. The AIP program provides the necessary Federal funds for 
the continued investment in our airport and airways infrastructure.
  The current authorization for the AIP program expires on September 
30. Without this reauthorization bill, the FAA would be unable to fund 
many worthy aviation infrastructure projects. We cannot let that 
happen. As we prepare to enter into a new fiscal year, the FAA needs 
this reauthorization in order to move ahead with the funding of many 
important airport improvement projects. AIP projects include 
construction and maintenance of airport facilities, including runways; 
construction of control towers; the installation of radar equipment and 
construction of radar facilities; and the acquisition and installation 
of navigational devices.
  Mr. President, investment in our aviation infrastructure is at a 
critical point. The FAA's forecasts for the aviation industry project 
tremendous growth by the turn of the century. Those forecasts project 
an average increase of 3.7 percent in domestic passenger traffic by the 
year 2007. One of the big growth areas will most likely be in the 
regional and commuter industry. In 1995, regional and commuter air 
carriers carried 53.7 million passengers. By the year 2007, the FAA 
projects these same carriers to carry 96.9 million passengers--an 
annual growth of 5.4 percent.
  Today, our airports are at or near capacity. Many are struggling just 
to keep up with today's demands. With these growth projections for the 
next 10 years, the Nation s entire aviation system will face even more 
challenges on an already heavily burdened system.
  The problems posed by the growth of air traffic will be further 
burdened as aircraft manufacturers move toward the development of even 
larger wide body jets. Recently, both Boeing and Airbus Industries 
announced plans to introduce new airliners capable of carrying over 600 
passengers. The introduction of these aircraft will require major 
improvements at our Nation's airports just to accommodate the size of 
these aircraft.
  These are just a few of the many reasons that we need to pass this 
conference report. We cannot let the AIP program lapse. We must 
continue to support many worthy airport construction and improvement 
projects that will help to sustain and support the growing demand for 
air carrier services, both passenger and cargo.
  During the Senate s consideration of the FAA reauthorization bill, I 
argued that we should keep our reauthorization simple and short. That 
is, we should not undertake any change in the formulas for entitlement 
and discretionary grants and that we should have a one year 
reauthorization. Part of the reasoning for this was my belief that we 
need to examine the best means by which to reform the FAA.
  The Senate bill included provisions which would establish an 
independent assessment of the funding needs for the FAA. Under the 
terms of the Senate bill, the independent assessment would study the 
funding needs of the FAA within one year and report to the Congress. At 
that time, the Congress would have recommendations and options for the 
long-term financing solutions of the FAA. Then, with the 
reauthorization of the FAA and the AIP program, we would be able to 
create a better funding system for the AIP program.
  However, given the late date at which we are considering this bill, 
we recognized that our efforts to try and have an independent 
assessment on the FAA s financing could not be accomplished prior to 
the expiration of the AIP authorization. We have compromised with the 
House, which had a three-year authorization, and have decided that we 
will have a two year authorization.
  With a 2-year authorization, we have accepted the provisions of the 
House that will modify the funding formulas of the AIP program. Under 
the provisions of the conference report, this bill will provide more 
entitlement funds for airports throughout the country. Each airport 
under the AIP program is entitled to Federal funding, based on the 
number of passenger emplanements. The bill eliminates a number of 
discretionary funds and redistributes those funds to the airports as 
entitlements. In addition, under existing law, there is a $325 million 
pure discretionary fund. The FAA has the ability to use those funds to 
put together larger projects for airports of all sizes. This bill will 
reduce that pure discretionary fund to $300 million. I would note that 
I am somewhat concerned that the amount of money set aside for noise 
has been reduced from $164 million to $134 million. However, I 
recognize that some of the discretionary monies may be used for that 
purpose.
  I am pleased that this conference report also includes the FAA 
reforms which were included in the Senate bill.
  As I mentioned, the increased demands on the air transportation 
system require the Congress to re-examine the way in which the FAA is 
managed and funded. The FAA is predominantly funded through the airport 
and airway trust fund. The monies which are in the trust fund are 
distributed among specific programs and functions, including the FAA s 
operations account, the facilities and equipment account, research, the 
engineering and development account, as well as the Airport Improvement 
Program.

  The trust fund is supported solely through revenue derived by a 10 
percent passenger ticket tax, interest paid on Treasury certificates, 
and other taxes associated with air travel and aviation. However, on 
January 1, 1996, the aviation excise taxes lapsed. That lapse in taxes 
resulted in a loss of $500 million a month in trust fund revenues. With 
the enactment of the minimum wage and small business tax credits act, 
the aviation excise taxes were reinstated, but only to the end of this 
calendar year.
  This experience has highlighted some problems and concerns with the 
FAA. Without a steady and reliable source of revenue, the FAA cannot 
fulfill its mission to promote a safe and reliable aviation system.
  Both the Senate and the House bills had separate panels to examine 
the issues of safety and security in the National air transportation 
system and the financing of the FAA. The conference report adopts both 
task forces to separately examine these issues.
  The conference report adopts the Senate provisions which creates an 
11-member panel to conduct an independent assessment of the FAA 
financing and cost allocations through 2002. This independent panel 
shall include individuals who have expertise in the aviation industry 
and who are able, collectively, to represent a balanced view of the 
issues which are important to all segments of the aviation industry, 
including: general aviation, major air carriers, air cargo carriers, 
regional air carriers, business aviation, airports, aircraft 
manufacturers, the financial community, aviation industry workers, and 
airline passengers.
  This independent assessment is required to complete its work within 
12 months. At which time, the panel will make a report to the Secretary 
of Transportation. The Senate bill included some provisions for 
expedited consideration of these recommendations. However, during the 
Senate's consideration, at the request of the Finance Committee, those 
provisions for expedited consideration were modified to provide for an 
automatic sequential referral to the Senate Finance Committee.
  The Senate bill also included similar expedited procedures for the 
House. Unfortunately, during our conference, the House conferees 
objected to the inclusion of any expedited procedure for the House. 
Consequently, the provisions included in the Senate bill for expedited 
procedures in the House are not included in this conference report.
  I will admit that I am somewhat reluctant to include provisions in a 
bill that bind only one House of the Congress. The expedited procedures 
that

[[Page S12237]]

were originally included in S. 1994 as reported by the Commerce 
Committee were designed to make the Congress act quickly to address the 
crucial funding needs of the FAA and our aviation infrastructure. 
Without these expedited procedures, I am concerned that in 2 years 
time, we may find ourselves in the same position we are in today. 
During the conference, our House counterparts gave us their assurance 
that the House would act expeditiously in considering the funding 
recommendations of the independent panel.

  I appreciate the commitments from our House colleagues. I can assure 
the Members of the Senate that when we get to the point that a 
comprehensive FAA financing reform package is presented to the 
Congress, I will be equally dedicated to the expeditious consideration 
of that proposal.
  Mr. President, this funding study will build upon personnel and 
procurement reforms already in place at the FAA, which were included in 
the Transportation Appropriations Act for fiscal year 1996.
  In addition to the independent study on funding solutions for the 
FAA, the bill also includes provisions for the creation of a Management 
Advisory Council. Mr. President, I think we all acknowledge that the 
FAA has been an agency with its problems. Some of that criticism is 
well-deserved. But, I think that most Members will also acknowledge, 
that under the current leadership of Administrator David Hinson and 
Deputy Administrator Linda Daschle, the FAA is beginning to respond to 
the challenges. We want to build on these improvements and we want to 
enable the FAA to improve its management so that it is prepared to face 
the challenges of the 21st Century.
  The Management Advisory Council [MAC] will be composed of 15 members 
to provide the Administrator with input from the aviation industry and 
community. Membership on the MAC will include representatives from all 
government and all segments of the aviation industry; all of whom will 
be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the 
Senate. Members of the MAC should be selected from individuals who are 
experts in disciplines relevant to the aviation community and who are 
collectively able to represent a balanced view of the issues before the 
FAA. It is important to note that selection for MAC membership is not 
required to be based on political affiliation or other partisan 
considerations.
  Among the issues that we expect that the MAC to examine are: air 
traffic control modernization; FAA acquisition management; rulemakings 
and cost-benefit analysis; review the process by which the FAA 
determines to use advisory circulars and service bulletins; and a 
review of old rules, including FAR part 145.
  The conference report also includes the Senate bill's provisions on 
improving safety and security in our air transportation system.
  The tragedy of TWA flight 800 has forced us to once again re-examine 
our aviation security measures. As we all know, following the TWA 
tragedy, President Clinton created the White House Commission on 
Aviation Safety and Security and asked that Vice President Gore head 
this commission.
  The President should be commended for the swiftness of his actions 
and his determination to improve our aviation security and safety. The 
President moved quickly to reassure the traveling public and the 
Nation, that we continue to have the safest air transportation system 
in the world. I appreciate and applaud the efforts of the President and 
the Vice President on this issue.
  The so-called Gore Commission issued an initial report to the 
President on September 9. That report made a number of recommendations 
including the purchase of explosive detection equipment; the placing of 
security equipment at our major airports; increasing the use of 
passenger profiling through the use of existing data bases and air 
carrier computer reservation systems; criminal background checks and 
FBI fingerprint checks for all security screeners and other airport and 
airline personnel with access to secure areas; increasing funding to be 
used to facilitate a greater role for the U.S. Customs Service and 
other law enforcement agencies; designate the National Transportation 
Safety Board to deal with the families and relatives of crash victims; 
and provide additional funds for the training of airport security 
screeners.
  The conference report adopts a number of the recommendations of the 
Gore Commission which required legislative action. I am pleased to say 
that within our conference, there was unanimous support for the Senate 
s provisions on safety and security.
  Title III of the conference substitute includes legislative language 
that will give the FAA the legal authority to undertake and implement 
the recommendations of the Gore Commission.
  These provisions include the following:
  A report by the Administrator of the FAA to the Congress on how to 
transfer certain security responsibilities of the air carriers to the 
Federal Government. Under current Federal law, air carriers are 
responsible for the security and screening procedures at airports. The 
Gore Commission and other experts believe that aviation security is a 
national security issue. As the Federal Government will be asked to 
assume more responsibility, we believe it is prudent to have a careful 
study of this issue to examine how and to what extent the Federal 
Government should assume these duties. This report will be due to the 
Congress within 90 days of enactment of this bill.

  The FAA will certify companies that provide security screening at our 
Nation's airports to ensure uniformity and consistency in screening 
operations. The certification process is intended to improve the 
training and testing of security screeners through the development of 
uniform performance standards.
  It will accomplish many things:
  A study on the detection of weapons and explosives conducted by the 
FAA and the National Academy of Sciences.
  Require criminal background checks on all individuals who will be 
responsible for the screening of passengers and property as well as any 
other individual who exercises a security function associated with 
baggage or cargo. In addition, this bill directs the FAA to conduct 
periodic audits on the effectiveness of these criminal record checks.
  Direct the FAA to require the interim deployment of commercially 
available explosive detection equipment.
  Direct the FAA to work with the intelligence and law enforcement 
communities to assist the air carriers in developing a computer-
assisted passenger profiling program.
  Report to the Congress on a pilot baggage match program if such a 
program is undertaken as a result of the Gore Commission.
  Mr. President, I think it is important to note that the Gore 
Commission has not completed its work. In fact, the review of aviation 
security and safety is a dynamic and evolving process. While we have 
attempted to include security provisions within this bill, it is 
anticipated that the Congress will be considering further security 
recommendations and enhancements as the Gore Commission continues its 
work.
  In addition to the provisions included in this bill, the conferees 
adopted a House provision which establishes an aviation safety task 
force. This task force will be required to submit a report to the FAA 
which sets forth a comprehensive analysis of aviation safety. This task 
force is not intended to duplicate the work of the Gore Commission. 
Rather, it is intended and anticipated that the safety study will build 
upon the experience and recommendations of the Gore Commission.
  As this bill includes provisions relating to improving security 
systems throughout our air transportation system, it also includes 
provisions which ensure that the FAA's highest priority is air safety. 
Following the ValuJet tragedy, there was intense scrutiny of the FAA's 
mission in promoting air safety. Much of that attention focused on the 
so-called dual mandate of the FAA to promote air commerce and air 
safety. Both the Senate and House bills included provisions which would 
clarify that the FAA's highest priority is the promotion of a safe 
and secure air transportation system. This provision does not require 
any changes to the management, organization, or functions of the FAA. 
Rather, it corrects any public misconceptions that might

[[Page S12238]]

exist that the promotion of air commerce by the FAA would create a 
conflict of interest with the FAA's safety mandate.

  In addition, this bill includes provisions to assist the FAA in its 
safety mission by clarifying the way in which safety and accident 
information is classified by the National Transportation Safety Board. 
Under the provisions of the bill, the NTSB will develop a 
classification of accident and safety data in a manner that will 
provide clearer descriptions of accidents with air transportation. In 
addition, the NTSB is directed to widely disseminate this information. 
As we note in the conference report, one way in which this information 
could be widely publicized by the NTSB is through the Internet. I hope 
that once the NTSB develops the new classification system, it will 
consider placing its reports on the NTSB web page.
  The conference report also includes provisions which direct the NTSB 
to take the lead in assisting the families of victims of air disasters. 
Recent experiences have demonstrated that it is of tremendous comfort 
for the families of victims to have someone addressing their concerns 
and needs. While the Senate bill included a provision on family 
assistance, the House bill did not. However, the House did consider and 
pass a separate bill, H.R. 3923. The conference report has adopted that 
bill as the basis for the provisions of the conference report. This 
section not only requires that the NTSB establish a program to provide 
family advocacy services, but also directs that all domestic air 
carriers submit their disaster plans to the NTSB. The NTSB will develop 
guidelines for such plans which are intended to serve as a guide to 
other air carriers.
  Mr. President, this conference report is an omnibus aviation bill. In 
addition to the FAA reform provisions and reauthorization of the AIP 
program, it includes provisions on the sharing of pilot records; 
provisions on child pilot safety; strong provisions prohibiting airport 
revenue diversion; provisions relating to the Metropolitan Washington 
Airport Authority; and provisions which support and enhance the 
Essential Air Service Program.
  There is one provision included in this conference report which 
concerns me and that relates to the creation of a pilot program for the 
privatization of airports. When we considered the FAA bill in the 
Senate, I expressed my strong reservations and objections to the 
privatization of airports. I am a strong opponent to the privatization 
of airports because I believe that it will result in the diversion of 
airport revenue and will harm air carriers and general aviation. In 
addition, many of these airports were built with substantial Federal 
funds. Despite my strong objections to privatization--and I might add, 
the strong objections of the Senator from Arizona--the conference 
report includes a pilot program for privatization. It is important to 
note that this is a pilot program for 5 airports.

  At the insistence of the Senate, the pilot program includes a number 
of provisions which address the concerns about revenue diversion.
  The pilot program will only permit long-term leases of commercial 
airports. The Secretary of Transportation must agree to the 
privatization plan and at least 65 percent of the air carriers must 
agree to the plan. This protects other air carriers at commercial 
airports where a dominant carrier may control 65 percent of the landed 
weight. That means that a dominant carrier cannot control the fate of 
an airport. While the pilot program permits AIP grants, it requires a 
60-percent match of private money. The Secretary of Transportation can 
disapprove a plan if he finds that privatization would result in 
anticompetitive or unfair and deceptive practices.
  I want to assure my colleagues that the inclusion of a pilot program 
for privatization in this conference report does not mean that this 
Senator's opposition to privatization has been lessened. We have made 
an accommodation to our House colleagues who strongly support this 
idea. We have compromised on this issue. That is what a conference 
committee is supposed to do--to fashion acceptable compromises so that 
legislation can be enacted. And in making those compromises, you have 
to give a little. And sometimes you have to accept things with which 
you may have opposed. Compromise is hard. As Henry Clay used to say, 
``Compromise is mutual sacrifice.'' Well, Mr. President, I may be 
somewhat bruised and hurt by this compromise, but this bill is too 
important to fail because of my opposition to privatization.
  We have created a 2-year pilot program with many protections. We will 
have the opportunity to review whether this program truly brings new 
investment and capital from the private sector as the supporters of 
privatization claim. I want to assure my colleagues that I will be 
vigilant in my attention to the developments of this pilot program.
  Overall, Mr. President, I believe that this conference report is an 
excellent bill for the FAA and for the entire aviation community. This 
conference report represents the bipartisan efforts on the part of the 
House and Senate, between Members and staff. Many long hours were spent 
to create this conference report. That hard work has produced a 
conference report that I am proud to support. I am proud of the work of 
our staff for their dedication to produce this conference report.
  On a personal note, this is somewhat of a bittersweet moment for me. 
As many of my colleagues know, a year ago, my longtime aide and 
aviation expert, Martha Moloney, passed away after a very courageous 
battle with breast cancer. Many of the provisions of this bill include 
proposals that Martha and I considered and proposed for many years. I 
know that many of us miss her and her experience and advice. I am sure 
that she would be equally proud of the efforts that we have made today.

  And if I may, I would like to dedicate this bill to her memory.
  Mr. President, this bill truly is a must pass piece of legislation. 
It is a comprehensive and bipartisan bill that deserves the support of 
the Senate. In addition, the administration has been intimately 
involved in the development of this bill and strongly supports its 
provisions.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting adoption of the 
conference report.
  Mr. President, I want to add a personal note to the discussion on the 
FAA bill. Yesterday, Senator Stevens expressed his gratitude to David 
Hinson for all of his work at the FAA. David has worked hard to bring 
us a new FAA. He has worked hard to correct many of the past mistakes. 
New equipment is being installed and the system is being modernized. 
Without his thoughtfulness and devotion to aviation, many of the 
changes at the FAA would not have occurred.
  I also want to thank Linda Daschle, the Deputy Administrator. Linda 
has spent her career in the aviation field, and the FAA has benefited 
from her experiences. There were many long nights and heated debates 
over this aviation bill. Throughout those negotiations, Linda kept 
pushing all of us forward. I may not have always agreed with her, but 
in the end, her strength and conviction wore us all out. Without her 
efforts, this bill would not be before this body today.
  The staff of the FAA and DOT also must be thanked for all of their 
efforts. David and Linda are keenly aware of the dedication of the FAA 
staff. Steve Palmer and the DOT staff watched over us constantly, to 
make sure that all issues were address appropriately.
  The Vice President's efforts also cannot go unmentioned. The 
President and Vice President are extremely interested in ensuring that 
the air traffic control system is modernized and that the system is as 
safe and secure as possible. We have worked with the President's and 
Vice President's staff throughout this process, and I appreciate the 
aid and advice provided.
  Finally, I want to thank my House colleagues, who worked with us for 
many long nights to craft a compromise on critical Aviation issues. Mr. 
Shuster, Mr. Duncun, Mr. Oberstar, and Mr. Lipinski, and their staffs, 
are to be congratulated for a good aviation bill. I also want to note 
that Congressman Oberstar and I have waged a few wars together on the 
aviation front over the years. This time, but for one or two 
provisions, we had another good meeting of the minds.
  Mr. STEVENS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I thank the Members of the Senate for

[[Page S12239]]

taking this extraordinary step to make certain this important 
legislation passes and goes to the President. As I said many times, 
this is probably the most important bill to my State that we have 
considered in this Congress.
  As the Senator from Kentucky just stated, I believe that we are 
indebted to the Administrator of the FAA, David Hinson, for constant, 
tireless work on this matter.
  As a result of what we are doing, I announce to the Senate, in my 
office right now are the safety people who are going to carry out this 
new law and try to find a way to reopen the airport at my capital city 
of Juneau. There are many other airports that are going to be open 
because of the action we have taken and, above all, Mr. President, I 
think we can say to the American people that the skies will be safer. 
There will be competent people in charge of disasters, should they, God 
forbid, occur again, and we will have a way to deal with people who are 
survivors of victims of air crashes in the manner that the coalition of 
survivors has recommended to the Congress.
  This is responsive legislation, and it is responsible legislation. I 
am grateful to the two managers of the bill, my good friend from 
Arizona, Senator McCain and Senator Ford and, of course, to the 
chairman, Senator Pressler, and the ranking member, Senator Hollings, 
for their constant commitment to see to it that this Congress passes 
this landmark legislation for aviation.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate?
  Mr. McCAIN. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the conference 
report to accompany H.R. 3539, the Federal Aviation Administration 
Reauthorization Act. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk 
will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Missouri [Mr. Bond], 
the Senator from Indiana [Mr. Coats], the Senator from Texas [Mr. 
Gramm], and the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Gregg] are necessarily 
absent.
  I also announce that the Senator from Colorado [Mr. Campbell] is 
absent due to illness.
  Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Vermont [Mr. Leahy] is 
absent on official business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 92, nays 2, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 306 Leg.]

                                YEAS--92

     Abraham
     Akaka
     Ashcroft
     Baucus
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Bradley
     Breaux
     Brown
     Bryan
     Bumpers
     Burns
     Byrd
     Chafee
     Cochran
     Cohen
     Conrad
     Coverdell
     Craig
     D'Amato
     Daschle
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Exon
     Faircloth
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Ford
     Frahm
     Frist
     Glenn
     Gorton
     Graham
     Grams
     Grassley
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hatfield
     Heflin
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnston
     Kassebaum
     Kempthorne
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Lautenberg
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McCain
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Moseley-Braun
     Moynihan
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nickles
     Nunn
     Pell
     Pressler
     Pryor
     Reid
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Shelby
     Simpson
     Smith
     Snowe
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Warner
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                                NAYS--2

     Simon
     Specter
       

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Bond
     Campbell
     Coats
     Gramm
     Gregg
     Leahy
  The conference report was agreed to.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
conference report was agreed to.
  Mr. FORD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

                          ____________________