[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 105 (Wednesday, July 23, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H5622-H5624]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2169, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 
             AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998

  Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 189 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 189

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule 
     XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 2169) making appropriations for the Department 
     of Transportation and related agencies for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 1998, and for other purposes. The first 
     reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. Points of order 
     against consideration of the bill for failure to comply with 
     clause 2(l)(6) of rule XI, clause 7 of rule XXI, or section 
     401(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 are waived. 
     General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not 
     exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the 
     chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Appropriations. After general debate the bill shall be 
     considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. Points 
     of order against provisions in the bill for failure to comply 
     with clause 2 or 6 of rule XXI are waived except as follows: 
     on page 4, line 1, through line 6; beginning with ``, of 
     which'' on page 10, line 20, through ``Fund'' on line 22; on 
     page 52, line 8, through line 15; on page 53, line 3, through 
     page 65, line 6. Where points of order are waived against 
     part of a paragraph, points of order against a provision in 
     another part of such paragraph may be made only against such 
     provision and not against the entire paragraph. The 
     amendments specified in section 2 of this resolution shall be 
     considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of 
     the Whole. During consideration of the bill for further 
     amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may 
     accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the 
     Member offering an amendment has caused it to be printed in 
     the portion of the Congressional Record designated for that 
     purpose in clause 6 of rule XXIII. Amendments so printed 
     shall be considered as read. The Chairman of the Committee of 
     the Whole may: (1) postpone until a time during further 
     consideration in the Committee of the Whole a request for a 
     recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) reduce to five 
     minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any 
     postponed question that follows another electronic vote 
     without intervening business, provided that the minimum time 
     for electronic voting on the first in any series of questions 
     shall be fifteen minutes. At the conclusion of consideration 
     of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report 
     the bill, as amended, to the House with such further 
     amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question 
     shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments 
     thereto to final passage without intervening motion except 
     one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
       Sec. 2. The amendments considered as adopted in the House 
     and in the Committee of the Whole are as follows--
       (1) page 31, line 24, strike ``Staten Island-Midtown Ferry 
     service project'' and insert ``St. George Ferry terminal 
     project''; and
       (2) page 60, strike line 13 and all that follows through 
     page 65, line 3, and redesignate the following section 
     accordingly.

                              {time}  1400

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bonilla). The gentlewoman from North 
Carolina [Mrs. Myrick] is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Slaughter], 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time is yielded for the purpose 
of debate only.
  On Thursday, July 17, the Committee on Rules met and granted an open 
rule by voice vote for the consideration of H.R. 2169, the 
Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriation Act for fiscal year 
1998. The rule waives clause 2(L)(6) of rule XI relating to the 3-day 
availability of the report, clause 7 of rule XXI relating to the 3-day 
availability of preprinted hearings and section 401(a) prohibiting 
consideration of legislation containing contract authority not 
previously subject to appropriation of the Congressional Budget Act 
against consideration of the bill.
  The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided 
between the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on 
Appropriations. It waives clause 6 of rule XXI prohibiting 
reappropriations in an appropriations bill against provisions in the 
bill and clause 2 of rule XXI prohibiting unauthorized provisions in an 
appropriations bill against provisions in the bill, except as otherwise 
specified in the rule.
  An amendment related to the St. George Ferry Terminal project printed 
in section 2 of this resolution shall be considered as adopted upon 
passage of this resolution.
  The rule also strikes from the bill expedited procedures related to 
the total

[[Page H5623]]

realignment of the Amtrak Commission because it falls under the 
jurisdiction of the Committee on Rules and should not be included in an 
appropriations bill before it has been properly considered by the 
Committee on Rules.
  Priority recognition will be provided to those Members who have 
preprinted their amendments in the Congressional Record. The Chairman 
of the Committee of the Whole may postpone votes during consideration 
of the bill and reduce votes to 5 minutes on a postponed question if 
the vote follows a 15-minute vote. Finally, the rule provides one 
motion to recommit, with or without instructions.
  Mr. Speaker, an effective and well-integrated transportation 
infrastructure has long been one of our Nation's greatest assets. It 
has enabled us to foster a diverse and expansive economy and made it 
possible for families to travel easily around the Nation and the world. 
Each region of the country has distinct needs with regard to 
transportation.
  Each year, we in this House are tasked with the responsibility of 
guaranteeing that our vast transportation network does not slide into 
disrepair. I congratulate the Appropriations Subcommittee on 
Transportation for the fine work they have done on this bill. The 
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Wolf], the chairman, and the gentleman 
from Minnesota [Mr. Sabo], the ranking member, worked very hard to make 
sure that the bill fairly and effectively distributed needed funds 
across the Nation. They produced a good bill with bipartisan support, 
and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  I also realize that some in this House may have different views on 
this important issue that they would like to express. That is why I am 
also happy that this bill will be considered under an open rule so that 
open and honest debate can be carried out.
  This bill is another step toward achieving a balanced budget, but it 
does not sacrifice the needs and safety of the traveling public. The 
need for new and improved highway systems connecting our Nation's 
cities with emerging suburban centers and more rural areas increases 
every year. H.R. 2169 includes a 20-percent increase in highway funding 
that is desperately needed.
  I am particularly aware of this problem because it is one that I 
faced while serving as mayor of Charlotte, NC. The growth that we are 
experiencing in Charlotte is typical of many emerging cities throughout 
the South and the Nation.
  The disaster of TWA flight 800 last year focused a great deal of 
concern on air travel safety in the United States. Like all of my 
colleagues and millions of Americans, I spend a great deal of time in 
the air. Safe air transportation is important not only for commerce but 
also for a growing number of families on vacations.
  Safety issues are a key component of H.R. 2169. The bill increases 
funding for the FAA, including the installation of airport security 
devices, alert systems to prevent runway collisions, and improved 
weather detection and forecasting systems. It also increases FAA 
personnel by adding 500 air traffic controllers and 326 staff members 
responsible for safety certification and regulation.
  Unfortunately, too many Americans lose their lives on our Nation's 
highways each year. It seems like every news report during Christmas, 
Thanksgiving, and other holidays always includes stories about the 
number of fatalities. Of course, those stories are not limited to 
holidays, it happens every day.
  This bill provides $333 million to programs designed to help reduce 
those numbers and includes a new prelicensing drug testing program and 
critical airbag safety initiative. To many, Amtrak is a vital link to 
work and family, particularly in the Northeast. H.R. 2169 increases 
capital appropriations to the embattled rail line by $30 million over 
last year. It also provides a $75 million increase for Amtrak's 
Northeast corridor improvement program.
  The Coast Guard has long been a partner in the war on drugs. They 
must enforce Federal laws on the high seas and other waterways within 
its jurisdiction. There has been an increase in drug trafficking in the 
waters off the United States. The Coast Guard works diligently to put a 
stop to that activity. Perhaps the most important part of this bill 
increases funding for the Coast Guard's operating expenses to target 
efforts to interdict ocean drug trafficking.
  I again congratulate the Committee on Appropriations on a fine bill 
and ask that my colleagues support its passage and the open rule under 
which it will be debated.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from North 
Carolina [Mrs. Myrick] for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I 
yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, while I do not oppose this open rule, I do have some 
serious concerns about the impact of the underlying bill on Amtrak. 
This passenger rail system is vital to the economic needs of millions 
of train passengers and thousands of communities across the Nation, 
including my own community in upstate New York.
  The bill provides a total of $793 million for Amtrak in fiscal year 
1998, but only $283 million of that will go for operating costs. This 
is the lowest operating budget in 20 years for Amtrak and represents a 
cut of $61 million below the administration's request for operations. A 
cut of this size could make Amtrak's cash problems insurmountable. 
According to Amtrak President Thomas Downs, Amtrak could go bankrupt 
within a year. Amtrak is already borrowing to go meet the payroll and 
may soon reach its commercial borrowing limits.
  By failing to provide the necessary funding in this bill to allow 
Amtrak to meet its existing obligations, we are placing at risk 23,000 
American jobs. Moreover, we risk losing this essential transportation 
and economic resource forever.
  If that happens, under current law, the Federal Government would be 
responsible for an estimated $6 billion in costs associated with 
closing Amtrak. These include the costs of the unemployment benefits, 
the C-2 label protections, tax revenue losses, and $2.3 billion in debt 
to public and private investors. I am not convinced that this Congress 
has fully considered the ramification of dropping this potentially 
massive liability into the laps of the U.S. taxpayer or the economic 
consequences on our communities if they were to lose Amtrak.
  In the past 2 years, Amtrak has increased ridership and revenues, cut 
costs, and made important investments to modernize its aging train 
fleet. While much work remains to be done, unfortunately this bill does 
not do enough to ensure that Amtrak has the operating resources it 
needs to remain an economically viable transportation option for the 
community it serves.
  While I have that major reservation about the underlying bill, Mr. 
Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this open rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Goss].
  (Mr. GOSS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina 
[Mrs. Myrick], a valued member of the Committee on Rules, for yielding 
me the time.
  I rise in support of this fair and open rule. Mr. Speaker, 
transportation funding is obviously a very important issue to every 
Member and for all the States in our country, and for growth States 
like Florida it has a special meaning. And southwest Florida is one of 
the fastest growing areas in the country and one of the nicest, and it 
will continue to be fast growing.
  In my districts, our roads and airports are stretched nearly to 
capacity by an ever-increasing flow of new residents and tourists. In 
the past, we have had some very serious concerns about the inequities 
in highway funding in ISTEA, our funding program. We certainly are not 
going to get into the fairness issue today related to the distribution 
of the gas tax. But I am pleased that we are going to be dividing a 
bigger transportation pie this year, I think that matters a lot, nearly 
20 percent bigger I understand for highway spending. I think that is 
very good news for America.
  Even with the current funding inequities, this bigger pie of $21.5 
billion

[[Page H5624]]

will mean more dollars for transportation priorities in fast-growth 
areas like Florida. In the short term, this will help improve safety on 
our roads and make long overdue improvements, which are obviously 
needed for those who have been using those infrastructure areas.
  In the long term, we are going to be looking for a greater share. And 
in Florida we say our fair share is the formulas that we find in the 
upcoming ISTEA reauthorization process.
  But today I am also pleased that the bill provides $1.7 billion for 
the airport improvement program. Southwest Florida International 
Airport is the third fastest growing airport in the country, and other 
airports nearby, like Naples and Immokalee, are also feeling the 
pressure of increased trade and traffic. Without Federal support 
available through the AIP to supplement local and State funding, these 
airports simply cannot respond to the need for capacity expansion 
programs for upgraded air traffic systems and for the runway 
improvements that we need for safety.
  The committee has wisely increased funding levels for this program 
despite the opposition of the Clinton administration, and I am grateful 
to the committee.
  Another issue on the minds of my constituents is the drug war, and it 
should be on the minds of all Americans. A major component of that 
struggle, the war on drugs, must be increased funding for drug 
interdiction efforts by the U.S. Coast Guard. We all know that. 
Everybody who reads the newspaper, watches television, draws a breath 
in this country, and opens their eyes and listens a little bit 
understands what a valuable role the Coast Guard has in drug 
interdiction.
  Last week, a hearing was held in the Subcommittee on National 
Security, International Affairs, and Criminal Justice of the Committee 
on Government Reform and Oversight on the increase in narcotics traffic 
just through the State of Florida, a serious issue for Florida, 
obviously, with consequences for the whole Nation. The good news from 
that hearing is that the different agencies in the war on drugs are 
increasing coordination so that in south Florida the Drug Enforcement 
Agency, the Customs Service, and the Coast Guard are all working 
together. That may sound like a simple thing to say, but it is a hard 
thing to accomplish. And it is good news when it happens, and it is 
very effective and it has positive results; and I hope it continues to 
happen. This legislation ought to help in that direction.
  Hopefully, the director of the ONDCP, the so-called drug czar's 
office, will review the Coast Guard's activities and ensure that these 
funds that we are providing are being used for their intended purpose 
of drug interdiction. The Coast Guard must be able to respond on the 
basis of good intelligence with the interdiction efforts necessary to 
fight the dangerous inflow of drugs on the high seas before they reach 
our shores.
  I think most people know that the way we get most of these drug busts 
is through good intelligence, through good tips, through good 
information, and then we direct the Coast Guard and the other 
enforcement agencies to go make the bust.
  The rest of the time, the random searches and checks just do not have 
the same kind of success record. I think it is very important that we 
understand the link between information and the Coast Guard and the 
money it takes to do enforcement.
  I commend the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Wolf], the chairman, for 
the work he has done on this bill, and I urge the House to support this 
fair rule and the bill it makes in order, and I am most thankful for 
the time.
  Mrs. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid upon the table.

                          ____________________