[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 108 (Monday, July 28, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8180-S8185]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                                 1998.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the hour of 5 p.m. 
having come and gone, the Senate will now proceed to the consideration 
of S. 1048, which the clerk will please report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 1048) making appropriations for the Department 
     of Transportation and related agencies for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 1998, and for other purposes.

  The Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following 
list of individuals be given full floor privileges during the 
consideration of S. 1048: Wally Burnett, Joyce Rose, Reid Cavnar, 
George McDonald, Kathy Casey, Peter Rogoff, Michael Brennan, Liz 
O'Donoghue.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following 
list also be given floor privileges during consideration of S. 1048: 
Tom Young, Alan Brown, Carole Geagley, and Mitch Warren.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I am pleased this evening to present the 
fiscal year 1998 Department of Transportation and related agencies 
appropriations bill. The subcommittee's allocation was $12.157 billion 
in nondefense discretionary budget authority, and $36.893 billion in 
nondefense discretionary outlays.
  The bill I am presenting today, along with my colleague from New 
Jersey, Senator Lautenberg, is within those allocations and is 
consistent with our determination to achieve a balanced budget. This 
bill will also contribute to a safer and more efficient transportation 
system in this country and therefore contribute to economic growth and 
a better quality of life for all Americans.
  This bill provides $30.1 billion for investment in infrastructure 
that the public uses, that is, highways, transit, airports, and 
railroads. That represents an 8 percent increase over the 
administration's request.
  The bill includes a Federal-aid highway obligation limitation of 
$21.8 billion for investment in our Nation's highways. This is a record 
high level. And $1.63 billion above the President's amended budget 
request. The actual distribution of that obligation authority among the 
States will depend on reauthorization of ISTEA, also known as the 
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, which has 
provided authorization of our Federal surface transportation programs 
for the past 6 years and which, as the Presiding Officer knows, expires 
at the end of this fiscal year.
  This increase of almost $3 billion over the obligation limitation in 
place for this year will almost certainly mean more Federal highway 
spending for each of our States. I want to illustrate for Senators what 
this increase might mean for them even though I must caution my 
colleagues this evening that no one can predict now how highway funds 
will be distributed among the States next year.
  I ask unanimous consent that this table comparing State-by-State 
distribution of highway obligation authority in the current fiscal year 
to the distribution of the highway obligation authority in our bill for 
the fiscal year 1998, assuming the same apportionments of contract 
authority among the States as this year, be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the list was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION--ACTUAL FY 1997 OBLIGATION LIMITATION &    
                                     ESTIMATED FY 1998 OBLIGATION LIMITATION                                    
                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Est. FY 1998               
                                                                     Total FY 1997    limitation                
                               State                                   obligation     based on FY       Delta   
                                                                       limitation     1997 actual               
                                                                          \1\       apportionments              
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama............................................................        342,557        396,091         53,535
Alaska.............................................................        195,784        231,059         35,276
Arizona............................................................        244,117        285,850         41,733
Arkansas...........................................................        205,115        244,592         39,477
California.........................................................      1,513,221      1,801,124        287,903
Colorado...........................................................        192,727        229,249         36,522
Connecticut........................................................        342,128        407,185         65,056
Delaware...........................................................         74,967         89,241         14,274
Dist. of Col.......................................................         77,307         93,231         15,924
Florida............................................................        757,510        869,277        111,767
Georgia............................................................        560,549        620,305         59,756

[[Page S8181]]

                                                                                                                
Hawaii.............................................................        117,861        140,413         22,552
Idaho..............................................................        103,597        125,018         21,421
Illinois...........................................................        638,487        759,358        120,871
Indiana............................................................        393,703        470,604         76,900
Iowa...............................................................        191,366        227,597         36,232
Kansas.............................................................        198,323        236,001         37,678
Kentucky...........................................................        308,464        343,085         34,621
Louisiana..........................................................        261,004        312,517         51,513
Maine..............................................................         88,442        105,102         16,660
Maryland...........................................................        261,931        306,085         44,154
Massachusetts......................................................        663,051        782,793        119,742
Michigan...........................................................        510,281        610,265         99,984
Minnesota..........................................................        239,327        278,865         39,539
Mississippi........................................................        201,721        241,881         40,160
Missouri...........................................................        391,755        470,538         78,783
Montana............................................................        146,156        169,351         23,195
Nebraska...........................................................        134,539        160,125         25,585
Nevada.............................................................        101,072        120,184         19,112
New Hampshire......................................................         82,749         98,474         15,724
New Jersey.........................................................        462,907        550,465         87,558
New Mexico.........................................................        161,983        190,795         28,812
New York...........................................................      1,010,508      1,202,370        191,862
North Carolina.....................................................        447,701        532,817         85,116
North Dakota.......................................................         98,670        117,360         18,690
Ohio...............................................................        601,766        732,224        130,458
Oklahoma...........................................................        258,618        309,756         51,138
Oregon.............................................................        202,318        241,238         38,920
Pennsylvania.......................................................        676,649        812,481        135,832
Rhode Island.......................................................         80,354         92,228         11,874
South Carolina.....................................................        273,300        314,160         40,860
South Dakota.......................................................        107,686        128,097         20,411
Tennessee..........................................................        375,667        451,035         75,368
Texas..............................................................      1,204,819      1,404,097        199,278
Utah...............................................................        122,674        144,653         21,979
Vermont............................................................         75,942         90,381         14,438
Virginia...........................................................        390,933        464,221         73,288
Washington.........................................................        312,109        369,628         57,519
West Virginia......................................................        153,425        182,354         28,929
Wisconsin..........................................................        336,942        402,433         65,491
Wyoming............................................................        107,621        128,057         20,436
Puerto Rico........................................................         73,656         87,690         14,034
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.....................................................     17,076,061     20,174,002      3,097,942
Administration.....................................................        551,192        558,440          7,248
Federal Lands......................................................        440,000        440,000              0
Reserve............................................................        627,558        627,558              0
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
      Total........................................................     18,694,811     21,800,000      3,105,190
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Does not include an estimated $264 million in bonus limitation yet to be distributed.                       


  Mr. SHELBY. If our limitation becomes law by the end of September, 
the States will be apportioned an average of 18 percent more--18 
percent more--highway obligation limitation for 1998 than they were 
apportioned at the beginning of last fiscal year. That is some 
improvement in the money.
  In addition, we have included $300 million for Appalachian 
Development Highway System investment consistent with existing 
authorization. The Federal Government made a commitment to improve 
these highways which run through economically undeveloped areas in 13 
of our States, and our bill helps to keep that commitment. This 
investment will pay off not only in economic development in areas that 
are in much need of it but also in lives saved since these highways in 
mountainous areas are often high-accident locations in our country.
  As most Senators know, Federal investment in airport development has 
been declining in recent years, and the administration proposed a 
further cut for the coming year. Our committee could not agree with 
that proposal at a time when air travel is increasingly in demand and 
air safety is uppermost in the minds of travelers. We have included 
$1.7 billion for the airport improvement program.
  Transit formula and discretionary accounts, including funding for 
Washington Metrorail construction, all of which are for capital 
investment in our bill, are funded at $4.56 billion, $311 million above 
fiscal year 1997.
  The bill provides $273 million for continued improvements on Amtrak's 
Northeast corridor between Washington and Boston. For other Amtrak 
capital expenditures, the bill makes a contingent appropriation, Mr. 
President, of $641 million to be funded from the intercity passenger 
rail fund, which would be established by S. 949, the Revenue 
Reconciliation Act of 1997. The Amtrak capital appropriation in this 
bill will be triggered when a final reconciliation bill including the 
passenger rail fund is enacted into law and the transportation 
subcommittee's 602(b) allocation is adjusted upward to cover the 
additional appropriation.
  Safety was a top priority as we developed this bill. It provides 
$5.376 billion for the FAA operations account, including funds for an 
increase of 235 aviation safety inspectors and 500 additional air 
traffic controllers. Our appropriations for FAA operations is 99.8 
percent of the administration's request. The committee was able to fund 
the FAA's operation account at this level without imposing $300 million 
in new user fee taxes proposed in the administration's request.
  The toll of deaths and injuries on our highways, we believe, is too 
high and our bill addresses that. It funds the National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration Program at $333.5 million. That is a $33 million 
increase above the fiscal year 1997 enacted levels and slightly higher 
than the administration's request.
  This bill provides $50.7 million for the National Transportation 
Safety Board, 8 percent above the President's request, to support the 
NTSB's investigatory mission and to expedite the development of safety 
recommendations.
  The Coast Guard, as you know, Mr. President, also plays a critical 
role in the safe operation of our Nation's waterways. Its operations 
funding of $2.73 billion as provided in this bill is an increase of 
$112 million above fiscal year 1997. This level is consistent with the 
administration's request for operating expenses and will continue 
congressional support for a streamlined Coast Guard.
  Coast Guard funding includes an increase of $53 million for antidrug 
activities, which are coordinated by the Office of National Drug 
Control Policy. The committee has provided the Commandant of the Coast 
Guard the discretion and the flexibility to manage this funding but has 
encouraged the Department to look at these activities as areas that 
would benefit from the development of performance measures.
  The bill funds the Coast Guard's capital program at $412 million, an 
increase of $33 million above the administration's request. This 
provides the Coast Guard with the equipment, ships, and aircraft to 
complete their multiple missions. The Coast Guard's capital needs, 
especially for replacing aging vessels and facilities, will increase 
dramatically in the years ahead and the committee's recommendation 
focuses on those acquisition programs that can be accelerated now to 
provide room in the outyears to replace these assets.
  I note for the benefit of the Senators from States that depend on the 
Saint Lawrence Seaway, that this bill assumes enactment of the 
administration's proposal to convert the Saint Lawrence Seaway 
Development Corporation to a performance-based organization and to move 
its financing from appropriated funds to an automatic annual 
performance-based payment. No funds are included in this bill for the 
Seaway Corporation, but if the legislative proposal fails, we will 
ensure in conference that the Seaway Corporation is funded.
  The Senate has taken the lead in past years in promoting management 
reform at the Department of Transportation, especially at FAA. This 
bill continues that direction by refraining from micromanagement of the 
Department, even as we look for improved results. The committee report, 
for example, offers guidance to the Secretary of Transportation on 
improving on DOT's draft strategic plan which is required by the 
Government Performance and Results Act. It also avoids artificial caps 
on the efforts of the Department to act in a more businesslike way, but 
it directs the DOT Inspector General to study whether in fact DOT's new 
entrepreneurial service organization is provided cost-competitive, 
high-quality service.
  But, even as we addressed infrastructure investment and safety in 
this bill, we have been very mindful of the priorities that Senators 
had for this bill. We receive more than 900 requests for projects and 
provisions to be included in this bill. We have reviewed those requests 
very closely and accommodated them to the extent that we could. In some 
cases, available funding was not sufficient to fund all requests, and 
we had to make some tough choices. But we have tried to be as fair as 
possible to all Senators on both sides of the aisle.
  Many Senators wanted funds for highway projects of special interest 
to them in their States. This year, ISTEA reauthorization is providing 
a vehicle for special project funding, especially in the House where 
there is very active consideration of such funding. But I want to 
assure my colleagues this evening that I believe the Congress has at 
least as legitimate a role in designating funding for specific highway 
projects as it does in designating new transit projects that will be 
funded. I intend to review the situation after enactment of ISTEA 
reauthorization legislation and to work with my Senate and my House 
colleagues in the year

[[Page S8182]]

ahead to ensure that we have an opportunity to designate funding for 
highway projects of special interest to our States and to our 
communities.
  I am proud, overall, of what we have been able to accomplish in this 
bill. It will benefit all Americans as it helps to improve 
transportation services in this country so that the economy and 
personal mobility are better served. I commend my colleague, the 
ranking Democrat on the committee and the former chairman on this 
committee, Senator Lautenberg, for all the hard work he has put in in 
this effort.
  At this time I yield to the ranking member, Senator Lautenberg.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, first, I want to say thank you to my 
colleague from Alabama, the chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Transportation of Appropriations, for the manner in which we have been 
able to work together to resolve problems on this bill. I support the 
leadership he has provided in getting us to this point where we are 
able to present the Transportation and related agencies appropriations 
bill for fiscal 1998. This bill was reported by the Appropriations 
Committee just this past Tuesday, a week ago.
  I don't believe that we give sufficient importance to our investment 
in transportation infrastructure in this country. There is hardly a 
State, that I am aware of as I talk to my colleagues, that is satisfied 
with its ability to deal with congestion, its ability to move people 
and goods from place-to-place efficiently. But I will say this. In view 
of the sparseness of budget dollars, this bill went quite well. It is 
the culmination of a very long and arduous effort to reestablish 
transportation as a priority in our Federal budget.

  As the senior Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee, I, along with 
Senator Domenici and several other members, spent a great deal of time 
and energy trying to ensure that transportation would be treated as we 
like to see it, as a priority under the budget resolution. That is 
where it all starts, the allocation of funds in the budget resolution 
to the various functions of Government.
  Transportation was not one of the priorities that the administration 
brought to the table. It was a congressional priority. The Congress 
decided we needed more money for transportation, and we have succeeded 
in getting it. We are interested in a balanced transportation network. 
I think the bill now before the Senate does exactly that.
  Our efforts on the budget resolution are well reflected in the 
sizable funding increases contained in this bill for critical 
transportation infrastructure programs. I want to thank the chairman of 
the Appropriations Committee, Senator Stevens for the funding 
allocation he granted to this subcommittee. He is serving as chairman 
of the Appropriations Committee for the first time this year and he is 
doing an excellent job. He and Senator Byrd, the ranking Democrat, 
worked hard to grant the Transportation Subcommittee an allocation that 
was consistent with the priority that was placed on transportation when 
we did the budget resolution.
  Mr. President, this bill has gone through a steady series of 
improvements as it moved through the process. In the view of this 
Senator, the bill that was presented to the subcommittee on July 15 
just did not go far enough in reflecting the needs of all 
transportation modes as well as the needs of all regions of the 
country. The bill had very sizable increases for important national 
programs such as the Federal-aid highway obligation ceiling and airport 
grants. However, the bill also provided a freeze on formula funding for 
mass transit and included insufficient funding for Amtrak's operating 
subsidy. This funding shortfall in Amtrak could have rapidly brought 
about the bankruptcy of the railroad very early in the coming fiscal 
year.
  There are very few countries that have, frankly, as insufficient 
intercity rail service as does the United States. When you look at the 
major developed countries of the world other than the United States, 
all of them, without a doubt, whether it be Japan's bullet train or the 
French TGV or trains in Germany or other parts of the world that zip 
along at 180 miles an hour--all of them depend on sizeable operating 
subsidies from the government.
  I am not sure, nor is the chairman, whether everybody would want to 
get to Washington in an hour and a half from New York, but we at least 
ought to make it possible. We could certainly do that and save time 
waiting at airports. But we must continue to invest, in Amtrak to make 
that happen. They have new equipment ordered that will accelerate the 
pace at which passengers can go from Boston to Washington.
  But we needed the cooperation of the chairman, Senator Shelby, and we 
were able to work together to boost Amtrak's operating subsidy by $154 
million above the level originally presented to the subcommittee. The 
funding level now stands at the level that was requested by the 
administration. We were also able to provide an additional $200 million 
in transit formula grants at full committee markup so the percentage 
boost for transit formula assistance would begin to approach the 
percentage increases provide for highway formula assistance and for 
airport grants.
  What we are saying with these important adjustments is that we salute 
a balanced transportation system in this country that includes 
highways, includes aviation, includes rail, includes all of the modes 
of mass transit so we can have the kind of efficiency in our 
transportation system that we need.
  These adjustments in the bill were made through careful negotiations 
between Chairman Shelby and myself. They were made without the need for 
a rollcall vote in either the subcommittee or the full committee. That 
fact is indicative of the cooperation and fair-minded spirit that the 
chairman has brought to this bill.

  With these changes now included in the transportation funding bill, I 
am pleased to recommend this bill to the entire Senate. It is a 
balanced bill that provides desperately needed funds to our States and 
communities to address the crushing problem of congestion in our cities 
and towns. As a matter of fact, in our region they are about to 
celebrate the initiation of another technological improvement in the 
collection of tolls. Some people do not support the rapid collection of 
tolls. They want to hang onto their money as long as possible. But the 
choice, Mr. President, is to sit in traffic for 15 minutes, 20 minutes, 
or a half hour at the toll gate. I drove, on Sunday, through one of 
what they call the easy pass tollgates. I want to tell you, it was a 
pleasure. They had a little thing on the windshield and when we got to 
the gate, up went the gate, down went my $4. But the fact of the matter 
is, it does improve the way we move ahead.
  That is the kind of improvements that we need. We have to continue to 
present technological innovation to improve the way our highways, our 
airports, and our railroads function.
  So, I think it is fair to say that this funding will accelerate our 
efforts to address improvements in our transportation infrastructure, 
which is deteriorating faster, frankly, than we can replace it. The 
bill will also provide critically needed funding, as you heard from the 
chairman, to maintain safety in all our transportation modes. I want to 
point out, there is still one significant hole in this bill, and that 
is the funding for Amtrak's capital account. Those are the investments 
necessary to build the infrastructure, buy the equipment, update the 
rail signals, to upgrade the trackage that we have down there. We need 
more investment in the capital account so that we can operate more 
efficiently.
  The bill does not include any funding for Amtrak's capital needs 
because we believe the chairman of the Finance Committee, Senator Roth, 
is currently seeking to provide for these needs through the 
reconciliation process. I know the chairman and I have a commitment 
that this is going to be taking place. I would only point out Senator 
Shelby's decision not to put any more capital funding in this bill was 
because he, as I said earlier, believed that Senator Roth was going to 
take care of it in the finance package. I hope that that ultimately 
gets to be the case, because that would provide Amtrak with a stable 
source of funding to address their capital needs over a period of 
several years, get that railroad up to the level that it ought to be in 
a country as great as ours.
  Last, Mr. President, I commend my colleague and friend, Senator 
Shelby,

[[Page S8183]]

for his excellent work in his first year as chairman of this 
subcommittee. He quickly gained a great deal of knowledge about how the 
committee functions.
  I offered to take over the chairmanship temporarily to show him how, 
but he said, no, he would take care of it. We worked together, with our 
fine staff--the names of whom Senator Shelby mentioned--to get it done.
  When it comes to the distribution of funds for the Member-specific 
projects, those projects they put forward as being critical in nature 
to their States, Senator Shelby has been fairminded in his allocation 
of funds. He sought to accommodate Members' priorities to the best of 
the subcommittee's ability, and he has continued to operate that way.
  I must say, I tip my hat to the fact that he is determined and has 
shown in this first chairmanship year that he can deal in a bipartisan 
fashion, and everybody got along. We occasionally had to face up to 
some tough discussions, but we always did it in an amicable way and we 
got a good bill.
  That has been the tradition with the Transportation Subcommittee, and 
that is do it in a bipartisan way. The American people don't want to 
see us bickering. They want to see us getting things done. They want to 
see us function as we are supposed to function. Disagree, if you will, 
make the points you have to make, but get the job done. I think it is 
fair to say that the Appropriations Committee, on which both of us have 
sat for some time, is maintaining almost a revolutionary pace in terms 
of getting the job done this year, and I am proud to be part of it and 
proud to work with my colleagues on the committee.
  With that, Mr. President, I hope we can move this bill with 
expediency. I yield the floor.
  Mr. SHELBY addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.


                           Amendment No. 1022

               (Purpose: To direct a transit fare study)

  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment offered on 
behalf of the Senators from New York, Senator D'Amato and Senator 
Moynihan, and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alabama [Mr. Shelby], for Mr. D'Amato, for 
     himself and Mr. Moynihan, proposes an amendment numbered 
     1022.

  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following:
       Out of the funds made available under this Act to the New 
     York Metropolitan Transportation Authority through the 
     Federal Transit Administration, the New York Metropolitan 
     Transportation Authority shall perform a study to ascertain 
     the costs and benefits of instituting an integrated fare 
     system for commuters who use both the Metro North Railroad or 
     the Long Island Rail Road and New York City subway or bus 
     systems. This study shall examine creative proposals for 
     improving the flow of passengers between city transit systems 
     and commuter rail systems, including free transfers, 
     discounts, congestion-pricing, and other positive 
     inducements. The study also must include estimates of 
     potential benefits to the environment, to energy conservation 
     and to revenue enhancement through increased commuter rail 
     and transit ridership, as well as other tangible benefits. A 
     report describing the results of this study shall be 
     submitted to the Senate Appropriations Committee within 45 
     days of enactment of this Act.

  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I see the distinguished manager of the 
legislation, Senator Shelby, here. And I would like to take this 
opportunity to engage in a brief colloquy with the distinguished 
Senator from Alabama.
  Mr. SHELBY. I will be glad to comply.
  Mr. CHAFEE. I want to start off, Mr. President, by saying to Senator 
Shelby that I am very pleased that this legislation has come to the 
Senate floor. I would like to take this opportunity to briefly discuss 
a project of great importance to my home State of Rhode Island.
  Included within S. 1048 is $10 million for the Rhode Island freight 
rail development project commonly known as the Third Track. I would 
like to express my gratitude to the subcommittee chairman, the manager 
of the bill, Senator Shelby, who has agreed to include this funding in 
his subcommittee's bill. And I see the distinguished ranking member of 
the committee, and I would also like to express my thanks to him 
likewise for support of this legislation.
  Earlier this year Senator Shelby was kind enough to take time to 
listen to Rhode Island's Governor, Lincoln Almond, Senator Reed from 
Rhode Island, and myself as we outlined the benefits of the Third Track 
project. And, Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to 
say that Senator Reed has been very interested and very supportive of 
all efforts in connection with this Third Track.
  The Third Track is a $120 million project that will upgrade 22 miles 
of rail line between Quonset Point-Davisville, and Central Falls, RI. 
It is needed to accommodate two impending changes that are occurring on 
this rail line: First, the increased passenger rail traffic and more 
passenger trains that will result from Amtrak's New Haven-Boston 
electrification project--that is the first problem that has arisen--
and, secondly, the larger freight cars that will operate along the 
line.
  The Third Track represents a tremendous potential for economic growth 
and job creation in Rhode Island. It plays a vital role in the State's 
development of the Quonset-Davisville Industrial Park and making that 
into a premier commerce park and international cargo point.
  Mr. President, let us take a brief look at recent developments 
associated with this Third Track. In just the past year, some 19 new 
tenants and four others have expanded their operations and have 
invested over $16 million and brought 500 new jobs to the Quonset-
Davisville Industrial Park.
  It is conservatively estimated that development of the port and of 
the park will yield in excess of 15,000 good-paying jobs to Rhode 
Island. The Third Track is a key element in what is not surprisingly 
one of our State's most promising economic development projects.
  To date, Congress has appropriated $13 million for the Third Track. 
Another $42 million is budgeted over the next 4 years, including the 
$10 million within the bill before the Senate today.
  Rhode Island's voters, on their part, in order to fulfill the State's 
50-50 funding matching requirement, passed a bond referendum last 
November allocating $50 million to this Third Track. I might say, Mr. 
President, a $50 million bond issue is a substantial one for our small 
State of little fewer than a million people.
  The Third Track represents great hope for economic growth in Rhode 
Island at a time when our manufacturing job base continues to erode.
  I again thank Chairman Shelby for his support and also thank the 
distinguished ranking member of the committee, Senator Lautenberg, for 
his support, and urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill.
  Mr. SHELBY addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
  Mr. SHELBY. I would like to respond to that.
  First of all, I want to acknowledge the work of the distinguished 
senior Senator from Rhode Island, Senator Chafee, in bringing to my 
attention--and also to Senator Lautenberg's attention--the needs of his 
State in dealing with this economic development project.
  I did have the opportunity, at Senator Chafee's request, to meet with 
Senator Chafee, the Governor, and the junior Senator, Senator Reed, 
regarding this project. I also met with Senator Chafee on numerous 
occasions as we talked about, ``Would funding for this project be 
included in the bill?'' I assured him that it would, and for a good 
reason.
  This is a sound project for the people of Rhode Island. We 
investigated it on

[[Page S8184]]

the committee and found that it makes a lot of sense. And as Senator 
Chafee has pointed out, the people of Rhode Island are also putting up 
a lot of money through a bond issue of $50 million. And $50 million is 
a lot of money for a State of around 1 million. And I want to 
acknowledge his work in this regard and say that we are pleased that we 
have been successful in identifying resources for this project. And I 
believe it is going to be very, very positive for the State of Rhode 
Island.
  I look forward to working with the distinguished Senator from Rhode 
Island in the future.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. I am pleased also, Mr. President, to support this 
project. And I have reviewed the plans several times over these last 
couple of years. It increases the ability of that port to function and 
to expedite the movement of freight from the port into the main line 
system. Otherwise, there are some problems with heights and of the cars 
that can pass underneath the bridges, so it needs some work. And we 
hope that Rhode Island will get this completed.
  We all know that essential to our economic development is the 
capacity to get people and goods to and from the business opportunities 
that either exist or want to be developed. So this one sounds like a 
pretty good idea.
  Senator Shelby said it. He said we have heard from Senator Chafee 
periodically, regularly. We have heard from the Governor of the State 
who, if I remember, is about 6' 4'', something of that nature. They 
made sure they brought him in. We got the message, Mr. President. 
Senator Reed was also involved. So it is a unified delegation. And they 
are working hard to get it done. And we want to help wherever we can.
  Mr. CHAFEE addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Again, I do want to thank the two distinguished managers 
of the legislation, the bill. The chairman of the subcommittee, Senator 
Shelby, has been very, very helpful, and as I indicated, very 
responsive. And we are very appreciative. And likewise, Senator 
Lautenberg, as mentioned, we have--I have to be careful in my use of 
words. I was going to say ``pestered'' him, but we have implored him or 
spent a good deal of time pointing out the virtues of this project. And 
the way they both have responded makes us very grateful.
  And I say to Senator Shelby, I want to thank you for your kind 
remarks and the work you have done on this, and Senator Lautenberg 
likewise.
  So, if nobody else seeks the floor----
  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, if I could add a few more comments to the 
remarks made by the distinguished Senator from Rhode Island. The 
Senator from Rhode Island is a distinguished veteran of the Senate. He 
has been here and has made his presence felt. He chairs a very 
important committee in the Senate--the Environment and Public Works 
Committee. I have had the privilege and the pleasure of working with 
him on a number of issues both on and off this committee. I can tell 
you, he has been the catalyst for the money for Rhode Island here in 
the Senate. Let us set the record straight. Thank you.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, we can't let this opportunity go 
without saying that we know that the Senator from Rhode Island is very 
much engaged in discussions of ISTEA. And New Jersey likes ISTEA.
  Mr. SHELBY. Absolutely.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. We like it in the summer and we like it in the 
winter. We want to help the State of Rhode Island, the important State 
that it is despite its tiny size. My State is only a wisp larger, and 
we have about eight times the number of people. But we know that the 
good Senator from Rhode Island will remember Alabama and New Jersey and 
how we all work together to get things done. Thank you.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, this is getting more and more expensive. 
So if nobody else seeks the floor at this time, I suggest the absence 
of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the 
Transportation appropriations bill and to engage in a colloquy with the 
distinguished chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee, Senator 
Shelby, about the ability of the State of Maine to use funding from 
this legislation to conduct a National Environmental Protection Act 
study for improving the travel corridor from Houlton to Fort Kent, ME.
  Under S. 1048, as approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee, 
the State of Maine is expected to receive a much-needed increase of 
almost $17 million for vital highway programs. This will bring the 
total for the next fiscal year to approximately $105 million. This 
additional funding--the $17 million--will enable the Maine Department 
of Transportation to fund a number of high-priority transportation 
projects, including the NEPA study, which will help my State 
tremendously.
  I want to commend both the chairman and the ranking minority member 
of the subcommittee for their hard work and leadership in ensuring that 
significant transportation funding increases are available, at a time 
when setting priorities for scarce tax dollars has never been more 
challenging. For large rural States like my home State of Maine, the 
funding in this legislation provides the money necessary to build, 
repair, maintain, and improve our roads, which are absolutely essential 
to expanding our economy and to providing our citizens with better job 
opportunities into the 21st century.
  In fact, in Maine, studies have shown that approximately 80 percent 
of all economic development has occurred within 10 miles of our 
interstate highway. Consequently, it is not surprising that economic 
activity in central and northern Aroostook County, where I am from, 
which is not served by the Interstate Highway System, has lagged far 
behind those areas of the State with access to the four-lane 
interstate.
  Earlier this year, the State of Maine completed an initial 
feasibility study that evaluated several different options for 
improving the travel corridor between Houlton and Fort Kent, a distance 
of roughly 125 miles. The initial study was funded by Congress with an 
appropriation of $800,000 about 3 years ago.
  Now, the State is prepared to take the next step in this process, 
which is to conduct a NEPA study on the various options. This study 
will, among other things, analyze the traffic demand for preliminary 
design engineering, assess the noise and air quality impact, develop 
and review alternatives within the corridor, update the construction 
cost analysis, and prepare an environmental impact statement.
  The need for this funding, Mr. President, is crystal clear. Upgrading 
the transportation infrastructure in Aroostook County, the largest 
county in my State, is essential to strengthening its economy. For 
example, in order to compete effectively, Aroostook County potato 
farmers and lumber industries need to improve their ability to 
transport goods efficiently from northern Maine to their markets.
  Upgrading the transportation system will also spur new economic 
development and business investment. The tourism industry, particularly 
snowmobiling, has absolutely exploded in recent years. But if it is to 
continue to grow, this promising industry needs an improved road system 
to bring more snowmobilers to Aroostook County.
  Similarly, the people of Aroostook County are moving forward in their 
efforts to redevelop the site of the former Loring Air Force Base in 
Limestone, ME. An enhanced highway system is absolutely vital to their 
ability to attract new economic investment that can best utilize the 
base's outstanding facilities and help to replace the thousands of jobs 
that were lost when the base closed.
  Proceeding with this additional study at this time will help us 
determine how best to improve the travel corridor, and it ultimately 
will make it easier for northern Maine to compete for new business 
investments, to find

[[Page S8185]]

new market opportunities for agricultural, manufactured, and timber-
related products, and to produce increased tourism opportunities, as 
well.

  I just want to take this opportunity to confirm with the chairman of 
the subcommittee my understanding that the State of Maine, which has 
included this project as part of its 20-year statewide transportation 
plan, can use a portion of the roughly $17 million in higher Federal 
highway funding from this legislation to pursue and conduct the NEPA 
study.
  Mr. President, at this point, I will yield the floor to the chairman 
of the subcommittee so that he may respond to my inquiry.
  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, Senator Collins has been in touch with our 
subcommittee throughout the year as we prepared the 1998 Transportation 
appropriation bill. She has talked to us more than once. In particular, 
the Senator from Maine has made clear that securing available sources 
of funding for the NEPA study is a very high priority for her and the 
people in the northern part of her State of Maine. The Senator has also 
been a strong supporter of higher funding in fiscal year 1998 to meet 
other necessary transportation priorities on behalf of the State of 
Maine as well.
  Mr. President, I want to take this opportunity to confirm the inquiry 
of the Senator and to reiterate that the State of Maine is clearly able 
to use highway funds provided in this act, subject to ISTEA 
reauthorization, to conduct a NEPA study. I believe that the Senator 
from Maine has made a compelling case for moving ahead with this study 
and, in fact, I believe that the NEPA study would be a good use of a 
portion of Maine's highway funding.
  Mr. President, Senator Collins has made it very clear to the 
subcommittee how important improving the travel corridor in northern 
Maine is, and I share her view that this NEPA study would be a very 
high priority for funding in 1998.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I thank the chairman for his assurances 
and express my gratitude and thanks to him and his staff for their 
assistance in this matter.
  I also want to again applaud his efforts to ensure that we have 
adequate funding for our transportation infrastructure, which is so 
vital to this Nation's prosperity.
  Thank you, Mr. President.
  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following 
be the only first-degree amendments in order to S. 1048 other than the 
pending amendments, and that they be subject to relevant second-degree 
amendments. I send the list to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and 
it is so ordered.
  The list is as follows:

       Bob Smith: Section 127 of title 23.
       Hollings: Relevant.
       Hollings: Relevant.
       Graham: Transit.
       Daschle/Johnson: Relevant.


                            managers package

       Shelby amendment.
       Lautenberg amendment.
       Durbin: Relevant.
       Graham/Levin Sense-of-Senate: Relevant.
       Byrd: Relevant.
       Stevens: Relevant.
       Kerrey: Relevant.
       Boxer: Railroad.
       Chafee: Relevant.
       Chafee: Relevant.
       Warner: Relevant.
       Warner: Relevant.
       Specter: Relevant.
       Enzi: Relevant.
       Enzi: Relevant.
       Mack: ISTEA reauthorization.
       Abraham: Relevant.
       D'Amato: Relevant.
       Frist: Relevant.
       Gorton: Relevant.
       Bond: Relevant.
       Brownback: Relevant.
       Moseley-Braun: Motorcycle helmets.

  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I further ask that when all of the above 
amendments have been disposed of, S. 1048 be advanced to third reading 
and the Senate immediately turn to H.R. 2169, the House companion bill, 
all after the enacting clause be stricken and the text of S. 1048, as 
amended, be inserted, H.R. 2169 be immediately advanced to third 
reading, and the Senate proceed to vote on passage, all without further 
action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SHELBY. Finally, I ask that following the vote on passage of the 
transportation appropriations bill, the Senate insist on its 
amendments, request a conference with the House, the Chair be 
authorized to appoint conferees on the part of the Senate, and S. 1048 
be placed back on the calendar.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SHELBY. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that the 
Senate resume consideration of S. 1048 immediately following the 
stacked votes at 2:15 on Tuesday.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and 
it is so ordered.
  Mr. SHELBY. For the information of all Senators, the managers intend 
to remain in session until all amendments are offered and debated with 
respect to the Transportation bill. Therefore, Members should expect 
final disposition of the Transportations appropriations bill on 
Wednesday morning.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, if I may say to my colleague, the 
chairman, I will just take the floor for a couple minutes and say that 
we have now been here 2 hours. It was the understanding when we left 
last week that the Transportation Subcommittee's bill would be up this 
evening with an opportunity to offer amendments and consider the 
business of the bill. We have had hardly a response.
  I do not have to lecture my colleagues, certainly, but this is the 
last week before we adjourn for August and get home to do the things we 
have to do with our constituents. I hope we can help move the process 
along. We ask our colleagues to join in to get the business of the 
people done, to get those amendments up here as quickly as we can 
tomorrow.
  We intend--and I discussed this with Senator Shelby--to be here long 
enough to get the work done, but we cannot do it unless people offer 
their amendments and take advantage of the opportunity to make those 
suggestions that they think improve the bill.
  So I send out this plea, Mr. President, probably to those who are 
just turning off their TV sets around the Capitol and say that we hope 
you will remember the bill will be open again tomorrow after the votes 
which are now listed and that we can get to work on passing the 
appropriations bill for 1998, one that we can send over to the House 
and get a conference on. We are moving along at a very good pace with 
our appropriations bills for next year, and we ought to continue to 
help that pace, get done, and let the people across the country know 
the appropriate investments are going to be made in the things that are 
included in this bill.
  With that simple admonition, Mr. President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________