[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 152 (Tuesday, November 4, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11629-S11630]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  TRANSPORTATION REAUTHORIZATION BILL

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to present to my colleagues 
what I think is a compromise that will help us get over a very 
difficult situation. I am very proud to be a member of the Environment 
and Public Works Committee and to have joined with the leadership of 
that committee--Chairman Chafee, Senator Warner, Ranking Member Baucus, 
and the other members of the committee, in reporting out what I believe 
is an excellent transportation reauthorization bill.
  I think this is a bill that we need for the next 6 years. We need it 
for transportation, for safety, for economic development. The simple 
fact of the matter is, without discussing the whys, the ``where we 
are'' is we are not going to get that passed this year. There, in my 
view, is no way that we can get agreement, get it passed on the floor 
of the Senate, and agree with the House on a very different approach 
they are taking prior to the time we adjourn for the remainder of the 
year.
  If we don't--and we had a hearing today in Environment and Public 
Works--No. 1, the Department of Transportation operations cannot 
continue, vitally needed safety programs cannot continue, transit 
programs cannot continue, and many States will not be able to let the 
contracts they need for major construction projects in the coming 
months because they will not have the obligational authority.
  There is a lot of money in the States--over $9 billion--that is 
unobligated that has been authorized, but the problem is very often it 
is in the wrong category. The States have money, but it may be in CMAQ 
when they need it in STP or the various different programs.
  The question is, what are we going to do about it? Some in the House 
have presented a proposal that is sort of a 6-month extension. It keeps 
the old formula and tries to jam everything into 12 months. Frankly, 
that is very unfair to my State and quite a few other States that are 
known in this body as donor States.
  I can assure you that any time we try to do something in the highway 
and transportation area that gets us into a formula discussion, we are 
going to spend some time at it. I feel very strongly about the 
formulas, and I intend to express myself about them, as other Members 
should.
  What are we going to do about it? What are we going to do about the 
fact that safety and transit programs run out and many States will not 
be able to let contracts they need for major projects at the end of the 
winter when they have to get ready for the summer construction season?
  Today I presented to my colleagues in the Environment and Public 
Works Committee a compromise which I think enables us to continue these 
vitally important operations. Certainly highways and transportation are 
right at the top of the list of things that my constituents in Missouri 
want to see us do. It will enable us to come back after the first of 
the year, pass a 6-year reauthorization and do so without penalizing 
the States and the transit and the safety programs.
  What we would do under my bill is provide 6 months of funding for the 
safety programs, the Department of Transportation operations and 
transit. For the unobligated balances, we would give the States 
complete flexibility. If they want to put surface transportation money 
into construction mitigation, they could do so, and they would be able 
to continue their operations and issue contracts through March 31.
  Some States do not have enough unobligated balances to be able to 
continue their contracting authority through March 31 at the same rate 
they had done in this year or the previous year. So for those States, 
my measure would provide them an advance, an advance against what we 
are going to authorize in the bill that we must pass and that the 
President must sign so transportation can go forward in this country.
  For most States, it means a small amount, but we would advance fund 
that money without regard to the formula. Say, for example, you had 
$250 million in unobligated balances, but in the first 6 months in one 
of those years you obligated $290 million. We would have the Department 
of Transportation advance $40 million to that State so that between now 
and March 31, the State would be able to obligate $290 million for 
transportation purposes.
  Later on in the year, when that State's allocation is determined and, 
say, under the formula that State would get $500 million from probably, 
say, $800 million for the year, that $40 million would be deducted from 
the allocations under the new authorization, and they would get $760 
million.
  What this does, Mr. President, is allow us to keep things operating, 
keep contracts being let, keep transit programs and safety programs 
operating without getting bogged down in the formula fight.
  As I said earlier, when I say ``bogged down,'' I look forward to the 
very active discussion of the funding formula.

[[Page S11630]]

It is one of the most important things that we need to do around here 
in terms of economic development, transportation and safety. But it 
will take some time. I would envision that whenever the majority leader 
wants to schedule it, it would take at least a couple of weeks and 
maybe more. So while we are doing that, we should not cut off the 
transit, the safety, or the contracting obligation that the States 
would normally do.
  As I said, we presented this at the EPW hearing this morning. We had 
a very good discussion with representatives of the National Governors' 
Association and the Department of Transportation.
  Mr. President, the National Governors' Association has sent a letter 
signed by 39 Governors. Getting 39 Governors--having been one--I can 
tell you, to sign on a letter is not easy. But the Governors very 
simply said:

       . . .it is imperative for the Senate to consider and pass 
     short-term legislation providing funding for highway, 
     transit, and safety programs and to complete a conference on 
     that legislation with the House of Representatives. Such 
     legislation would minimize the interruption in funding to 
     State and local governments. It would also avoid the 
     disastrous effects that a several-month lapse in 
     authorization would have on many States' transportation 
     programs.

  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that that letter be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                               National Governors Association,

                                 Washington, DC, November 4, 1997.
     Hon. Trent Lott,
     Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.

     Hon. Thomas A. Daschle,
     Minority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Lott and Senator Daschle: Given the very 
     limited time remaining in this legislative session, it is 
     imperative for the Senate to consider and pass short-term 
     legislation providing funding for highway, transit, and 
     safety programs and to complete a conference on that 
     legislation with the House of Representatives. Such 
     legislation would minimize the interruption in funding to 
     state and local governments. It would also avoid the 
     disastrous effects that a several-month lapse in 
     authorization would have on many states' transportation 
     programs.
           Sincerely,
         Governor George V. Voinovich; Governor Thomas R. Carper; 
           Governor Edward T. Schafer, Co-Chair, Transportation 
           Task Force; Governor Paul E. Patton, Co-Chair, 
           Transportation Task Force; Governor Mike Huckabee; 
           Governor Roy Romer; Governor Lawton Chiles; Governor 
           Philip E. Batt; Governor Terry E. Brandstad; Governor 
           Mike Foster; Governor Parris N. Glendening; Governor 
           Arne H. Carlson; Governor Marc Racicot; Governor Jeanne 
           Shaheen; Governor Jane Dee Hull; Governor Pete Wilson; 
           Governor John G. Rowland; Governor Zell Miller; 
           Governor Frank O'Bannon; Governor Bill Graves; Governor 
           Angus S. King Jr.; Governor John Engler; Governor Mel 
           Carnahan; Governor Bob Miller; Governor Christine T. 
           Whitman; Governor James B. Hunt Jr.; Governor David M. 
           Beasley; Governor Don Sundquist; Governor Howard Dean, 
           M.D.; Governor Gary Locke; Governor Tommy G. Thompson; 
           Governor Benjamin J. Cayetano; Governor John A. 
           Kitzlaber; Governor William J. Janklow; Governor 
           Michael O. Leavitt; Governor Roy Lester Schneider, 
           M.D.; Governor Cecil H. Underwood; Governor E. Benjamin 
           Nelson; Governor Pedro Rossello.

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, in conclusion, let me say that we have had 
good ideas from both sides of the aisle in the EPW Committee. We look 
forward to working with Chairman Warner, Senator Baucus, Chairman 
Chafee, the other members of the committee.
  I hope this is something that we could agree on and move forward on 
quickly so that our States and the traveling public will not suffer 
while we go through the very important discussions on coming up with a 
new highway funding formula.
  I invite comments. I look forward to working with my colleagues. This 
one I hope we can do on a bipartisan basis without the regional 
differences that will inevitably arise when we begin discussion of the 
funding formula.
  Mr. President, I appreciate the time, and I yield the floor.

                          ____________________