[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 156 (Saturday, November 8, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12194-S12195]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            THE SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EXTENSION ACT OF 1997

 Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise to comment on S. 1454, 
the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 1997, which the Senate 
adopted last night. This bill allows States to obligate funds for six 
months, to ensure that

[[Page S12195]]

transportation funding continues to flow for highways, mass transit and 
safety programs. In addition, this bill will enable continued operation 
of the United States Department of Transportation.
  Each state will be assured access to transportation funds equaling at 
least 50 percent, and not more than 75 percent of the state's total 
transportation funding in FY1997. Moreover, states will have until May 
1, 1998, to obligate those funds. No state will be able to obligate 
Federal funds after that date.
  Every member should understand that this approach essentially creates 
another transportation funding crisis in only a few short months. This 
is far from a comfortable situation.
  Next year, when we take up the ISTEA reauthorization bill, we will be 
in the middle of the FY99 budget discussions and a decision about 
whether to allocate new funds that may become available as a result of 
improved budget projections. So, the debate over ISTEA, and the reality 
of another funding cutoff, will likely coincide with discussions over 
the FY99 Budget Resolution. As the Ranking Democratic Member of the 
Budget Committee, I can assure you that I will be doing my best to make 
additional investment in our transportation infrastructure a high 
priority during these discussions.
  Mr. President, when it became clear over one month ago that there was 
not enough time to fully debate a multi-year authorization bill, I 
starting calling for enactment of a short-term extension of ISTEA. This 
was the logical approach toward ensuring that States' transportation 
funding would not run dry.
  The States need additional funds now to meet their immediate 
transportation needs. ISTEA expired over a month ago, and although 
States have funding left over from previous years, these available 
funds will begin to run dry very soon for many States. Highway safety 
programs have been particularly hard hit because they have no leftover 
funding. Mass transit programs have no funding reserves.
  A straightforward reauthorization of ISTEA for six months is, to me, 
the easiest and fastest way to proceed. A House bill to do just that is 
currently pending on the Senate calendar. By simply continuing current 
law, this short-term extension also bypasses the controversy caused by 
enacting changes to the existing funding formulas or apportionments. In 
addition, passage of the House extension bill would allow us to 
immediately send this legislation to the President, rather than having 
to begin new discussions in a conference with the House. However, I 
understand that controversy is in the eye of the beholder, and there is 
a feeling among many in this body that allocation of new money will 
inevitably result in a discussion of formulas. So here we are.
  Mr. President, in the absence of a six month extension of current 
law, I reluctantly support the Bond compromise, which identified those 
needs that had to be addressed in a stop-gap measure.
  Mr. President, it is imperative that by the time Congress adjourns 
this year, both the House and Senate agree on an approach and send a 
bill to the President that can be signed into law. It is clear to most, 
that failure to enact some stopgap measure before we adjourn will have 
a severe impact on the transportation programs of the States. All State 
plans for new transportation construction, maintenance, and repair 
activities will be stopped. State transit agencies, metropolitan 
planning organizations, safety programs, and State planning and bidding 
activities will immediately suffer from funding shortages. Without a 
bill, important agencies within USDOT will shut down by mid- to late 
December. As a result, no projects involving Federal funding could go 
forward. This would have a huge impact on the States. Federal funds pay 
for over half the capital costs of State and local highway projects.
  The situation is even more bleak for all the other programs 
authorized under ISTEA--the safety programs, Intelligent Transportation 
Systems program, research programs, and--something very important to my 
state--the federal transit program. There are no funds left over to 
continue these programs.
  Perhaps the most distressing effect of our failure to act is the 
safety risk imposed on our constituents, as drunk driving prevention 
programs, truck and bus safety enforcement, bridge inspections, and 
highway/rail crossing projects are suspended. For safety reasons alone, 
we must ensure that some authority is extended. This bill does just 
that.
  While this bill is important, I do have some concerns. Under this 
bill, States would have the flexibility to shift unobligated balances 
among programs to ensure that states can use their scarce funds where 
they are most needed. For instance, a State could use its left-over 
CMAQ or enhancement funds to pay for a highway construction project. 
Language is included to prevent States from abandoning the 
responsibility to pay back the accounts from which they transferred 
funds. I remain concerned that these pay-back provisions will not be 
honored. States must be strictly required to pay back all of these 
transfers, including transfers from their CMAQ accounts, otherwise 
valuable programs, critical to our Nation's health and welfare, may be 
depleted. We must watch this closely to ensure that the program is 
protected.
  Mr. President, this bill authorizes the additional funding needed to 
keep crucial safety programs running, to allow States to continue their 
transportation projects and plans, to keep the U.S. Department of 
Transportation operating, and to continue the federal transit program 
for six months. Although this bill will most likely lead to yet another 
funding crisis in the near future, I want to do all I can to make sure 
that the Senate does not adjourn without somehow addressing the lapse 
in transportation funding. I prefer a straight extension of current 
law, and urged Senator Lott to bring it up. However, he rejected that 
path. Since that option is not before the Senate, I support this 
proposal as an acceptable compromise to carry us over until an ISTEA 
reauthorization bill is passed into law.

                          ____________________