[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 158 (Monday, November 10, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12436-S12437]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            THE HIGHWAY BILL

  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask the leader his intentions when we 
return, what the first order of business would be. The leader and I had 
had a chance to have a conversation last Friday, and he had indicated 
to me his intention was at that time that we would go to the highway 
bill when we return. Is that still the Senator's intention.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, it would be my intention. Of course, we 
would need to confer on that with the committee leaders. But I believe 
that Senator Chafee and Senator Baucus would like to take it up early. 
I talked with Senator Daschle about it. That is something I would like 
to maybe begin on the next day after the State of the Union but right 
at that first part. So we can go ahead and do our work and, hopefully, 
the House will follow our leadership.
  One other issue that could come up early next year would be the 
juvenile justice bill reported out of the Judiciary Committee. I 
believe there is some language in the omnibus bill that we passed that 
would provide funds for it, but those funds are fenced until we do 
authorization. So that is something that could come up. And before we 
go out for the President's Day recess, we would also take up the Morrow 
nomination for a judicial position.
  Mr. CONRAD. I thank the Senator. If I could just conclude the 
thought, a number of our States are very concerned about the highway 
legislation because, although we are going to have a 6-month extension 
here, they are concerned about having a short construction season and 
about our completing work on a highway bill in a timely way.
  Mr. LOTT. Will the Senator yield so I can bring him up to date on 
that?
  Mr. CONRAD. Yes.
  Mr. LOTT. Throughout the day yesterday, meetings were occurring 
between the House and Senate leadership on the highway bill. We had 
passed in the Senate, as the Senator will recall, a fix which allowed 
flexibility so that some funds could be moved between accounts, if 
necessary, to keep the Department of Transportation employees working. 
I think there was a transit accommodation. So I think it had about four 
parts.
  During the day yesterday, they were meeting with their counterparts 
in the House. I was led to believe last night that they had come to an 
agreement and that agreement, whatever it is--I just can't give you the 
total outlines of it now--would be attached to either the omnibus 
appropriations bill or one of the appropriations bills that would be 
going to the President for his signature.
  Mr. CONRAD. So we will have a 6-month extension.
  Mr. LOTT. I am not sure. As I said, I don't know what they came up 
with, but necessary actions to provide for safety, transit funds, and 
flexibility over some additional funds depending on what they agreed 
to, which I assume would take us to May 1.
  But I do think, again, it is very important we have some deadline on 
this. Otherwise, we will never bring this very important but very 
difficult issue to a conclusion.
  Mr. CONRAD. As one of the first orders of business when we turn to 
the 6-year bill.
  Mr. LOTT. Right.
  Mr. CONRAD. Which is what most of us would like to see, at least in 
this Chamber. We have a problem on the House side; they only want a 6-
month bill, but we want a 6-year bill.
  Mr. LOTT. Absolutely.
  Do I have time?
  If the Senator will allow me to respond--and I will yield the floor 
if you would like me to--the Senate, I believe, has acted very 
responsibly on this in terms of the package we had before us, the 6-
year package within the budget. Obviously, there will be some important 
amendments to be offered.
  As the Senator is aware, it got tangled up on an unrelated issue, but 
that issue will not be hanging over us on this bill when we come back.
  What has me worried is I believe there are people really kind of 
interested in dragging this out because they want to keep the formula 
as it now is. I think the existing formula is fundamentally unfair to 
States like my own, and so I am very anxious for the Senate to keep the 
pressure on to move a 6-year bill that comes up with a fairer formula 
but also lives within budget constraints.
  Mr. DORGAN. Will the Senator yield just for a moment on that point?
  Mr. LOTT. I will be glad to yield.

[[Page S12437]]

  Mr. DORGAN. The Senator from North Dakota [Mr. Conrad] raised a 
question about the highway issue. I just wanted to follow up briefly.
  The Senator from Mississippi will recall that the chairman of the 
transportation committee of the other side some many weeks ago 
indicated he would not even go to conference on a 6-year bill, and so 
we got tangled up for a lot of reasons, including I think the desire of 
some on the other side only to consider a 6-month bill. That pole 
vaults this into next year at some point when the Senator talks about 
May 1. I understand and share with him the need to be some end date 
that applies the pressure to say now we need to get the 6-year bill and 
get it done, because we cannot continue this approach of incremental 
funding without some understanding by the States of what they have to 
work with in the long run.
  I have not had an opportunity to make contact or have discussions 
with folks in the other body, but when they indicated an unwillingness 
even to go to conference if we come up with a 6-year bill, it suggests 
an approach radically different than most of us in the Senate would 
have wanted.
  Mr. LOTT. That is absolutely the case. But the problem they had in 
the House--we both served in the House; we know what it is like--
highway infrastructure and transportation funds are very, very 
important in every State. This is not a partisan issue. This is an 
issue that divides us, some not really even by regions; States side by 
side can have a different view of the formula. And I think they pushed 
the 6-month proposal because they could not get the votes for anything 
else right then. But I think if the Senate does not show leadership and 
keep the pressure on them, we will never get this issue resolved.
  That is why I had not wanted to do anything akin to 6 months. I 
wanted us to have some basic flexibility so States could reprogram, 
move funds around and make sure we had the safety fund but keep the 
heat on.
  But I think the best thing that we could do on that right now is to 
make sure there is not a short-term problem with availability of funds, 
realizing that in the colder States you need to do contracting in 
December and perhaps early January to have those programs underway in 
the spring.
  But again, it is my intent for the Senate to go ahead and take up 
this issue and address it early to put pressure on the House and also 
so that whenever they do get their act together and vote, we will be 
ready for conference. But I do think it is irresponsible for a Member 
on either side of the aisle, whether he or she be a chairman or not, to 
say they are not going to go to conference with the other body if the 
other body doesn't pass a bill that they like. We have feifdoms around 
here, but I believe we should not have that type of attitude or we will 
never bring this important issue to a reasonable conclusion.
  That is all I am pushing for. That is why I have tried to push this 
bill all this year. Frankly, in our own body I think our colleagues 
made a mistake by letting it drag out to this fall. I thought it should 
have been done last spring. I had a tentative schedule for the Senate 
to take it up in April of this year, last April. I know they had a hard 
time working it out in committee, but to their credit they worked it 
out and brought out a good, broadly bipartisan bill.
  It will be a focus that we need to work on and we need to do it 
earlier in the year, because if we wait until next September right 
before elections, there will be no way we can do it.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I understand the comments of the Senator 
from Mississippi. I really share his desire to move on this early next 
year. I think the committee has done an exceptional job. I like the 
highway bill they brought to the floor, the 6-year bill. If we can move 
something like that early next year, I think we will have provided some 
significant leadership. So I appreciate very much the leadership of the 
Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. LOTT. I yield the floor, Mr. President.

                          ____________________