[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 4 (Monday, February 2, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S251-S252]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ISTEA FUNDING
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, we have had this afternoon several Members
rise to talk about ISTEA funding. I rise to support the things that
they have said. One of the most important bills that we passed in our
committee last year, and I think one of the most important elements
before us now in the Senate, is the funding of the Intermodal
Transportation Act.
We worked a great deal last year. I happen to be on the Committee on
Environment and Public Works, and we came up with an extension of the
ISTEA bill, which expired last year, by the way. Now, of course, we are
operating on a temporary arrangement, which makes it very difficult for
State highway departments to make the contracts that are necessary. I
think it is particularly important for States like Wyoming and the
northern part of the country, where you have a relatively small short
contracting and construction time, that we move to pass this bill so
that the States will know what money is available to them.
There should have been approval last year, other than an extension.
Unfortunately, we couldn't come to an agreement with the House.
Furthermore, right here in the Senate, as I recall, there were some
things that were brought up that kept us from considering ISTEA. But
now it is time to do that.
We also have before us a proposal to extend the authority for
spending, to use more of the dollars that are collected, and I agree
with that. I have not yet become a sponsor of it, but I, frankly,
propose to be. We have been spending in the neighborhood of $21 billion
a year on ISTEA, but Federal taxes have been raising more like $27
billion. Now, of course, as a result of last year's budget, we
converted the 4.3-cent tax, having gone to the general fund, to now go
to the highway fund. I support that idea. So it is time for us to do
that.
I am concerned, of course, that we do it within budget guidelines. I
am not interested in breaking the budget caps by simply spending. I
know when you have a unified budget, if you are going to spend more
money here, you have to make arrangements on the other side, too, which
restricts spending. I am for that.
I think it is necessary for us to do it. I am sorry that it has been
postponed. It was my understanding that it would be the first item of
business to be considered or early, at least, in this session. I know
there is controversy now with the budgeteers in terms of how that
works, but this is an authorization, as I understand it. It is not an
expenditure, of course. It authorizes what will then be put together by
the budgeteers and appropriators.
Mr. President, I certainly want to endorse the notion that there is
nothing more important or nothing that needs to be dealt with more
currently than the idea of expanding ISTEA. I hope
[[Page S252]]
that the leader and others in the leadership will give some
consideration to that. I think we can move forward. I know that there
is not certainty in the House as to the direction they want to take,
but I believe passage of the Senate proposal and shipment of it to the
House would cause that to happen. If it is difficult, it is difficult.
It is no more difficult now than it will be later. To the contrary, as
we get toward the end of this session, it may be even more difficult to
find time.
I suggest, hope and urge that we bring it to the floor as soon as
possible, and we resolve that issue so that we can move forward on this
transportation question, which is probably one of the most important
economic things we do in our States. These dollars go there, they are
contracted, they go into business, and we provide a better
transportation system.
Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________