[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 6 (Wednesday, February 4, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S375-S376]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page S375]]
                            THE HIGHWAY BILL

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, there has been a fair amount of discussion 
in the last few days about the desire that many Members of the Senate 
have that we be able to debate a highway bill here on the floor of the 
Senate. I want to add my voice to that of Senator Byrd and Senator 
Gramm of Texas, Senator Baucus and so many others who have come to the 
floor of the Senate and indicated the importance of the Senate 
proceeding ahead to deal with the highway bill.
  I know that there are those who say, ``Well, the House of 
Representatives indicates it is not going to proceed on a highway bill 
until some point much later, perhaps following the decisions made on 
the budget.'' There are those who say in the Senate that we ought not 
proceed until we deal with the budget.
  The fact is, the highway bill was supposed to have been done last 
year and was not. It ought to be done now. If we wait, we will move 
right to that May 1st drop-dead date on the highway short-term 
extension, and we will leave a good many States out there wondering 
what on Earth are they going to do with respect to their roads and 
bridges that need repair and rebuilding? Now, the highway bill does not 
sound very sexy or very interesting to some. But the investment in 
highways is very important to this country. It represents an investment 
in infrastructure, it represents jobs and economic activity and 
opportunity. It is very, very important.
  We take for granted so many things in this country, almost every day. 
But go, for example, to Honduras and get on a road going south from 
Tegucigalpa, and then think to yourself, as you drive along that road, 
what a different kind of infrastructure there exists in some countries 
versus what we have done in this country. We take roads for granted 
until we go elsewhere in the world and discover what we have done in 
this country to make this a better place.
  I come from a very, very rural area of America, a county the size of 
the State of Rhode Island that has only 3,000 residents. I know from 
that background how important roads have been to my hometown--the 
opportunity to move grain to market, the opportunity to get to a 
hospital, the opportunity to go back and forth for purposes of 
commerce. It unlocks economic opportunities in all parts of our 
country. That is why building and maintaining the network of roads and 
bridges in our country has been so important.
  One of the wonderful examples of progress in this country was when we 
decided as a country that we were going to build an interstate highway 
system and it was going to be an American system, a national system. 
They did not decide, you know, we should debate whether the interstate 
highway should go through a State like North Dakota. They did not say, 
``Well, when it gets to Fargo, ND, on the Minnesota border, we have to 
stop there because there aren't enough people living between Fargo, ND, 
and Beach, ND, over by the Montana side to justify building four lanes 
of highway calling it an interstate.'' They don't say that.
  They built an interstate highway all across this country to connect 
this country even through remote rural areas because we knew it was a 
good investment for this country.
  Roads, infrastructure--it represents an awfully good investment for 
this country. What has happened to us--and I am not laying partisan 
blame at all--what has happened to us is we have gotten embroiled in 
debates about a lot of other issues here in the U.S. Senate when in 
fact it is our duty and responsibility to take up the issue of highway 
reauthorization and get it done.
  We have a very short construction season in some of our northern 
States. We have to know what kind of money is available, what kind of 
investment can be made, what kind of resources will be available to us 
to proceed and develop the plans needed to maintain our roads and 
bridges. I worry very much that what is going to happen to us is we 
will come up to the May 1st deadline and not have done the highway bill 
even this year, when in fact it should have been done last year. So the 
question before the Senate is not whether we are going to do a highway 
bill. The question is when. And the question of when is very, very 
important.
  I know the majority leader told the Senate that it would be the first 
order of business when we come back after the first of the year. I also 
know there are others in the Senate who are tugging at his sleeves 
saying, well, we do not want the highway bill to come up until after 
the budget. So I know the majority leader wants to bring the highway 
bill up, but he has other Members suggesting that it be brought up 
later.
  I urge the majority leader, in the strongest terms possible, to heed 
the call of Senator Gramm from Texas, Senator Byrd, Senator Baucus, 
Senator Chafee, so many other Senators who say this is a critically 
important issue. Let's do this. Let's do it together in a bipartisan 
way, and let's tell the Governors and the mayors and the legislators 
and the folks out in our country in the countries and the cities that 
here is our highway bill, here are the resources, here is our 
investment in infrastructure. We are proud of it. We want to do it 
because it is good for the country. Let's do it soon.

  So we will continue, in the coming days, to call for action on the 
highway bill. It is not meant in any way as a partisan call, because 
there are both Republicans and Democrats who feel very strongly that it 
ought to be placed right at the top of the agenda right now. Some say 
that when the highway bill comes to the floor, there will be 100 or 200 
amendments. Well, if there are 100 amendments, we could have gotten rid 
of a lot of them last week and this week. Let's work our way through it 
and pass this legislation and send a message to the folks out in the 
country that this Congress values the investment in infrastructure in 
our country, this Congress understands the importance of a highway 
program that provides certainty to the American people about our 
investment in infrastructure.
  The National Council of State Legislatures, today, has written the 
majority leader saying:

       On behalf of the Nation's State legislators, the National 
     Conference of State Legislatures reiterates its continuing, 
     firm support for immediate action on ISTEA reauthorization.

  That is the highway bill.

       It is crucial that a long-term reauthorization be enacted 
     before March 31.

  It goes on to say:

       The National Council of State Legislatures feels that 
     immediate action is essential. States face imminent 
     shortfalls in various program accounts at the end of March, 
     1998, shortfalls which can have serious ramifications for 
     State transportation programs. For example, contractual 
     relationships for future highway construction can be 
     compromised, transit agencies can be unable to apportion 
     funds without the passage of authorizing legislation, and 
     highway safety programs can come to a halt in certain States. 
     State legislators remain greatly concerned about the 
     possibility of these disruptions.

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

                                            National Conference of


                                           State Legislatures,

                                 Washington, DC, February 4, 1998.
     Hon. Trent Lott,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Lott: On behalf of the nation's state 
     legislators, the National Conference of State Legislatures 
     reiterates its continuing, firm support for immediate action 
     on ISTEA reauthorization.
       It is crucial that a long-term reauthorization be enacted 
     before March 31st. NCSL feels that immediate action is 
     essential. States face imminent shortfalls in various program 
     accounts at the end of March 1998, shortfalls which can have 
     serious ramifications for state transportation programs. For 
     example, contractual relationships for future highway 
     construction can be compromised, transit agencies can be 
     unable to apportion funds without the passage of authorizing 
     legislation, and highway safety programs can come to a halt 
     in certain states. State legislators remain greatly concerned 
     about the possibility of these disruptions.
       Thank you for your consideration. We hope that you will do 
     your part to ensure the passage of any surface transportation 
     reauthorization.
           Sincerely yours,

                                                Richard Finan,

                                           Senate President, Ohio,
                                                   NCSL President.

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I know the majority leader wants to pass 
this legislation. I know there will be a bipartisan consensus on a 
highway reauthorization bill. I come today to the floor of the Senate 
saying, let us start

[[Page S376]]

now, let us move to the highway reauthorization bill and decide to take 
action as quickly as possible for the benefit of this country.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________