[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 16 (Thursday, February 26, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1055-S1060]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT OF 1998

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I see that the distinguished chairman of the 
committee that has jurisdiction over the surface transportation bill is 
in the Chamber. I believe that the ranking member is on his way. In 
fact, I see he has just arrived in the Chamber.
  So, I now move to proceed to S. 1173, the Intermodal Surface 
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1997.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion.
  The motion was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 1173) to authorize funds for construction of 
     highways, for highway safety programs, and for mass transit 
     programs, and for other purposes.

  The Senate resumed consideration of the bill.
  Pending:

       Chafee/Warner amendment No. 1312, to provide for a 
     continuing designation of a metropolitan planning 
     organization.
       Chafee/Warner amendment No. 1313 (to language proposed to 
     be stricken by the committee amendment, as modified), of a 
     perfecting nature.
       Chafee/Warner amendment No. 1314 (to amendment No. 1313), 
     of a perfecting nature.
       Motion to recommit the bill to the Committee on Environment 
     and Public Works, with instructions.
       Lott amendment No. 1317 (to instructions of the motion to 
     recommit), to authorize funds for construction of highways, 
     for highway safety programs, and for mass transit programs.
       Lott amendment No. 1318 (to amendment No. 1317), to strike 
     the limitation on obligations for administrative expenses.

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it not be in 
order to offer any amendments relative to funding or financing prior to 
the Senate resuming consideration of the bill on Wednesday, March 4, 
1998.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I would like to state at this point that I 
did consult with the leaders of the committee and with the Democratic 
leader about this issue. There are still discussions underway with 
regard to funding, whether or not some additional funds would be 
available, and how much. There will be meetings occurring on that, I am 
sure, later on this afternoon, tonight, and over the weekend. But there 
are a number of amendments that are pending to this bill that we can go 
ahead and take up that would take some time for debate and be 
considered and have debate and vote. It is my hope that we can get our 
colleagues to come on to the floor, offer amendments, and, hopefully, 
we could even have some amendments disposed of this afternoon.
  I have indicated to the Democratic leader that we have to expect 
votes on Monday and Friday in March, because we have not only this very 
important bill but a number of other important bills. We are just going 
to have to start having votes in order to complete this very ambitious 
agenda.
  Does the Senator wish me to yield?
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I thank the majority leader. I think he 
just clarified it. I just came from our Policy Committee luncheon. The 
question was asked about votes tomorrow. I assured them it was the 
majority leader's expectation that there would be votes, and I think he 
just confirmed that it is his expectation that we will see votes on 
Friday. At what point could we expect to see votes on Monday?
  Mr. LOTT. I think we would honor our previous understanding that we 
would stack votes, if any were available, for 5 o'clock Monday 
afternoon. But, again, we will consult and have some further 
announcement on this after we get a better feel of how it is going to 
go later on today or before we go out for the week.
  Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that it be in order 
for me to withdraw all amendments and the pending motion pending to S. 
1173, except the pending committee amendment, and it be further 
modified to be in the form of a complete substitute subject to further 
amendments.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


 Amendments Nos. 1312, 1313, 1314, 1317, 1318, and motion to recommit 
                               withdrawn

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, therefore, I withdraw amendments numbered 
1312, 1313, 1314, 1317, and 1318 and the motion to recommit.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, again, what we are doing here, without going 
back and touching on last year's history--I do not want you to recall 
that--we did have some amendments that had been added to the tree, so 
to speak. We are withdrawing all of these now. We have the substitute 
bill out of committee. It is ready for amendments, and Senators will be 
able to come and offer their amendments, and we will have debate and 
vote.


                          Amendment No. 1676.

  (Purpose: To provide a substitute)
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, so, on behalf of the chairman, I further 
modify the committee amendment to reflect

[[Page S1056]]

what is now in the form of a substitute amendment and, therefore, 
subject to further amendments and ask that the amendment be printed as 
a Senate amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Lott), for Mr. Chafee, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 1676.

  (The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under 
``Amendments Submitted.'')
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from South Dakota for 
his cooperation in this effort.
  Obviously, this is very important legislation. I believe progress has 
been made over the past couple of days in a bipartisan way to come to 
some agreements, although they have not been reached, that would allow 
us to complete this bill in a way that would be fair to most all 
Senators.
  I thank the Senator, and I thank Senator Baucus for his cooperation 
and particularly the chairman, Senator Chafee.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate minority leader.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, Let me thank the majority leader for his 
efforts in scheduling this legislation.
  As I think everyone knows, this has been a matter of great priority 
for many of us. We are very pleased that now we are able to move ahead 
with the debate and consideration of this important legislation.
  We do not want to miss the construction cycle, and, certainly, by 
passing the legislation at an early date, we ought to be in a position 
to send a clear indication as to what our intentions are with regard to 
highway funding for the foreseeable future in time to meet the 
construction season.
  We hope that our House colleagues will also be sensitized to the 
importance of moving this legislation ahead quickly.
  Obviously, this legislation will go to conference. That will take 
some time. Even if we can expeditiously consider it now, it will be 
some time before we are prepared to send it over to the President. The 
sooner we can do that the better.
  It is for that reason that I hope we can avoid debate on extraneous 
amendments and legislation that may not be directly germane to the 
issues that fall within the consideration of this title and of this 
bill. It is for that reason that it is not our intention to offer 
campaign reform legislation to this bill or other forms of legislation 
that might be of high priority to the Democratic caucus.
  I will say, with regard to campaign reform legislation, there is no 
doubt at some point that it will be our intention to revisit the 
question, revisit the issue, but not on this bill, not at this time. 
Our hope now is that we can expeditiously consider it so we can get the 
legislation passed in time to assist States in planning for resources 
and the allegation of the available funding that will be made as a 
result of the completion of this legislation.
  So, I thank again the leader and all colleagues involved for bringing 
us to this point.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. CHAFEE addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, the majority leader has outlined or stated 
clearly what the situation is. We are going to now proceed with the 
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1998.
  I have a statement. I suspect that the distinguished ranking member 
will have a statement. Then we want to get on with amendments.
  The amendments that are available to consider today, tomorrow, and 
early next week will be amendments that are not relative to funding or 
financing. Funding and financing matters are now being worked out 
between various participants in that matter. So we will not touch on 
allotments or matters like that. But there is a whole series of 
amendments. There are some 200 amendments that have been filed, and a 
whole series of them have nothing to do with either financing or 
funding.
  So I hope that the authors of those amendments will bring them over, 
and let's debate them. If we can get a time agreement, three cheers, 
and get the vote. We have a lot of work to do. I just hate to have 
matters pile up toward the end. The majority leader has indicated he is 
very anxious to complete this legislation. I join in that desire.
  Mr. President, at long last, the Senate will begin its consideration 
of the ``Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1998,'' 
which will be referred to constantly on this floor as ISTEA or ISTEA 
II. This legislation is the product of more than a year of hard work 
and careful negotiations in the face of tremendous obstacles.
  At this time last year, the Committee on Environment and Public Works 
had before us three different very good proposals. But they were 
different. We were able to integrate them into one unified plan that I 
believe is deserving of the entire Congress' support.
  I might say, Mr. President, that this bill was reported out of the 
committee unanimously--18 to nothing. Democrats and Republicans all 
supported it.
  When ISTEA was enacted in 1991--that is, ISTEA I, the original bill--
it transformed national transportation policy. What was once simply a 
highway program is now a surface transportation program. That is the 
name of the bill. It is the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
Efficiency Act. That is what it is. It isn't just a highway bill; it is 
a surface transportation bill.
  We recognize that transportation touches every facet of our lives. 
The transition from the old policies and practices to those embodied in 
ISTEA I wasn't easy, and as for S. 1173, ISTEA II, it will carry 
forward the strengths of ISTEA I. But it also corrects some weaknesses 
that were in that legislation. And it will provide a responsive and, I 
believe, responsibly financed transportation program.
  ISTEA II preserves and builds upon the worthy objectives of 
intermodalism. That is a big word that we will be using around here. 
Intermodalism means in conjunction with and cooperation of a series of 
methods of transportation--it might be railroad, it might be aircraft, 
it might be automobiles and trucks--all working together to the greater 
strength of all.
  ISTEA II provides $145 billion. That is what we have as of now. 
Perhaps that will be increased as the result of the negotiations that 
are taking place. That is for over 6 years. It provides it for our 
Federal highway system, for highway safety, and other surface 
transportation systems. Moreover, it aims to stretch these dollars as 
far as possible.
  Mr. President, in the 1940s and 1950s the mindset--and understandably 
so--was to build an expensive highway system to move goods and 
passengers throughout the country. Now the interstate system is 
completed, and the mindset has shifted. The goal is no longer simply to 
build more highways but to preserve and maximize the strengths of our 
existing system, do the best we can to move more vehicles over the 
existing roads in a safe and efficient manner. We must reach out for 
ideas on creative ways of meeting our infrastructure needs.

  One of the primary goals of the Committee on Environment and Public 
Works as we drafted ISTEA II was that limited Federal funding be spent 
as efficiently as possible. We sought to accomplish this in several 
ways.
  First, ISTEA II provides real flexibility to States and localities 
and makes the program easier to understand. We believe this is a more 
simplified program than ISTEA I. It reduces the number of the program 
categories from five to three, and it includes more than 20 
improvements to reduce the red tape involved in carrying out 
transportation projects. These provisions address some of the chief 
complaints we heard about ISTEA I.
  Second, ISTEA II includes a number of innovative ways to finance 
transportation projects. It establishes the Federal credit assistance 
program for surface transportation. The new program leverages limited 
Federal dollars by allowing up to a $10.6 billion line of credit for 
transportation projects at a cost to the Federal budget of just over 
$500 million. In other words, for $.5 billion we get a $10.6 billion 
line of credit. The bill also expands and simplifies the State 
Infrastructure Bank Program to enable States to make the most of their 
transportation dollars.
  The third change we made, or key feature of this bill, is it 
strengthens

[[Page S1057]]

the transportation technology programs of the original ISTEA. 
Transportation technologies offer a wide array of benefits. They 
relieve traffic congestion and improve safety.
  A key forward-looking initiative of ISTEA II has been the Intelligent 
Transportation Systems, or the so-called ITS. ITS technologies provide 
new options for transportation planners to address safety and capacity 
concerns without the negative environmental or social effects of just 
expanding the highways, adding more lanes, constantly widening the 
highway. The Intelligent Transportation Systems also provide timely 
information to travelers and more efficient ways to design and build 
transportation infrastructure.
  The beauty of these innovative technologies is they boost the 
potential of our existing transportation system by moving more cars 
through existing lanes. That is what I was talking about before. Let me 
give you an example. I think we can take a good lesson from the 
Nation's airports. In the past decade we have only built one new 
airport, a major one, in our country. That is the International Airport 
in Denver--the only one new airport in the country in the last 10 
years. Nonetheless, we have increased the capacity of our existing 
airports through state-of-the-art technology. By learning from 
innovations and air traffic control and operations used in our airports 
where more aircraft carrying more people are using the existing 
facilities, we can maximize the so-called throughput of our highways, 
our rail system, and our transit systems just as well.
  Fourth, the bill before us significantly reforms the ISTEA funding 
formulas to balance the diverse regional needs of our Nation. The aging 
infrastructure and congested areas of the Northeast, the growing 
population and capacity limitations in the South and Southwest, rural 
expanses in the West require different types of transportation 
investments. Under ISTEA II, 48 of the 50 States share in the growth of 
the overall program, and the bill guarantees 90 cents back for every 
dollar a State contributes to the highway fund. This is up. In the 
past, under the ISTEA I, some States were as low as getting back 70 
cents for every dollar. This would boost them all up to 90 cents on the 
dollar.
  One of the wisest transportation investments we can make is safety 
for our passengers and drivers. In the United States alone there are 
more than 40,000 fatalities. That is something like 800-plus deaths a 
week on our highways in the United States. There are 3.5 million 
automobile crashes every year. Between 1992 and 1995 the average 
highway fatality rate increased by more than 2,000 deaths a year, while 
the annual injury rate increased by over 380,000.
  We must work vigorously to reverse this trend, and this bill will 
help us do that. ISTEA II substantially increases the Federal 
commitment to safety. The funds set aside for safety programs such as 
hazard elimination and railroad-highway crossings under this bill total 
nearly $700 million a year, a 55 percent increase over the current 
level.
  As valuable as transportation is to our society, it has taken a great 
toll on our Nation's air, water, and land. The cost of air pollution 
alone that can be attributed to cars and trucks has been estimated to 
range from $30 billion to $200 billion a year. I am proud that the bill 
before us increases funding for ISTEA's key programs to offset 
transportation's impact on the environment.
  ISTEA II provides an average of $1.18 billion per year over the next 
6 years for congestion mitigation and air quality improvements, 
sometimes referred to as CMAQ--congestion mitigation, reducing 
congestion and improving air quality. The amounts for this program are 
a substantial increase over the current funding levels for transit 
improvements, shared-ride services, and other activities to fight air 
pollution.
  Over the past 6 years, the Transportation Enhancements Program has 
offered a remarkable opportunity for States and localities to use their 
Federal transportation dollars to preserve and create more livable 
communities. Our highway program has devastated many communities, 
barging through them in a fashion that was designed to ``get the road 
built. Forget about the neighborhoods or what is happening in the 
communities that these highways are going through.'' That was the old 
system.
  Starting with ISTEA I, continued with ISTEA II, we provide a 24 
percent increase in funding for transportation enhancements such as 
bicycle and pedestrian facilities, billboard removal, historic 
preservation, rails-to-trails programs.
  In addition to CMAQ and enhancements, the ISTEA II establishes a new 
wetlands restoration pilot program. The purpose of the program is to 
fund projects to offset the loss or degradation of wetlands resulting 
from Federal-aid transportation projects.
  The original ISTEA, ISTEA I, recognized that transportation is but 
one part of a complex web of competing and often conflicting demands. 
As we all know, it is not a simple task to resolve the competing and 
often conflicting interests and demands with respect to transportation. 
The statewide metropolitan planning provisions of ISTEA I have yielded 
high returns by bringing all interests to the table and increasing the 
public's inputs into the decisionmaking process. This is the so-called 
metropolitan planning provision that we had in ISTEA I.
  ISTEA II continues and strengthens the planning provisions of the 
original ISTEA. This program is a comprehensive approach to 
transportation and has been working well. ISTEA II continues the spirit 
of intermodalism by extending the eligibility of the National Highway 
System and Surface Transportation Program funds to passenger rail, such 
as Amtrak, and magnetic levitation systems which we are just embarking 
on. By unleashing the efficiency and environmental benefits of all 
modes of transportation systems--highway, rail and transit--the bill 
before us will meet these demands and give a better quality of life for 
all Americans.
  I wish to express my appreciation to the majority leader for helping 
us to expedite the Senate's consideration of this important measure. 
The majority leader has been deeply involved in the conversations we 
have been having in connection with this legislation.
  I also thank Senators Warner and Baucus, and other members of the 
Environment and Public Works Committee, including our distinguished 
Presiding Officer this afternoon, each, for their excellent works in 
developing this legislation. It has been a challenging but rewarding 
exercise, to write the bill before us. I look forward to working with 
other Members of the Senate as well as the House leadership to enact a 
bill that will take the Nation's transportation system into the 21st 
century.

  So, Mr. President, again I issue a call to all who may be in their 
offices or listening. Now is the time to bring up amendments. 
Undoubtedly the distinguished ranking member will have a statement. But 
after that we are ready to go. I will feel distressed if we just sit 
here waiting for people to respond and they do not bring over these 
amendments. As I say, there are some 200 amendments out there. Some of 
them, obviously, are involved with fiscal matters which we cannot take 
up; but the others we can and we would like to.
  I thank the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Allard). The Senator from Montana.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I am very pleased to join my good friend 
and colleague, the chairman of the Public Works Committee, Senator 
Chafee. We have been friends for many, many years, have been on the 
committee for many, many years, and here we are again with the highway 
bill. I compliment the chairman for his graciousness, his hard work, 
his dedication to public service. I think the citizens of Rhode Island 
already know this, but for those who may not know it, or are wondering, 
I would like, to them and the rest of the country, to say they could 
not have a finer Senator than Senator Chafee.
  Mr. CHAFEE. Thank you very much.
  Mr. BAUCUS. I would also like at this point to thank our leader, 
Majority Leader Trent Lott, who has worked hard, particularly in the 
last several weeks, with various Senators, various groups, to assure we 
could bring this bill, the highway bill, the ISTEA bill, up earlier 
than it looked like would be the case.
  At the end of the last session of Congress, the leader indicated he 
would like to bring this bill up as one of the

[[Page S1058]]

first orders of business in 1998. Other factors intervened and made 
that difficult, extremely difficult. But, through his hard work, he was 
able to work out a way to bring this up very soon. One main reason is 
because of the tremendous need in our country. The current highway 
program expired several months ago. It expired the end of September. We 
don't have a highway program. We did pass a short-term extension until 
the end of April--it expires April 30--but there are not many weeks 
left between now and April 30. It is, therefore, incumbent upon us to 
take up this bill early because it is so complex, there are so many 
Senators who have such interest; let alone Members of the House, the 
other body; let alone taking it to conference. Again, I tip my hat to 
the majority leader for bringing this up very quickly.
  The current ISTEA legislation, as I mentioned, expired the 30th of 
last September, and, as I mentioned, it means we are currently 
operating under a 6-month extension which expires May 1. I might say 
that is just 9 weeks from now. I might also say that after this May 1 
date, States will no longer be able to obligate any Federal funds. That 
means we have to finish this bill very soon. By that I mean, after May 
1 a State may not obligate, that is, may not contract, funds to 
contractors, to designers, for rights-of-way or whatever is part of the 
highway program.
  That is not true for other bills around here, other laws that are 
passed here in Congress as a general rule. Sometimes an authorizing 
program expires and the Congress appropriates dollars for the program. 
That is not the same for the highway program. The highway program has 
to be in place in order for States and highway departments to contract 
dollars to people in their States to build highways.
  Since it has been a little while since we debated this bill, I would 
like to just add a few points to those made by the chairman of our 
committee, Senator Chafee. I want to begin by saying that we have 
tremendous infrastructure needs in our country. It's a big, fancy term, 
infrastructure. It's roads, highways, it's telephone lines and power 
lines--all of the basic structure that is the foundation for the rest 
of the country to operate on. You just can't let it deteriorate.
  Other countries spend more on infrastructure than we do, more on a 
per capita basis of their gross domestic product. Japan, for example, 
spends about four times what we do on infrastructure per capita; 
Germany spends a couple of times more than we do per capita. I might 
say that the Germans spend a lot of money on their highway program, and 
a lot of it goes into research. They have researched highways so much, 
when you build a highway in Germany now it lasts forever, virtually. 
They have a whole new technology, ways to bring their highways up to 
date. They spend a lot more on research and development than we do. We 
are a bigger country. We have to spend the dollars on our roads.
  Once we spend more dollars on our highway programs, it will go a long 
way, obviously, to reduce congestion. There are more cars every year, 
not fewer. This will also help increase highway safety. It will 
mitigate the impacts of transportation on the environment.
  Some people think of this only as a highway bill. This isn't only a 
highway bill. There are lots of other parts of this bill, and one of 
them is it helps improve the air quality in our country. The bill will 
also improve our mobility, our efficiency as a nation. That's a cost of 
doing business. A businessman knows, a company knows, the more 
efficient the transportation system, the more he or she is able to 
reduce the costs of doing business. So it's not just pleasure. It's not 
just convenience. It's a matter of doing business.

  The bill also increases the dollars for research and for the 
deployment of new transportation technologies. That is very important 
as we move into the next millennium.
  Some may ask, why is transportation so important? I have given some 
very obvious reasons already, but let me just amplify them a little 
bit. Transportation really affects us every day. Certainly when we get 
in our cars and drive, if we get in a taxicab, or try to move from one 
place to another, it very much does affect our quality of life. It also 
means investment. It means jobs. Over 42,000 jobs are created for every 
$1 billion of Federal spending. Stop and think about that for a moment. 
Mr. President, 42,000 jobs in America are created for each $1 billion 
of Federal spending. And most of those jobs are good-paying jobs. They 
are operating engineers, or they are laborers, they are with companies 
making the asphalt, concrete, highway resurfacing aggregate--those are 
good jobs. That's income. It helps our economy.
  Transportation and related industries employ almost 10 million people 
overall each year. Again, transportation and related industries employ 
about 10 million people every year. Transportation is one of the 
largest sectors of our economy; about 11 percent of gross domestic 
product. There are only three other sectors that have a higher 
percentage of our national gross domestic product; that's housing, 
that's health care, and that's food. Highway ranks No. 4.
  In addition to the economic implications of transportation 
investments, we cannot overlook the impact of our quality of life. The 
United States has the largest transportation system in the world. We 
enjoy the premier system of highways: a 45,000-mile interstate system; 
about 4 million miles of other roads.
  To put that in perspective, these 4 million miles of roads in the 
United States would circle the Earth 157 times. Just think about it, 4 
million miles of basic roads in the U.S. would circle the Earth 157 
times. In a population of about 265 million, our people drive over 2.4 
trillion miles each year on these highways.
  I was trying to think of an example of what 2.4 trillion really 
means. It is such a staggeringly high number. No example immediately 
comes to mind, but if people just stop and think a little bit, we are 
not talking about millions, not billions, but trillions, 2.4 trillion 
miles each year on our highways.
  Obviously, it causes us to repair them more. They get more beat up by 
trucks and cars. Some roads in our part of the country, Mr. President, 
thaw, freeze, thaw and freeze again. They get cracks in the pavement 
and fill with water and freeze again. They get bigger and cars and 
trucks pound on them. It is a problem.
  Not only does it cause highway repair bills for our cars, but it 
causes us to rattle our teeth a little bit and utter a few words about 
our highways, roads and potholes. The Transportation Department 
estimates that we need about $54 billion every year just to maintain 
our current highway system --$54 billion every year just to maintain. 
If we want to spend $74 billion a year, we could improve our system. 
That is the needs assessment of the Department of Transportation, $54 
billion to maintain. If we want to improve our system to a level that 
makes sense for America, it would be about $74 billion. I must say, at 
all levels--State, local and Federal--we spend about $34 billion a 
year. So just to maintain the current level, it would cost $54 billion. 
If we want a premier system, it would be $74 billion. But we in America 
spend not $54 billion to maintain to stay even, we spend $34 billion. 
That is a total of Federal, State and local spending on our highway 
system.
  That means we are challenged in the Congress to come up with 
legislation that is very efficient, that does what it can with what we 
have.
  I think this bill does that. It is not perfect. No legislation is 
perfect. We are 100 Senators; we are not one. We have to compromise. 
Again, I think this is a good compromise. Why?
  First, it builds on the successes of its predecessor, the highway 
bill, otherwise known as ISTEA of 1991. That was authored by my good 
friend and colleague from New York, Senator Moynihan, in the Senate. 
That was a landmark piece of legislation because it recognized the 
intermodal nature of transportation in America, much more than previous 
highway bills, and how connected we are for a more fluid flow of 
traffic and commerce and people, more of a seamless system.
  Our transportation system is more intermodal now. Also, State and 
local governments will be able to choose transportation projects that 
meet their diverse needs. We are one country, but we are also 50 States 
with many, many localities. This legislation gives local municipalities 
more control in making decisions for themselves. No longer are

[[Page S1059]]

we restricted in our mode of transportation. States can build highways, 
transit facilities, bike paths. Different communities certainly over 
the last 2, 3, 4 years have been more and more interested in, the fancy 
term is enhancements, but basically it is more concretely things like 
bike paths, pedestrian walkways. Again, that is a local decision 
hopefully covered enough in this bill.
  It also continues, as I said, along that path, no pun intended. We 
have some improvements, and I think we will be able to have even more 
improvements, that is, even more dollars added to this bill in the next 
several days.
  Let me talk a little bit about what we have attempted to do to make 
this bill more efficient and user friendly. The current highway 
program, again the fancy term is ISTEA, has about 11 categories from 
which dollars are taken to spend on various projects, whether it is 
interstate maintenance or whether it is interstate construction 
enhancement, bridges, whatnot. We have reduced those 11 categories down 
to five.
  They are: the Interstate National Highway System, that is one 
category; the Surface Transportation Program; the Congestion Mitigation 
and Air Quality Program; and then two other equity accounts essentially 
to make this all fit. Yet, we have maintained the integrity of ISTEA.
  What do I mean by that? Six years ago, Congress declared the end of 
the interstate era. Essentially, the interstate system had been 
completed. We are now in the process of combining the interstates with 
other key, most important primary highways in our country. We call that 
the National Highway System, or NHS. This National Highway System is a 
system of about 170,000 miles of roads and bridges, and they carry the 
vast majority of our traffic--commercial and passenger. These are the 
roads which provide access to rural and urban areas. They are the ones 
that connect farms to markets and homes to jobs. Mr. President, 170,000 
miles, that is the interstate system, plus the other major highways in 
our country.

  This legislation before us today recognizes the important role of 
that National Highway System and its key component the interstate 
system. Under the bill, about $12 billion a year will be spent on the 
National Highway System and at least half of that, about $6 billion, 
will be spent to maintain the interstate system of roads and bridges.
  While we have eliminated the current bridge program, and I won't get 
into details except to say a lot of communities have abused the current 
bridge program; that is, they say they need all this money for bridges 
and then they take the money and don't spend it on bridges but spend it 
on something else. Obviously, we want to reduce that dodge but yet 
maintain the quality of our bridges. So we have folded the current 
bridge program into other categories. States will receive about $4.2 
billion under certain bridge apportionment factors, and they will be 
required to spend at least what they are spending on bridges today. 
This will help ensure improvements in the conditions of our bridges.
  The second category, the Surface Transportation Program, is retained. 
That is a very flexible funding category. It is very important to give 
State highway commissions flexibility because, after all, they know 
what their needs are. This STP, Surface Transportation Program, 
provides this flexibility for all kinds of transportation projects from 
new construction to improvements in current highways, just to name a 
couple examples.
  In addition to this second program, Surface Transportation Program 
can be used for bike paths or pedestrian walkways or transit capital 
projects, transportation enhancement projects, rail highway crossing 
safety improvements, hazard elimination projects--again, a lot of 
flexibility to the highway commissions.
  We also maintain a very important program to improve air quality and 
reduce congestion around the country. That program is called the 
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program, otherwise known as CMAQ. 
This program provides dollars to nonattainment areas so they can 
undertake projects to improve their air quality.
  What does that mean? Mr. President, as you well know, under the Clean 
Air Act that was passed in 1991, certain regions and certain cities of 
our country are ``not in attainment'' of air quality standards which 
they are working toward. We want to make sure that the highway program 
doesn't make attainment or air quality worse, because sometimes if you 
have a lot more traffic in a certain city that is having a hard time 
meeting its level of air quality, that is going to make it even more 
difficult for that community to meet air quality standards. We are 
trying to figure how to work the two together.
  The solution, as in last year's bill, is the CMAQ Program. States 
then will use these dollars on certain projects that help reduce 
congestion in certain areas, therefore, to help that community meet its 
air quality requirements.
  I must say, the past 6 years have demonstrated terrific benefits 
which CMAQ has contributed to many areas reaching attainment. It has 
helped areas reach attainment and helped reduce traffic flows and 
reduce congestion. Most important, we have updated the formulas. These 
factors are much more current in helping calculate what a State will 
receive. The bill recognizes the diverse transportation needs of our 
country, from large southern States to donor States to the densely 
populated Northeast. The bill uses transportation factors and measures 
the extent of the use of the highway system.
  Use of these factors ensures that the funding is directed to the 
States based upon their need for highway funding. Just as a sidelight, 
I must say that the last ISTEA bill, the one we are operating under, 
uses very dated data. It is based on the 1980 census, for example, even 
though it was a 1991 bill. The ISTEA program, when it was passed in 
1991, used the 1980 census data. It also uses 1916 postal roads 
requirements. There is a lot in there that doesn't make sense for 1998 
and particularly as we move into the next century.
  So we have used and changed the formulas, brought them up to date 
based upon the needs of a State. Just as transit program formulas 
measure ridership in the extent of an area's transit system, it only 
makes sense that highway formulas do the same. That is what we have 
done in this bill.
  In addition to providing funding to improve infrastructure, the bill 
before us today also pays for more research, more development of new 
transportation technologies. We are not saying we are as up to date and 
as fancy with new technologies on our highway system as the Internet is 
with all the advances in computer technology, but we are developing 
intelligent transportation systems--shorthand ITS technologies--that 
will help increase the capacity of existing transportation systems 
without having to add new lanes and make this more efficient with the 
use of technologies and increase safety on our roads with new 
technology.

  An example I might give is transponders on cars which could read the 
ownership and the distance a car is traveling going through a toll so 
you don't have to stop and pay the toll every time.
  In addition to that, in my State of Montana, and I know yours, too, 
Mr. President, in Colorado, sometimes we drive along and there are deer 
and elk on the road ahead, livestock in my State. Sometimes in the 
southern part of the State we have bison on the road, or winter range. 
We are developing technology to warn cars ahead of time that there is 
livestock on the road, there is bison, deer and elk on the road. It is 
not fully developed, but it is an example of the kind of things we are 
working on just to help improve and update our highways.
  Let me sum up by saying that I think this bill is very balanced. It 
passed the committee by a unanimous vote. It is a fair bill. It is good 
for the country and for our future, and I think it is very important we 
begin work today so we can meet our May 1 deadline.
  I strongly urge Senators who have amendments, and under the agreement 
we are operating right now, as you know, we are providing only for 
nonfunding amendments; that is, amendments that don't deal with money 
in the bill, and there are a lot of them. So I ask Senators who have 
those amendments to come to the floor now today because we all know 
that when we get up to the deadline--a weekend--that things get pretty 
tight. It is far better to bring your amendments up earlier

[[Page S1060]]

than later if you want them to be considered, otherwise they will not 
be fully considered and will go down the drain most likely.
  Mr. President, I also want to mention and give tremendous credit to 
the Senator from Virginia, Senator Warner, chairman of the 
transportation subcommittee of our full committee. He has worked very, 
very hard. He has many, many responsibilities around here with 
everything under the Sun, frankly, yet he has diligently, with his 
staff, worked to come up with this compromise, and I might say, also, 
with tremendous grace and style and class. And it has been a real 
pleasure to work with the Senator from Virginia.

  In addition, we are here today in large part, Mr. President, because 
of the efforts of Senator Byrd, from West Virginia, and Senator Gramm, 
from Texas. There was a problem as to whether--we did not know whether 
we were going to get this bill up before the budget bill. But Senators 
Byrd and Gramm have offered an amendment. It is very simple. The 
amendment is not before us now. It is part of the matrix of this whole 
highway bill.
  It is a very simple amendment which says, essentially, of the 4.3 
cents of Federal gasoline taxes, which we last year transferred from 
general revenue into the highway trust fund, that money should also be 
spent back on highway programs, at least that portion dedicated to 
highways.
  That is the amendment. And because of that amendment, and because of 
the urgency of making sure that our motorists in our States get what 
they pay in taxes, we are here now today, before the budget resolution 
is before us, and again it is Senator Byrd and Senator Gramm who in 
large part are responsible, in addition to the leader and Senator 
Warner and others as to why we are here.
  So I close, Mr. President, because I see my good friend, Senator 
Warner, standing over here ready to speak. And I thank him for what he 
has done.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleague. And 
indeed the Senator from Montana and I have been partners on this 
throughout. There was a time when it was just the two of us together. 
And we stood steadfast and put together the basic coalition of States 
that gave us the nucleus of concepts and ideas which were incorporated 
in the subcommittee bill, of which I am privileged to chair and the 
distinguished Senator from Montana is not only ranking on the full 
committee but he is ranking on the subcommittee that drew up this bill.
  I thank him because there were some lonely days in the course of the 
development of this bill, and we stood together as we have throughout. 
He has quite properly acknowledged the important contributions of 
Senator Byrd and Senator Phil Gramm of Texas. And we have been meeting 
together with the distinguished majority leader, the chairman of the 
Budget Committee, chairman Chafee, Chairman D'Amato, as we try to work 
through a solution to the timing and the presentation of that 
amendment.
  So, Mr. President, I want to give a statement on behalf of the bill. 
But two of our colleagues have time constraints, and if it is agreeable 
to the distinguished floor manager here on the Democrat side, I would 
like to yield at this point in time the floor such that these Senators 
can get recognition and do their important work.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I might 
proceed as in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. I would also like to add my commendation to the 
distinguished Senator from Virginia for his outstanding leadership on 
the ISTEA II bill and on his commitment to the infrastructure of this 
country. It has been my privilege in my first year in the Senate to 
serve with Senator Warner on the Environment and Public Works 
Committee, and it has been an honor indeed to see his commitment to 
improving the infrastructure of this Nation and his willingness to work 
with me on our particular needs in my home State. I commend you for 
your leadership.
  (The remarks of Mr. Hutchinson pertaining to the introduction of S. 
1684, S. 1685, and S. 1686 are located in today's Record under 
``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. THOMPSON addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business for 10 minutes for the purpose of introducing 
legislation.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The remarks of Mr. Thompson pertaining to the introduction of S. 
1687 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced 
Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')
  Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to proceed for 5 
minutes as if in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________