[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 155 (Friday, December 15, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11829-S11830]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   MAKING FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2001

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to the technical continuing resolution, H.J. Res. 133.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the joint resolution by 
title.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A joint resolution (H.J. Res. 133) making further 
     continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2001, and for 
     other purposes.

  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the joint 
resolution.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution 
be read the third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be laid 
upon the table, all without intervening action, motion, or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The joint resolution (H.J. Res. 133) was read the third time and 
passed.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I have one further clarification. It seems 
there is an objection, notwithstanding the receipt of the papers, that 
we have a vote and then go to debate, but we are working on an 
arrangement that will allow us to proceed with debate and get some 
certainty about how the vote will be dispensed with. We should be able 
to get that clarified in a few minutes. I would hate to ask the Senator 
to yield again in a few minutes, but in view of the importance of the 
issue, I might do that. For now, that is all the business Senator 
Daschle and I have.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from New 
Jersey has the floor.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. I thank the Chair. I yield 3 minutes to the Senator 
from Massachusetts, again with it understood that I retain the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The 
Senator from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from New Jersey. He is 
very gracious in doing so. I know he wants to make some important 
comments that summarize his 18 years of work and commitment on this 
issue. He is generous to allow us to intervene.
  I join in thanking the majority leader and the minority leader, 
Senator Daschle, Senator Reid, particularly Senator Byrd and Senator 
Stevens for responding to the request of a number of us from our 
region. I thank Senator Biden and Senator Lautenberg for their 
leadership again on this issue.
  There was a lot of passion in our caucus earlier this afternoon, and 
the minority leader listened to all of us very carefully. Our caucus, I 
must say, was united in its commitment to the notion that those of us 
who cared about this issue needed to have some kind of response on the 
floor that indicated where we will go. I am grateful for this response.
  The commitment on the floor openly, as it has been given, to proceed 
as we will proceed, particularly from the distinguished ranking member 
of the Appropriations Committee and the chairman, is as good a 
commitment as one can get in the Senate.
  We have 56 sponsors of this legislation today in the Senate. With the 
new Senators coming in, I am absolutely confident we will have more 
than 60 sponsors of this legislation. I look forward to building on the 
legacy of Senator Moynihan and Senator Lautenberg and completing what 
is absolutely essential for this country, which is a rail system of 
which the Nation can be proud.
  I am very grateful to all those who have made this effort. I 
particularly say about the Senator from New Jersey and the Senator from 
New York, the two of them will be so missed with respect to their 
leadership and the vision they have expressed with respect to 
transportation issues as a whole, but particularly for those of us in 
the Northeast, what voices they have been in the Senate with respect to 
their vision for how we can more inexpensively and capably move people 
from here to

[[Page S11830]]

there and increase the productivity of our country. I pledge, along 
with my other colleagues, to build on their example and on that vision. 
The day will come when we will all have a better transportation network 
as a consequence of their leadership.
  Mr. President, I know that every member of the Congress is anxious to 
end this session and get back to our states. We all have work to do and 
families waiting to celebrate the holidays. However, my colleagues 
Senator Lautenberg and Senator Biden are right to be angry and 
frustrated with this legislation.
  There is a small but extremely significant item missing from this 
legislation--the High-Speed Rail Investment Act. The Act would allow 
Amtrak to sell $10 billion in bonds over the next decade and provide 
tax credits to bondholders in lieu of interest payments. Amtrak would 
use this money to upgrade existing rail lines to high-speed rail 
capability. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the bill 
would cost just $95 million over 2 years. Over 5 years, the bill would 
still cost only $762 million.
  The High-Speed Rail Investment Act has 56 co-sponsors in the Senate. 
This is not a partisan issue. It is not a regional issue. It is not an 
urban issue. The High-Speed Rail Investment Act has the support of the 
National Governors Association, the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the 
National Conference of State Legislatures. Nineteen newspapers, from 
the New York Times and Providence Journal, to the Houston Chronicle and 
Seattle Post Intelligencer, have called for the enactment of this 
legislation.
  Let me explain why so many people and organizations support this 
legislation:
  It is in our national interest to construct a national infrastructure 
that is truly intermodal. Rail transportation helps alleviate the 
stress placed on our environment by air and highway transportation. It 
is a sad fact that America's rail transportation, and its lack of a 
national high-speed rail system, lags well behind rail transportation 
in most other nations--we spend less, per capita, on rail 
transportation than Estonia, Myanmar, and Botswana.
  There is a compelling need to invest in high-speed rail. Our highways 
and skyways are overburdened. Intercity passenger miles have increased 
80 percent since 1988, but only 5.5 percent of that has come from 
increased rail travel. Meanwhile, our congested skies have become even 
more crowded. The result, predictably, is that air travel delays are up 
58 percent since 1995.
  In the air travel industry, bad weather in one part of the country 
very often results in delays in other parts of the country. There is 
consumer demand for more flights. But we know that our skyways and air 
traffic control systems are finite and that the system is overloaded.
  Amtrak ridership is on the rise. More than 22.5 million passengers 
rode Amtrak in Fiscal Year 2000, a million more than the previous year. 
FY 2000 was the fourth consecutive year that ridership has increased. 
We should welcome that increased use and support it by giving Amtrak 
the resources it needs to provide high-quality, dependable service.
  High-Speed Rail Investment Act is critical to the future of Amtrak. 
For half the cost of constructing the new Woodrow Wilson Bridge linking 
Maryland and Virginia, we can create 10 high-speed rail corridors in 28 
states. For the cost of the St. Louis Airport expansion, we can improve 
intercity transportation in 28 states. In October we passed a $58 
billion transportation appropriations bill for this fiscal year. What 
we are talking about today is an additional $95 million over the next 
two years, which will leverage $2 billion in funding. This is a sound 
investment.
  There is an alarming misconception among some members of this body 
and around the country that Amtrak is a money pit, where taxpayer 
dollars simply disappear. Nothing could be further from the truth. In 
fact, the federal government has invested $380 billion in our highways 
and $160 billion in airports since Amtrak was created. By contrast, the 
federal government has spent only $23 billion on Amtrak. We have spent 
just 4 percent of our transportation budget on rail transportation in 
the last 30 years.
  Those who criticize Amtrak for not ``turning a profit'' employ a 
double standard--a double standard that is misleading, unfair and 
unwise. Between 1985-1995, this country spent $17 billion more on 
federal highways than it raised through the federal gas tax and highway 
trust fund. During the same period, the nation spent $30 billion more 
on aviation expenditures than it received through the aviation trust 
fund. By their misguided logic, there can be only one solution: since 
neither of those trust funds operated at cost, we should eliminate 
these programs. That's nonsense. So why are we failing to adequately 
invest in rail transportation?
  Mr. President, high-speed rail is a viable transportation 
alternative. There is a large and growing demand for rail service in 
the Northeast Corridor. Amtrak captures almost 70 percent of the 
business rail and air travel market between Washington and New York and 
30 percent of the market share between New York and Boston. High-speed 
rail will undoubtedly increase that market share.
  These new trains, like the Acela Express that debuted in the 
Northeast this year, currently run at an average of only 82 miles per 
hour, but with track improvements, will run at 130 miles per hour.
  As a Nation, we have recognized the importance of having the very 
best communication system, and ours is the envy of the world. That 
investment is one of reasons our economy is the strongest in the world. 
And we should do the same for our transportation system. It should be 
equally modern and must be fully intermodal. And in order to do that, 
we must invest in rail transportation, invest in Amtrak and be certain 
to include this inexpensive legislation in the last bill of the 106th 
Congress.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, before I yield, and I will continue to 
do so throughout the night, I say to my friends, my colleagues from 
Massachusetts and Delaware, that I am grateful for their comments. I am 
sure we will see, and I am particularly grateful to the majority leader 
and Democratic leader, an Amtrak bill on the floor early in the next 
session. I am sorry I will not be here, but in the meanwhile, I will 
yield to the majority leader.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, again I thank the Senator.

                          ____________________