[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 176 (Tuesday, December 9, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S16128-S16133]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. WARNER (for himself and Mrs. Clinton):
  S. 1993. A bill to amend title 23, United States Code, to provide a 
highway safety improvement program that includes incentives ot States 
to enact primary safety belt laws; to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works.

[[Page S16129]]

  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce today with my 
distinguished colleague from New York, Senator Clinton, the National 
Highway Safety Act of 2003. It would be our intention in the course of 
the deliberations next year on the reauthorization or, as we call it, 
the successive piece of legislation to TEA-21, that this bill, which we 
introduce today, would be incorporated as an amendment.
  As the Congress prepares to consider legislation next year to enact a 
new 6-year surface transportation law to succeed TEA-21, our foremost 
responsibility, in my judgment and in the judgment of many, and in the 
judgment of the President of the United States, must be to improve 
highway safety for the driving public. Simply by increasing the number 
of Americans who will buckle up is the most effective step that can be 
taken to save the their lives and the lives of others. That is the 
single most important step.
  I am privileged to serve on the Environment and Public Works 
Committee that has now completed its markup of the TEA-21 
reauthorization bill. The bill addresses, as it should, highway safety 
measures, such as how to build safer roads, how to do use new 
technologies to improve safety. But, statistics show that the greatest 
measure of safety, again, to drivers, passengers, and possibly third 
parties not connected with the vehicle, is through the use of a 
seatbelt. It is remarkable, the lives that have been saved through the 
use of this simple device. I have, through my career in the Senate--I 
say with modesty--been associated with, and indeed I think in the 
forefront of, trying to move forward on seatbelt legislation. I will 
not belabor what this humble Senator has done working with others 
through the years, but we are very proud today that America has about a 
79 percent use rate of seatbelts. That has been translated into the 
saving of tens of thousands of lives and injuries in automobile 
accidents.
  Those are the facts. Are we just going to have a standstill, or are 
we going to move forward? Senator Clinton and I think we should move 
forward with this somewhat new approach. I will address the technical 
aspects as we go along.
  We have debated the benefits of seatbelt use on many occasions in 
this body, and elsewhere across America. And whether it is in the town 
forums we conduct, town meetings, or here on the floor of the Senate, 
there is always that individual who comes back: Don't tell me what I 
have to do. What does it matter to you, John Warner--or to any other 
colleague with whom I am privileged to serve--what does it matter to 
you whether I buckle up?
  Well, let's take a look. No one disputes that the absence of a 
seatbelt causes more serious loss of life and injury and, to some 
extent, crashes. The statistics show that with the impact associated 
with the crash, to the extent the driver can maintain, as best he can 
control of the vehicle in those fatal microseconds, often fatal, 
perhaps the severity of the crash, and perhaps the loss of life can be 
reduced by the use of a safety belt--simply said.
  Accidents involving unbelted drivers result in a significant cost to 
the wallet, out of your pocket. Many people are rushed from the 
accident scene to various emergency facilities. All of that has the 
initial cost of the law enforcement that responds, the rescue squads 
that respond, and eventually the emergency room or whatever medical 
facility you might have the good fortune to be taken to, to hopefully 
save you your life. That isn't free. There is a cost. Maybe it is a 
hidden cost in the budgets of the towns and the communities and the 
States, but there is definitely a cost. Regrettably, a number of 
persons who suffer those types of injuries are uninsured. Again, the 
cost often devolves down on the good old hard-working taxpayers; in 
most instances, the taxpayers who buckle up.
  This also is rather interesting and fascinating. When an accident 
happens, regrettably, on our roads and highways across this great 
Nation, we try to refrain from rubbernecking. Nevertheless, chances are 
that we take a glance. More often than not, the accident with the 
combined slowdown of those passing the accident causes significant 
congestion for some considerable portion of time. Either the lane in 
which we are traveling moves very slowly because of the accident or, 
indeed, we come to a standstill, as often is the case when a lane is 
closed to clear an accident. That standstill frequently is necessitated 
because of the severity of the injuries experienced in that accident. 
It takes the response team longer in their carefully trained steps to 
extricate the injured person, to give the initial treatment, and then 
to carefully transport that individual, if necessary, to a medical 
facility. That takes time. That road is backed up.
  That is lost time for your mission on the road, be it for business, 
family, or pleasure. That is lost time and productivity. Behind you 
often are trucks and other vehicles involved in commerce. That is lost 
time and delay due to the seriousness occasioned by injuries and 
accidents where there has been the lack of use of seatbelts. It is as 
simple as that.
  The legislation Senator Clinton and I are introducing today will take 
an important step forward for the States to adopt either a primary 
safety belt law, or take steps of their own devising to meet a 90 
percent seat belt use rate--not the Warner-Clinton bill or the 
legislative measure put forth by the administration upon which Senator 
Clinton and I draw for concepts of certain portions. The States can 
decide for themselves how they achieve a 90-percent goal of the use of 
seatbelts in their respective States. That is the purpose of this 
legislation--to move every State to a 90-percent use rate for safety 
belts.
  In a letter dated November 12, 2003, to Chairman Inhofe of the 
Committee on the Environment and Public Works, on which I am privileged 
to serve, Secretary Mineta states:

       President Bush and I believe that increasing safety belt 
     usage rates is the single most effective means to decrease 
     highway fatalities and injuries.

  That is explicit and clear. The Secretary goes on to say:

       The surest way for a State to increase safety belt usage is 
     through the passage of a primary safety belt law.

  I have had this debate with Governors, former Governors, even in this 
Chamber with former Governors. I think they would tell you that a 
primary safety belt law is a tough piece of State legislation to pass 
solely on its own. Frankly, it needs the impetus of Uncle Sam, the 
impetus of the Congress of the United States to move that process in 
the States forward, so the local politicians can shake their fist 
saying, it is Washington that has done it again--more regulation, more 
direction--you know the arguments. But I think quietly in the hearts of 
those State legislatures is the thought that we will improve safety in 
my State. We will improve the chance of survivability on the roads in 
my State. So that is why we are here today. I ask unanimous consent 
that the full text of Secretary Mineta's letter be printed in the 
Record at the conclusion of my remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. WARNER. As provided in our legislation, the Warner-Clinton bill, 
States can increase seatbelt use either by enacting, as I said, a 
primary seatbelt law--everybody knows what a primary seatbelt law is 
and how it works. It means a law enforcement officer can literally stop 
a vehicle if they observe that the individual is not wearing his or her 
seatbelt. It is as simple as that. But a State, if they decide not to 
enact a primary safety belt law, can, by implementing their own 
strategies, whatever they may be--and there is a lot of innovation out 
in the States--that would result in a 90-percent safety belt use rate. 
So that is a challenge to the States.

  The current national belt use, as I said, is 79 percent. But many 
States--those that have the primary law are sometimes at 90, or even 
above 90, but those that do not have the primary seatbelt law are down 
sometimes in the 60 percentile. It is the weight of the primary States 
that carries the percentile and brings it up to 79 from those States 
that don't have an effective law. States with their primary safety belt 
law have the greatest success for drivers wearing seatbelts.
  On an average, States with the primary seatbelt law have a 10 to 15 
percent higher seatbelt use compared to those with a secondary system. 
This demonstrates that secondary seatbelt

[[Page S16130]]

laws are far more limited in their effectiveness than a primary law.
  Essentially, the secondary laws say that if a law enforcement officer 
has cause other than a perceived or actual seatbelt violation--namely, 
the driver didn't have it buckled--if they have cause to stop that car, 
for example, for a speeding offense or a reckless driving offense or 
indeed an accident and they observed there has been no use of the 
seatbelt, then in the course of proceeding to enforce the several laws 
of the State as regards speeding or reckless driving, or whatever the 
case may be, they can add a second penalty to address the absence of 
the use of the seatbelt in that State.
  Drivers are gamblers. They say: Oh, well, don't worry, I will not 
buckle up. State law doesn't require it. Unless they stop me--and they 
are not going to stop me today. It is that gambling attitude that, more 
often than not, will cause an accident. Then it is too late.
  So we come forward today to build on our national programs. We are 
building on what we did in TEA-21. I was privileged to be on the 
committee. I was chairman of the subcommittee 6 years ago. I worked 
with Senator Chafee, who was chairman of the full committee, and we 
drove hard to make progress with the seatbelt laws, and we did it. We 
basically put aside a very considerable sum of money to encourage 
States--again, using their own devices--to increase uses. As a direct 
consequence of what we did in TEA-21, there has been an 11 percent 
increase in these 6 years in the use of seatbelts.
  Sadly, traffic deaths in 2002 rose to the highest level in over a 
decade. It is astonishing. Of the nearly 43,000 people killed on our 
highways, over half were not wearing their seatbelts. That is according 
to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. And 9,200 of 
these deaths might have been prevented if the safety belt had been 
used.
  Those are alarming statistics. Automobile crashes are the leading 
cause of death for Americans age 2 to 34. Stop to think of that: age 2, 
that means a child; that means a parent neglected to buckle up a child. 
Automobile crashes are the leading cause of death for Americans age 2 
to 34. That is our Nation's youth. Do we have a higher calling in the 
Congress of the United States than to do everything we can to foster 
the dreams and ambitions and the productivity of our Nation's youth? I 
think not. And this is one of the ways.
  Last year, 6 out of 10 children who died in car crashes did not have 
the belt on--6 out of 10; that is over half. I plead with colleagues to 
join with me, join with the President who has taken this initiative.
  My primary responsibility in the Senate--and this is one of the 
reasons I got interested in this subject--is the welfare of the men and 
women in the Armed Forces. I say to colleagues, again, the statistics 
are tragic. Traffic fatalities are the leading non-combat cause of 
death for our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. They are in that 
high-risk age category, 18 to 35.
  Someone even took a look at the statistics, the total of the 
fatalities last year, and said that represents in deaths approximately 
the size of the average U.S. Army battalion. That is several companies 
and maybe a reinforced element. Just think, that is the magnitude in 
one category of those who serve our United States, the men and women in 
the Armed Forces.
  I cannot think of any reason why we all cannot join behind this 
effort. That alone is a driving impetus for this Senator.
  The time is long overdue for a national policy to strengthen seatbelt 
use rates. I said a national policy, and that is what this bill 
represents, either through States enacting a primary seatbelt law or 
giving far greater attention to public awareness programs that result 
in more drivers and passengers wearing safety belts. Our goal is 90 
percent--90 percent.
  I have been privileged to serve on this committee 17 years, and I, 
together with many others, notably my dear friend and late chairman, 
Senator Chafee, addressed this issue. Our committee is rich in the 
history of focusing revenue from the highway trust fund on effective 
safety programs. It goes back through many chairmen and members of the 
committee.
  With jurisdiction over the largest share of the highway trust fund, 
our committee has had the vision to tackle important national safety 
problems. Regrettably, I report to you that the recent markup of the 
committee on the proposed successor to the TEA-21 legislation, which we 
will take up next year, does provide more funding to help build safer 
roads--that is a step forward--but it does not have, in my judgment, 
that provision which represents a step up from what we did in TEA-21, 
that provision that would represent a recognition for the President's 
initiative. He has taken a decidedly strong initiative to increase the 
use of seatbelts. It is absent from the bill, and that is why, I say 
respectfully to Chairman Inhofe and others on that committee, we need a 
provision to strengthen and to move forward the position of the 
Congress on the issue of increased use of safety belts. That is the 
purpose of this legislation.
  It is just unfortunate, but those with reckless intent quickly 
disregard responsible behavior and drive unbelted at excessive speeds 
and many times with the use of alcohol. So no increased dollars for 
improved road engineering, which is in this bill, can defy in many 
instances and the type of personal conduct that results in reckless 
behavior. It is as simple as that.
  Our automobiles now come equipped with crash avoidance technologies 
and are more crashworthy than ever before, but these advances are only 
part of the solution.
  In repeated testimony before the Environment and Public Works 
Committee, from the administration, our States, safety groups, and the 
highway insurance industry, we are told that three main causes of 
traffic deaths and injuries are unbelted drivers, speed, and alcohol.
  The formula we have devised in this legislation does have a reduction 
in the amount a State receives under this proposed bill that we will 
consider next year when they fail to achieve the 90 percent safety belt 
use rate. It is as simple as that. But the formula is patterned 
directly after the law that is on the books now with respect to the .08 
legal blood alcohol content level.
  The net effect of this legislation is simply to recognize we are 
asking that the same type of sanction policy with regard to one of the 
three major causes of death--alcohol--be equated to a second cause of 
death and injury, and that is absence of the use of seatbelts, bringing 
into parallel two of the three principal causes of death and injury on 
today's highways.
  The administration put forward an innovative safety belt program, as 
I said, under the leadership of the President that was a major 
component of their new core transportation program, the Highway Safety 
Improvement Program. Regrettably, this recommendation is not included 
in the bill that will come before my committee next year as a 
consequence of the markup seeking reauthorization of TEA-21.
  The proposed reauthorization bill also does not include the current 
program, the Safety Belt Incentive Grant program, that we even had in 
the previous highway bill, of which I was primarily one of the authors. 
Not only are we not going forward, but in a sense we are stepping 
backwards. I just cannot understand how we can, as a body, not observe 
our responsibility to do what we can to provide the necessary incentive 
to the States to take these steps.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1993

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``National Highway Safety Act 
     of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

       (a) Safety Improvement.--
       (1) In general.--Section 148 of title 23, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 148. Highway safety improvement program

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Highway safety improvement program.--The term 
     `highway safety improvement program' means the program 
     carried out under this section.
       ``(2) Highway safety improvement project.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `highway safety improvement 
     project' means a project described in the State strategic 
     highway safety plan that--

[[Page S16131]]

       ``(i) corrects or improves a hazardous road location or 
     feature; or
       ``(ii) addresses a highway safety problem.
       ``(B) Inclusions.--The term `highway safety improvement 
     project' includes a project for--
       ``(i) an intersection safety improvement;
       ``(ii) pavement and shoulder widening (including addition 
     of a passing lane to remedy an unsafe condition);
       ``(iii) installation of rumble strips or another warning 
     device, if the rumble strips or other warning devices do not 
     adversely affect the safety or mobility of bicyclists and 
     pedestrians;
       ``(iv) installation of a skid-resistant surface at an 
     intersection or other location with a high frequency of 
     accidents;
       ``(v) an improvement for pedestrian or bicyclist safety;
       ``(vi)(I) construction of any project for the elimination 
     of hazards at a railway-highway crossing that is eligible for 
     funding under section 130, including the separation or 
     protection of grades at railway-highway crossings;
       ``(II) construction of a railway-highway crossing safety 
     feature; or
       ``(III) the conduct of a model traffic enforcement activity 
     at a railway-highway crossing;
       ``(vii) construction of a traffic calming feature;
       ``(viii) elimination of a roadside obstacle;
       ``(ix) improvement of highway signage and pavement 
     markings;
       ``(x) installation of a priority control system for 
     emergency vehicles at signalized intersections;
       ``(xi) installation of a traffic control or other warning 
     device at a location with high accident potential;
       ``(xii) safety-conscious planning;
       ``(xiii) improvement in the collection and analysis of 
     crash data;
       ``(xiv) planning, equipment, operational activities, or 
     traffic enforcement activities (including police assistance) 
     relating to workzone safety;
       ``(xv) installation of guardrails, barriers (including 
     barriers between construction work zones and traffic lanes 
     for the safety of motorists and workers), and crash 
     attenuators;
       ``(xvi) the addition or retrofitting of structures or other 
     measures to eliminate or reduce accidents involving vehicles 
     and wildlife; or
       ``(xvii) installation and maintenance of signs (including 
     fluorescent, yellow-green signs) at pedestrian-bicycle 
     crossings and in school zones.
       ``(3) Primary safety belt law.--The term `primary safety 
     belt law' means a law that authorizes a law enforcement 
     officer to issue a citation for the failure of the operator 
     of, or any passenger in, a motor vehicle to wear a safety 
     belt as required by State law, based solely on that failure 
     and without regard to whether there is any other violation of 
     law.
       ``(4) Safety project under any other section.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `safety project under any other 
     section' means a project carried out for the purpose of 
     safety under any other section of this title.
       ``(B) Inclusion.--The term `safety project under any other 
     section' includes a project to--
       ``(i) promote the awareness of the public and educate the 
     public concerning highway safety matters; or
       ``(ii) enforce highway safety laws.
       ``(5) State highway safety improvement program.--The term 
     `State highway safety improvement program' means projects or 
     strategies included in the State strategic highway safety 
     plan carried out as part of the State transportation 
     improvement program under section 135(f).
       ``(6) State strategic highway safety plan.--The term `State 
     strategic highway safety plan' means a plan developed by the 
     State transportation department that--
       ``(A) is developed after consultation with--
       ``(i) a highway safety representative of the Governor of 
     the State;
       ``(ii) regional transportation planning organizations, if 
     any;
       ``(iii) representatives of major modes of transportation;
       ``(iv) local traffic enforcement officials;
       ``(v) persons responsible for administering section 130 at 
     the State level;
       ``(vi) representatives conducting Operation Lifesaver;
       ``(vii) representatives conducting a motor carrier safety 
     program under section 31104 or 31107 of title 49;
       ``(viii) motor vehicle administration agencies; and
       ``(ix) other major State and local safety stakeholders;
       ``(B) analyzes and makes effective use of State, regional, 
     or local crash data;
       ``(C) addresses engineering, management, operation, 
     education, enforcement, and emergency services elements of 
     highway safety as key factors in evaluating highway projects;
       ``(D) considers safety needs of, and high-fatality segments 
     of, public roads;
       ``(E) considers the results of State, regional, or local 
     transportation and highway safety planning processes in 
     existence as of the date of enactment of this section;
       ``(F) describes a program of projects or strategies to 
     reduce or eliminate safety hazards;
       ``(G) is approved by the Governor of the State or a 
     responsible State agency; and
       ``(H) is consistent with the requirements of section 
     135(f).
       ``(b) Program.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall carry out a highway 
     safety improvement program.
       ``(2) Purpose.--The purpose of the highway safety 
     improvement program shall be to achieve a significant 
     reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on 
     public roads.
       ``(c) Eligibility.--
       ``(1) In general.--To receive funds under this section, a 
     State shall have in effect a State highway safety improvement 
     program under which the State--
       ``(A) develops and implements a State strategic highway 
     safety plan that identifies and analyzes highway safety 
     problems and opportunities as provided in paragraph (2);
       ``(B) produces a program of projects or strategies to 
     reduce identified safety problems; and
       ``(C) evaluates the plan on a regular basis to ensure the 
     accuracy of the data and priority of proposed improvements.
       ``(2) Identification and analysis of highway safety 
     problems and opportunities.--As part of the State strategic 
     highway safety plan, a State shall--
       ``(A) have in place a crash data system with the ability to 
     perform safety problem identification and countermeasure 
     analysis;
       ``(B) based on the analysis required by subparagraph (A), 
     identify hazardous locations, sections, and elements 
     (including roadside obstacles, railway-highway crossing 
     needs, and unmarked or poorly marked roads) that constitute a 
     danger to motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians, and other 
     highway users;
       ``(C) adopt strategic and performance-based goals that--
       ``(i) address traffic safety, including behavioral and 
     infrastructure problems and opportunities on all roads and 
     bridges on the Federal-aid system;
       ``(ii) focus resources on areas of greatest need; and
       ``(iii) are coordinated with other State highway safety 
     programs;
       ``(D) advance the capabilities of the State for traffic 
     records data collection, analysis, and integration with other 
     sources of safety data (such as road inventories) in a manner 
     that--
       ``(i) complements the State highway safety program under 
     chapter 4 and the commercial vehicle safety plan under 
     section 31102 of title 49;
       ``(ii) includes all roads and bridges on the Federal-aid 
     system; and
       ``(iii) identifies hazardous locations, sections, and 
     elements on public roads that constitute a danger to 
     motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians;
       ``(E)(i) determine priorities for the correction of 
     hazardous road locations, sections, and elements (including 
     railway-highway crossing improvements), as identified through 
     crash data analysis;
       ``(ii) identify opportunities for preventing the 
     development of such hazardous conditions; and
       ``(iii) establish and implement a schedule of highway 
     safety improvement projects for hazard correction and hazard 
     prevention; and
       ``(F)(i) establish an evaluation process to analyze and 
     assess results achieved by highway safety improvement 
     projects carried out in accordance with procedures and 
     criteria established by this section; and
       ``(ii) use the information obtained under clause (i) in 
     setting priorities for highway safety improvement projects.
       ``(d) Eligible Projects.--
       ``(1) In general.--A State may obligate funds apportioned 
     to the State under this section to carry out--
       ``(A) any highway safety improvement project on any--
       ``(i) road or bridge on the Federal-aid system; or
       ``(ii) publicly owned bicycle or pedestrian pathway or 
     trail; or
       ``(B) as provided in subsection (e), for other safety 
     projects.
       ``(2) Use of other funding for safety.--
       ``(A) Effect of section.--Nothing in this section prohibits 
     the use of funds made available under other provisions of 
     this title for highway safety improvement projects.
       ``(B) Use of other funds.--States are encouraged to address 
     the full scope of their safety needs and opportunities by 
     using funds made available under other provisions of this 
     title (except a provision that specifically prohibits that 
     use).
       ``(e) Flexible Funding for States With a Strategic Highway 
     Safety Plan.--
       ``(1) In general.--To further the implementation of a State 
     strategic highway safety plan, a State may use up to 25 
     percent of the amount of funds made available under this 
     section for a fiscal year to carry out safety projects under 
     any other section as provided in the State strategic highway 
     safety plan.
       ``(2) Other transportation and highway safety plans.--
     Nothing in this subsection requires a State to revise any 
     State process, plan, or program in effect on the date of 
     enactment of this section.
       ``(f) Reports.--
       ``(1) In general.--A State shall submit to the Secretary a 
     report that--
       ``(A) describes progress being made to implement highway 
     safety improvement projects under this section;
       ``(B) assesses the effectiveness of those improvements; and
       ``(C) describes the extent to which the improvements funded 
     under this section contribute to the goals of--

[[Page S16132]]

       ``(i) reducing the number of fatalities on roadways;
       ``(ii) reducing the number of roadway-related injuries;
       ``(iii) reducing the occurrences of roadway-related 
     accidents;
       ``(iv) mitigating the consequences of roadway-related 
     accidents; and
       ``(v) reducing the occurrences of roadway-railroad grade 
     crossing accidents.
       ``(2) Contents; schedule.--The Secretary shall establish 
     the content and schedule for a report under paragraph (1).
       ``(g) Federal Share of Highway Safety Improvement 
     Projects.--The Federal share of the cost of a highway safety 
     improvement project carried out with funds made available 
     under this section shall be 90 percent.
       ``(h) Use of Funds.--
       ``(1) Projects under section 402.--For fiscal year 2005 and 
     each fiscal year thereafter, 10 percent of the funds made 
     available to a State under this section shall be obligated 
     for projects under section 402, unless by October 1 of the 
     fiscal year, the State--
       ``(A) has in effect a primary safety belt law; or
       ``(B) demonstrates that the safety belt use rate in the 
     State is at least 90 percent.
       ``(2) Withholding.--
       ``(A) In general.--For fiscal year 2007, the Secretary 
     shall withhold 2 percent, and for each fiscal year 
     thereafter, the Secretary shall withhold 4 percent, of the 
     funds apportioned to a State under paragraphs (1), (3), and 
     (4) of section 104(b) and section 144 if, by October 1 of 
     that fiscal year, the State does not--
       ``(i) have in effect a primary safety belt law; or
       ``(ii) demonstrate that the safety belt use rate in the 
     State is at least 90 percent.
       ``(B) Restoration.--If, within 3 years after the date on 
     which funds are withheld from a State under subparagraph (A), 
     the State has in effect a primary safety belt law or has 
     demonstrated that the safety belt use rate in the State is at 
     least 90 percent, the apportionment of the State shall be 
     increased by the amount withheld.
       ``(C) Lapse.--If, within 3 years after the date on which 
     funds are withheld from a State under subparagraph (A), the 
     State does not have in effect a primary safety belt law or 
     has not demonstrated that the safety belt use rate in the 
     State is at least 90 percent, the amount withheld shall 
     lapse.''.
       (2) Allocations of apportioned funds.--Section 133(d) of 
     title 23, United States Code, is amended--
       (A) by striking paragraph (1);
       (B) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (5) as 
     paragraphs (1) through (4), respectively;
       (C) in paragraph (2) (as redesignated by subparagraph 
     (B))--
       (i) in the first sentence of subparagraph (A)--

       (I) by striking ``subparagraphs (C) and (D)'' and inserting 
     ``subparagraph (C)''; and
       (II) by striking ``80 percent'' and inserting ``90 
     percent'';

       (ii) by striking subparagraph (C);
       (iii) by redesignating subparagraphs (D) and (E) as 
     subparagraphs (C) and (D), respectively; and
       (iv) in subparagraph (C) (as redesignated by clause (iii)), 
     by adding a period at the end; and
       (D) in paragraph (4)(A) (as redesignated by subparagraph 
     (B)), by striking ``paragraph (2)'' and inserting ``paragraph 
     (1)''.
       (3) Conforming amendments.--
       (A) Chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking the item relating to section 148 and inserting 
     the following:

``148. Highway safety improvement program.''.

       (b) Apportionment of Highway Safety Improvement Program 
     Funds.--Section 104(b) of title 23, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting 
     after ``Improvement program,'' the following: ``the highway 
     safety improvement program,''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) Highway safety improvement program.--
       ``(A) In general.--For the highway safety improvement 
     program, in accordance with the following formula:
       ``(i) 25 percent of the apportionments in the ratio that--

       ``(I) the total lane miles of Federal-aid highways in each 
     State; bears to
       ``(II) the total lane miles of Federal-aid highways in all 
     States.

       ``(ii) 40 percent of the apportionments in the ratio that--

       ``(I) the total vehicle miles traveled on lanes on Federal-
     aid highways in each State; bears to
       ``(II) the total vehicle miles traveled on lanes on 
     Federal-aid highways in all States.

       ``(iii) 35 percent of the apportionments in the ratio 
     that--

       ``(I) the estimated tax payments attributable to highway 
     users in each State paid into the Highway Trust Fund (other 
     than the Mass Transit Account) in the latest fiscal year for 
     which data are available; bears to
       ``(II) the estimated tax payments attributable to highway 
     users in all States paid into the Highway Trust Fund (other 
     than the Mass Transit Account) in the latest fiscal year for 
     which data are available.

       ``(B) Minimum apportionment.--Notwithstanding subparagraph 
     (A), each State shall receive a minimum of \1/2\ of 1 percent 
     of the funds apportioned under this paragraph.''.
       (c) Elimination of Hazards Relating to Highway 
     Facilities.--
       (1) Funds for protective devices.--Section 130(e) of title 
     23, United States Code, is amended--
       (A) in the heading, by striking ``Protective Devices'' and 
     inserting ``Railway-Highway Crossings'';
       (B) by striking the first sentence and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(1) In general.--For each fiscal year, at least 
     $200,000,000 of the funds authorized and expended under 
     section 148 shall be available for the elimination of hazards 
     and the installation of protective devices at railway-highway 
     crossings.''; and
       (C) by striking ``Sums authorized'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(2) Obligation.--Sums authorized''.
       (2) Biennial reports to congress.--Section 130(g) of title 
     23, United States Code, is amended in the third sentence--
       (A) by inserting ``and the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
     and Transportation,'' after ``Public Works''; and
       (B) by striking ``not later than April 1 of each year'' and 
     inserting ``every other year''.
       (3) Expenditure of funds; apportionment.--Section 130 of 
     title 23, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(k) Expenditure of Funds; Apportionment.--Funds made 
     available to carry out this section shall be--
       ``(1) available for expenditure on compilation and analysis 
     of data in support of activities carried out under subsection 
     (g); and
       ``(2) apportioned in accordance with section 104(b)(5).''.
       (d) Transition.--
       (1) Implementation.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     to qualify for funding under section 148 of title 23, United 
     States Code (as amended by subsection (a)), a State shall 
     develop and implement a State strategic highway safety plan 
     as required by subsection (c) of that section not later than 
     October 1 of the second fiscal year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
       (2) Interim period.--
       (A) In general.--Before October 1 of the second fiscal year 
     after the date of enactment of this Act and until the date on 
     which a State develops and implements a State strategic 
     highway safety plan, the Secretary shall apportion funds to a 
     State for the highway safety improvement program and the 
     State may obligate funds apportioned to the State for the 
     highway safety improvement program under section 148 for 
     projects that were eligible for funding under sections 130 
     and 152 of that title, as in effect on the day before the 
     date of enactment of this Act.
       (B) No strategic highway safety plan.--If a State has not 
     developed a strategic highway safety plan by October 1 of the 
     second fiscal year after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     but demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary that 
     progress is being made toward developing and implementing 
     such a plan, the Secretary shall continue to apportion funds 
     for 1 additional fiscal year for the highway safety 
     improvement program under section 148 of title 23, United 
     States Code, to the State, and the State may continue to 
     obligate funds apportioned to the State under this section 
     for projects that were eligible for funding under sections 
     130 and 152 of that title, as in effect on the day before the 
     date of enactment of this Act.
       (C) Penalty.--If a State has not adopted a strategic 
     highway safety plan by the date that is 2 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, funds made available to the 
     State under section 1101(6) shall be redistributed to other 
     States in accordance with section 104(b) of title 23, United 
     States Code.

                                   Secretary of Transportation

                                Washington, DC, November 12, 2003.
     Hon. James Inhofe,
     Chairman, Committee on Environment and Public Works, U.S. 
         Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: With almost 43,000 people dying every 
     year on our nation's highway, it is imperative that we do 
     everything in our power to promote a safer transportation 
     system. The Bush Administration's proposal to reauthorize 
     surface transportation programs, the Safe, Accountable, 
     Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2003 
     (SAFETEA), offers several bold and innovative approaches to 
     address this crisis.
       President Bush and I believe that increasing safety belt 
     usage rates is the single most effective means to decrease 
     highway fatalities and injuries. As a result, SAFETEA's new 
     core highway safety program provides States with powerful 
     funding incentives to increase the percentage of Americans 
     who buckle up every time they get in an automobile. Every 
     percentage point increase in the national safety belt usage 
     rate saves hundreds of lives and millions of dollars in lost 
     productivity.
       Empirical evidence shows that the surest way for a State to 
     increase safety belt usage is through the passage of a 
     primary safety belt law. States with primary belt laws have 
     safety belt usage rates that are on average eight percentage 
     points higher than States with secondary laws. Recognizing 
     that States may have other innovative methods to achieve 
     higher rates of belt use, SAFETEA also rewards States that 
     achieve 90% safety belt usage rates even if a primary safety 
     belt law is not enacted. I urge you to consider these 
     approaches as your Committee marks up reauthorization 
     legislation.
       While safety belts are obviously critical to reducing 
     highway fatalities, so too is a data

[[Page S16133]]

     driven approach to providing safety. Every State faces its 
     own unique safety challenges, and every State must be given 
     broad funding flexibility to solve those challenges. This is 
     a central theme of SAFETEA, which aims to provide States the 
     ability to use scarce resources to meet their own highest 
     priority needs. Such flexibility is essential for States to 
     maximize their resources, including the funds available under 
     a new core highway safety program.
       I look forward to working with you on these critically 
     important safety issues as development of a surface 
     transportation reauthorization bill progresses.
           Sincerely yours,
                                                 Norman Y. Mineta.

  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, let me first congratulate my colleague 
from Virginia, Senator Warner, for the very fine statement he just made 
a moment ago about the bill that he and Senator Clinton are introducing 
with regard to the primary seatbelt law. This is something I have been 
interested in for some time. I congratulate them for their very fine 
bill and Senator Warner's very fine statement. He is absolutely 
correct. If we are serious about saving lives on our highways in this 
country, there really is nothing more important that we can do than to 
get our fellow citizens to buckle up.
  We have made great progress in this area, but the fact that many of 
our States do not have a primary seatbelt law on the books costs us 
thousands and thousands of lives each year. As my colleague from 
Virginia so eloquently stated in this Chamber a few minutes ago, all 
the experts--everyone who knows anything about highway safety--will 
tell you that the most important thing that we could do and the easiest 
thing we could do would be to have every State of the Union tomorrow, 
instantly, have a primary seatbelt safety law.
  That simply means if law enforcement, instead of having to wait for 
another type of violation before they could cite someone for not 
wearing a seatbelt could cite someone directly for not using a 
seatbelt, the use of seatbelts would dramatically increase in this 
country. That is what has happened in every single State that has had 
these laws enacted. Seatbelt use dramatically goes up almost overnight.
  We know there is an inverse relationship between the use of seatbelts 
and auto fatalities. Thousands and thousands of Americans' lives would 
be saved every single year. I wanted to come to the floor this 
afternoon after I listened to my colleague's speech in my office. I 
wanted to thank him. He has been a real leader in the area of highway 
safety and this is certainly one more example of his leadership.
  When we take up the highway safety bill next year, there are a number 
of highway safety initiatives on which I have been working. I intend to 
bring them to the floor and talk about them and offer them as 
amendments, offer them as initiatives. Frankly, there is nothing as 
important as what my colleague from Virginia has suggested.
  I hope the Senate will take this very seriously. This is a great 
opportunity we will have to save thousands and thousands of lives every 
year. So I salute my colleague from Virginia.
                                 ______