[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 28 (Thursday, March 10, 2005)]
[House]
[Page H1334]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     TRANSPORTATION REAUTHORIZATION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the last 2 days were a 
whirlwind, but I am not going to criticize the speed in which we moved 
at this time, 2005, to move TEA-21. Why? Because we have been trying 
for almost a session to pass a transportation reauthorization bill that 
really provides jobs and mobility to America. So I rise today to 
applaud both Chairman Young and Ranking Member Oberstar for the very 
complicated and complex legislation that was passed trying to embrace 
all of America: rural, urban, suburban, all of the hamlets and counties 
and large cities and small cities, all of the true aspects of mobility 
in this Nation.
  I heard this morning on one of our networks, our cable networks, that 
in order to address the question of an energy shortage besides the fact 
that I come from Texas and we are known, my particular district, for 
being the energy capital of the world, but I think good common sense, 
no matter where you come from, would suggest that mobility is an 
important part of energy conservation, and mobility dealing with trains 
and transit systems, buses that are more conservation, if you will, 
sensitive, electrical cars, hybrids, all of those are on the table and 
I am glad to say that as we look toward the energy bill, we will be 
looking at those issues; but the transportation bill addresses them as 
well.
  Let me cite, Mr. Speaker, a few of the concerns that I have and also 
a few of the accolades. Let me first of all say that I believe that we 
are a United States of America, small States and large States. I happen 
to come from a donor State. That means that we send more money to the 
Federal Government than we get back. It is not a question of 
selfishness. It is a question of spreading the wealth across the United 
States per person. I am glad to note that this good sense of the United 
States House came together to increase the donor State return so that 
Texas gets more money on its return as it is investing in the United 
States Government while not hurting the smaller States. That is the 
donor State equity, and I would say that we as members of the Texas 
delegation and other large States were willing to work with the 
leadership to make this happen.
  Might I also say that I am disappointed in all of the amendments that 
came about on the toll roads. These are roads that you pay to go on. I 
know if I look at most of my constituents, they wish we did not have 
toll roads. But I certainly think it is unfair if a local jurisdiction 
decides to provide some sort of relief for low-income workers, many of 
whom are driving the 1990, 1980 vintage cars, maybe some of you have 
those cars, and are day laborers or hourly workers and really cannot 
afford to get to work. They have no mass transit which we are trying to 
promote. They cannot get to work. That was passed and I hope it is 
taken out in conference where local jurisdictions can give relief, 
meaning a lower rate, to those low-income workers who are driving cars 
who are trying to get to work. Would you not rather have them working 
than to be on the public benefit, if you will, because they cannot get 
to work?
  That brings me as well, Mr. Speaker, to a provision in my 
constituency that is called the Safe Clear program. It means that you 
are automatically moved off a freeway in my jurisdiction in Houston 
without any option to call any relatives or to move in another 
direction. It is an automatic tow. We had an enormous crisis and many 
of these tolls are on interstate highways. I hope that we will have the 
monitoring of this program, though it has been fixed by city council 
and they have tried to work with the State, they were concerned, but 
the United States Government Department of Transportation should be 
monitoring what we call the Safe Clear program in Houston, Texas, in 
order to avoid what we call impeding of interstate commerce.
  Let me also cite a very important issue in my district and that is 
Metro. That is our mass transit that has been struggling for 20 years 
to get on the books.

                              {time}  1600

  We finally got over 50 percent.
  Many of you in your communities may be facing this. You want mass 
transit, and two people do not, and those two people have been holding 
it up. That is what has been happening in Houston, Texas. I would beg 
of the Department of Transportation not to be engaged in politics, that 
is what you are engaged in, and expedite the approval process so that 
people who want to get on mass transit in jurisdictions like Houston, 
Texas, and maybe other parts of the Nation, can get an expedited 
approval so they can move forward with the dollars and get people out 
of their cars and into effective mass transit.
  Our metro system now, with only 7.5 miles, has some 30,000 riders per 
day. It connects the Medical Center and students to downtown Houston. 
It is imperative that we work on that.
  Again, I want to applaud those who brought a resolution to the donor 
problem, and I want to likewise be mindful of the fact that as we move 
towards this bill, let us take out the poison pills, those provisions 
such as not allowing some individual relief, let us take out the poison 
pill of not allowing local toll jurisdictions to use their profitable 
dollars to invest in other mobility projects.
  This is a good bill, but we need oversight, and we certainly need to 
move those transit projects forward that are sitting and waiting on the 
FTA's desk.

                          ____________________