[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 74 (Tuesday, May 6, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3758-S3760]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         FAA MODERNIZATION ACT

  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, the FAA Modernization Act, which we are 
debating in the Senate today, makes critical improvements that will 
ensure our aviation system is safe and efficient. That will put us on a 
path to modernizing our air traffic control system.
  Now, in a short while, early this afternoon, the Senate will vote on 
whether we will finish this bill and send it to conference or whether 
Republicans are again going to refuse to work with us and force us to 
take this bill off the Senate floor.
  I hope we are going to vote to move forward this afternoon. My 
colleagues on the Commerce and Finance Committees worked very hard on 
this important bill because it is critical to our Nation's economy that 
our aviation system work smoothly. We have some serious problems that 
we need to address.
  Our air travel infrastructure is aging fast. It needs to be updated. 
The bill before us will help us modernize our aviation system to ensure 
that it continues to be the safest in the world.
  We also have to take action to help carriers deal with rising fuel 
costs and, of course, to protect our passengers by reducing flight 
delays and cancellations.
  Unfortunately, as we speak this morning, the Senate is essentially 
deadlocked. Republicans say they object to certain tax provisions, even 
though this bill, I remind everyone, was supported overwhelmingly when 
it was marked up in the Finance Committee. But our Republican 
colleagues insist that we strip out every provision that isn't directly 
linked to aviation. If that isn't done, they say they are going to 
filibuster this bill and keep us from ever getting to a final vote on 
it.
  The majority leader has said time and again that he would welcome 
amendments to the bill, but Republicans have refused. Instead of 
working with us to come to an agreement on the points they oppose, they 
are going to block the whole bill.
  What is most unfortunate about the Republican filibuster today is 
that this is a vitally important piece of legislation. Although my job 
as chairman of the Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee is to 
deal with appropriations, not authorizations, I can also tell you that 
this FAA bill is not just a bill that would be nice to have, it is a 
bill we must have.
  Some of our most important aviation authorities expire at the end of 
this June. That means by the end of next month, if this bill is not 
enacted, the FAA will no longer have the authority to spend money out 
of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund.
  Every penny that has been appropriated for purchasing and 
modernization at the FAA is paid for out of that fund. So if this bill 
doesn't become law at the end of next month, billions of dollars in 
projects at the FAA are going to grind to a halt.

[[Page S3759]]

  If this bill doesn't become law, all of the employees who work on 
those projects will be told to stay home because the agency would not 
be able to pay them.
  Mr. President, that is not all. Republican obstruction of this bill 
would cost billions of dollars in capital projects at our Nation's 
airports. The entire Airport Improvement Program, or AIP, would be shut 
down, and billions of dollars in critical safety improvements at 
airports across the country would go unspent.

  Finally, our ability to collect ticket taxes from air travelers in 
order to fund our trust fund will run out. That would push the FAA's 
primary source of funding closer to bankruptcy.
  Mr. President, these are not just small things. These programs ensure 
that airplanes and airports operate safely, and nobody can argue that 
safety would not be harmed if we shut down the ability of the FAA to 
modernize its long-outdated radar infrastructure.
  I wish to talk about one of the nonaviation provisions that the 
Republicans say is a reason they are standing in the way of this 
important critical piece of legislation. I want to tell you why I 
believe it is critical to keep it in this legislation. The provision I 
am referring to addresses an urgent problem with the highway trust 
fund.
  If we don't act now, the highway trust fund will go bankrupt sometime 
next year. If that happens, it will put a stop to Federal road projects 
across our entire country. That means bridge improvements, turn lanes, 
highway widenings, and countless projects would no longer get the 
Federal funding that has been promised. These are vital projects to all 
of our communities. They ensure that our highways are safe. They are 
essential to commerce and economic development.
  It is critical to every State in our Nation and everybody who drives 
on our Federal highway system that we find a way to keep this trust 
fund solvent.
  I have been sounding the alarm over this looming disaster for almost 
2 years. We are at a point now where we have to find a fix to ensure 
that we don't have to make disastrous cuts in our highway spending next 
year.
  Very early in this Congress, both Chairman Baucus and Ranking Member 
Grassley committed in writing to myself and my ranking member, Senator 
Bond, that they would make this fix that is now contained in this bill.
  I ask unanimous consent that the letter to Senator Bond and myself be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                      U.S. Senate,


                                         Committee on Finance,

                                 Washington, DC, January 25, 2007.
     Hon. Patty Murray,
     Chairman, Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, the 
         Judiciary, Housing and Urban Development, and Related 
         Agencies, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Christopher Bond,
     Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, the 
         Judiciary, Housing and Urban Development, and Related 
         Agencies, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senators Murray and Bond: Meeting the funding 
     obligations laid out in SAFETEA-LU is of vital importance to 
     our nation's transportation system. According to the recent 
     CBO projections, the Highway Trust Fund shows a shortfall of 
     several billion dollars in fiscal year 2009, the last year of 
     SAFETEA-LU. The Senate Finance Committee is dedicated to 
     finding the necessary revenues to keep the Highway Trust Fund 
     whole for the life of the current authorization. We are 
     actively working on several options to accomplish this task.
       We appreciate this opportunity to share our commitment to 
     meeting the nation's transportation needs.
           Sincerely yours,
     Max Baucus,
       Chairman.
     Charles E. Grassley,
       Ranking Member.

  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, in the tax portion of the aviation bill, 
Chairman Baucus and Senator Grassley are keeping their word. This 
provision in this bill authorizes that there will be enough money to 
continue highway projects under SAFETEA-LU--the Federal transportation 
planning bill.
  As I said, this addresses an urgent need. If the highway trust fund 
provision is stripped from this bill, my subcommittee could be required 
to cut highway spending for 2009 by $14 billion just to keep the trust 
fund out of bankruptcy next year. That will represent a cut of more 
than one-third in a single year.
  I think all of our colleagues should know exactly what is being put 
at risk if the highway trust fund provisions were to be stripped out of 
this bill.
  I ask unanimous consent that a table that has been prepared by the 
Federal Highway Administration be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION--FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION--COMPARISION OF DISTRIBUTION OF OBLIGATION
                                                   LIMITATION
   [Scenario 1: Obligation Limitation Distribution for FY 2008 Based on Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008.
   Scenario 2: Obligation Limitation Distribution for FY 2009 Based on Obligation Limitation of $27.2 Billion]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        Total obligation limitation
                          State                          -------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Scenario 1        Scenario 2         Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama.................................................       652,726,547       454,824,733       (197,901,814)
Alaska..................................................       282,066,711       213,461,360        (68,605,351)
Arizona.................................................       645,075,344       423,184,887       (221,890,457)
Arkansas................................................       408,704,023       286,719,068       (121,984,955)
California..............................................     3,027,693,941     2,162,914,748       (864,779,193)
Colorado................................................       439,113,155       305,442,339       (133,670,816)
Connecticut.............................................       448,398,704       298,155,051       (150,243,653)
Delaware................................................       128,377,882        89,408,810        (38,969,072)
Dist. of Col............................................       131,278,091        89,055,744        (42,222,347)
Florida.................................................     1,646,926,789     1,102,615,868       (544,310,921)
Georgia.................................................     1,189,444,266       808,957,462       (380,486,804)
Hawaii..................................................       138,186,609        92,455,082        (45,731,527)
Idaho...................................................       240,341,940       168,827,927        (71,514,013)
Illinois................................................     1,116,883,893       783,330,484       (333,553,409)
Indiana.................................................       837,221,544       581,195,810       (256,025,734)
Iowa....................................................       376,023,626       242,857,239       (133,166,387)
Kansas..................................................       331,623,187       223,029,846       (108,593,341)
Kentucky................................................       563,101,468       388,477,945       (174,623,523)
Louisiana...............................................       525,533,278       351,623,950       (173,909,328)
Maine...................................................       145,807,693       101,473,221        (44,334,472)
Maryland................................................       526,801,824       351,819,107       (174,982,717)
Massachusetts...........................................       563,444,067       365,897,655       (197,546,412)
Michigan................................................       949,589,055       722,171,474       (227,417,581)
Minnesota...............................................       516,029,374       391,306,319       (124,723,055)
Mississippi.............................................       386,729,693       267,581,968       (119,147,725)
Missouri................................................       762,557,035       530,486,038       (232,070,997)
Montana.................................................       307,593,579       218,174,703        (89,418,876)
Nebraska................................................       241,810,163       163,744,876        (78,065,287)
Nevada..................................................       235,089,219       145,744,407        (89,344,812)
New Hampshire...........................................       148,716,449       100,205,953        (48,510,496)
New Jersey..............................................       869,636,446       582,846,004       (286,790,442)
New Mexico..............................................       302,478,979       217,029,410        (85,449,569)
New York................................................     1,520,182,342       990,367,322       (529,815,020)
North Carolina..........................................       926,525,517       651,798,430       (274,727,087)
North Dakota............................................       202,565,774       139,213,152        (63,352,622)
Ohio....................................................     1,166,229,708       840,803,111       (325,426,597)
Oklahoma................................................       503,342,513       342,367,319       (160,975,194)
Oregon..................................................       377,426,038       255,186,729       (122,239,309)
Pennsylvania............................................     1,505,915,429       992,854,989       (513,060,440)
Rhode Island............................................       169,131,952       109,296,597        (59,835,355)
South Carolina..........................................       533,174,501       362,727,197       (170,447,304)

[[Page S3760]]

 
South Dakota............................................       212,627,616       151,170,837        (61,456,779)
Tennessee...............................................       705,609,706       488,908,923       (216,700,783)
Texas...................................................     2,676,992,892     1,855,034,583       (821,958,309)
Utah....................................................       234,081,641       160,420,055        (73,661,586)
Vermont.................................................       136,260,491        96,554,996        (39,705,495)
Virginia................................................       856,744,956       600,370,965       (256,373,991)
Washington..............................................       572,683,600       380,729,769       (191,953,831)
West Virginia...........................................       352,622,384       244,799,450       (107,822,934)
Wisconsin...............................................       625,583,865       444,299,449       (181,284,416)
Wyoming.................................................       210,639,995       153,148,013        (57,491,982)
                                                         -------------------------------------------------------
    Subtotal............................................    32,573,345,494    22,485,071,374    (10,088,274,120)
Allocated Programs......................................     4,127,089,170     1,909,255,590     (2,217,833,580)
High Priority Projects..................................     2,740,953,600     1,922,227,200       (818,726,400)
Projects of National & Regional Significance............       410,949,000       230,558,400       (180,390,600)
National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Program....       449,988,000       252,460,800       (197,527,200)
Transportation Projects.................................       590,259,516       331,158,586       (259,100,930)
Bridge (Sec. 144(g))....................................        92,400,000        64,800,000        (27,600,000)
Transfer to Sections 154 & 164..........................       231,066,579         4,468,050       (226,598,529)
                                                         -------------------------------------------------------
      Total.............................................    41,216,051,359    27,200,000,000    (14,016,051,359)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Mrs. MURRAY. The agency's table shows all of us the amount of money 
each and every State will see cut next year if the highway trust fund 
were not fixed and if we are required to fix it through the 
appropriations process for 2009. No State will be spared. Look up your 
own State. Texas will lose $822 million. Kentucky will lose $175 
million. Minnesota will lose $125 million. Maine would lose $44 
million. The list goes on. Look up your State and learn what is at risk 
if we don't vote to move this bill forward and solve this problem.
  I remind my colleagues that the provisions in this bill do not fix 
the trust fund on the long-term basis. The fix that is in this bill 
will only be sufficient to keep the highway trust fund in the black 
through 2009. But cutting this provision would not just mean States 
would lose the ability to make urgent road improvements, it would also 
mean a loss of a half million jobs across our Nation.
  Many of my colleagues have talked about the terrible impact felt in 
the construction sector by the recent economic slowdown. Some have 
called for economic stimulus proposals to get the sector back on its 
feet.
  I have to say, stripping the highway trust provision out of this bill 
will have the exact opposite effect. It will mean layoffs at a time 
when our economy badly needs help. So I hope our colleagues take that 
into consideration when we vote this afternoon on whether to move 
forward on this bill.
  In addition, I hope my colleagues remember that earlier this year we 
learned some disturbing news about the FAA's handling of safety 
inspections at Southwest Airlines. We learned that the FAA had not 
reviewed Southwest's system for complying with certain agency safety 
directives since 1999. That revelation caused a great deal of concern 
about the FAA's safety inspections across the country, with very good 
reason. Those inspections are important because they help our airlines 
and the FAA discover potential problems and address them before there 
is a tragedy.
  But when Congress began looking into the problem, we found it was 
much more extensive. Last month, at a hearing with the Acting FAA 
Administrator, Robert Sturgell, and the Department of Transportation 
inspector general, I learned for well over 5 years the FAA had not 
examined whether Southwest was using the right safety systems for 
certain maintenance requirements.
  Now, you can imagine I was concerned to hear about that. So I asked 
him how many other airlines had missed safety inspections. Mr. Sturgell 
could not answer me. Well, I asked him to get it back to me. I finally 
received an answer. The FAA now tells us it has failed to perform 
dozens of mandatory inspections at seven other major air carriers.
  In fact, the FAA now says it has missed more than 100 of these 
required safety inspections at major airlines. Mr. Sturgell said that 
part of the reason might be ``inadequate resources.'' Well, I am not 
sure how that could be. I have been working, along with my colleagues, 
to increase funding for FAA inspections for the last 7 years--in fact 
and this is true of my appropriations subcommittee, whether I have been 
chairman or my Republican colleagues have been chairman, for the last 4 
years. We have provided more funding for more safety inspectors than 
the FAA has ever requested of us. So this is a funding issue? The FAA 
hasn't been honest about the true needs of its agency.

  Now, I know Congress has been doing its part to build the inspection 
workforce without the benefit of a request from the FAA, and as a 
result, we have hundreds more inspectors across the country than the 
FAA has ever requested. Either way, I have serious concerns because the 
agency has insisted that the airlines must be the ones to guarantee the 
safety of their operations, and it is said that FAA inspectors are best 
used to ensure that the airlines have assistance to do the job. Now we 
are being told that the FAA is years behind in inspecting those very 
systems.
  The lesson from the Southwest debacle is that these safety 
inspections matter. They are one of the best indicators of whether an 
airline has its act together when it comes to maintenance and safety 
compliance. Clearly, the FAA needs to bring more focus and leadership 
to meeting its own self-imposed deadlines, and we will be looking for 
quarterly reports and answers on this as we move forward.
  So with all of these safety concerns as a backdrop, this afternoon we 
are now facing a filibuster from our Republican colleagues who want to 
bring down the FAA safety authorization bill. We have a bill before us 
that clearly offers us a chance to make a difference for safety, for 
our airlines, for our passengers, for our highways, and for our 
economy. We are talking about a bill that ensures the safety of our air 
travel. This is a critically important bill and, by the way, until 
recently a bipartisan one. But now we are hearing that the Republicans 
want to wage their 68th filibuster on a bill that is important to all 
of us.
  We have the ability to move forward. I urge our Republican colleagues 
to work with us and to not obstruct this bill this afternoon because 
anyone who has stood in an endless line at an airport or had their 
flight canceled or wanted to have important highway improvements done 
is counting on us to do the job. So I urge my colleagues to negotiate 
instead of blocking progress, and I hope they will work with us to do 
this quickly as we move to the bill today.
  Mr. President, I thank you, and I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Maryland is 
recognized.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, first I wish to thank Senator Murray for 
her comments. I couldn't agree with her more. I know the people of 
Maryland are very much concerned about the FAA reauthorization bill and 
getting it done. Passenger safety is critically important to the people 
of Maryland and this Nation. Modernizing our air system is very 
important. I thank Senator Murray for the comments she made.




                          ____________________