[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 159 (Wednesday, October 1, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10283-S10290]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            FEDERAL RAILROAD SAFETY IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2007

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will now resume consideration of 
the House message on H.R. 2095, which the clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       Message from the House of Representatives to accompany H.R. 
     2095, entitled an Act to amend title 49, United States Code, 
     to prevent railroad fatalities, injuries, and hazardous 
     materials releases, to authorize the Federal Railroad Safety 
     Administration, and for other purposes.

  Pending:

       Reid amendment No. 5677 (to the motion to concur in the 
     amendment of the House of Representatives to the amendment of 
     the Senate to the bill), to establish the enactment date.
       Reid amendment No. 5678 (to amendment No. 5677), of a 
     perfecting nature.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will be 15 minutes for the majority and 
15 minutes for the minority.
  The Senator from Texas is recognized.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I wanted to make sure everyone knows 
we have 30 minutes allocated for Amtrak, and then the majority leader, 
Senator Reid, also intends to go back, before the vote starts, and use 
his leader time at his discretion.
  I rise to talk about the Amtrak reauthorization bill which will be 
the first vote tonight. I start out by thanking my colleague, Senator 
Smith from Oregon, for all of the good work he has done on the rail 
safety portion of this bill; also Senator Lautenberg, the majority 
member who has worked so hard on the Amtrak portion; and Senators 
Inouye and Senator Stevens, the chairman and ranking member of our 
committee during most of the negotiations on this big, very important 
bill.
  I think we have come to a very good position on Amtrak and on rail 
safety, and the legislation before us combines these two important 
bills that were written with separate subcommittees. I have worked on 
rail safety since I came to the Senate in 2004 when Union Pacific was 
going through a rash of accidents. The Department of Transportation 
initiated a compliance review at the request of myself and all the 
members of the Texas Congressional delegation.
  The rail safety component of this legislation will reduce driver 
fatigue by ensuring that train employees receive adequate rest between 
shifts. The recent accident in California has led many to call for the 
implementation of new safety technologies on trains. Our legislation 
requires the Department of Transportation to develop a plan for 
implementation of positive train control systems on trains by the end 
of 2015.
  I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this very important 
bipartisan legislation.


                           Financial Bailout

  Mr. President, the later votes we will take tonight are on another 
major piece of legislation. We have been hearing the debate on it all 
afternoon, really for the last 2 weeks. I want to start by saying that 
stabilizing our economy is the most important responsibility our 
Congress has right now. I did not vote for the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac 
bailout. I did not. I did not vote for that because I did not think 
there was enough taxpayer protection, nor were there limits on 
executive compensation packages.
  When Secretary Paulson came before us last week and said he wanted to 
have the power to spend up to $700 billion, I would not have supported 
that package, because, again, there were not enough taxpayer 
protections, there were not enough limits on executive compensation, 
and there was not enough oversight.
  But in my 15 years in the Senate, I have never seen a more bipartisan 
effort in Congress to sit down and come to a real conclusion for the 
good of our country, putting Republican and Democratic labels aside, to 
say: We know it is our responsibility to save the financial integrity 
of our country for every person who has a pension

[[Page S10284]]

fund, for every person who has a lifetime savings in a bank, for every 
person who has worked hard all their lives to buy their homes, and to 
want to be able to own that home and pay off their mortgage.
  I am speaking for every person who has gone to the bank for a loan in 
the last 4 days, because they are being told there is no ability to 
loan right now. I am talking about a State that goes to the markets for 
municipal funding and does not get one bid despite a triple A rating. 
Do we have the option of sitting here and seeing this happen in our 
country and saying: You know, I do not like this part of that bill or 
that part of that bill, so I am going to vote no?
  I do not say that any person voting no is not doing it because of 
their own convictions, but I am saying that from my standpoint, the 
people who have elected me to represent them in the Senate, I have 
worked in every way I could to get the taxpayer protections, to get the 
oversight of Congress, to have the board that would make a difference 
in maybe what could be done by the Treasury, the way they put together 
these packages, to make sure there is an upside for the taxpayer, which 
there is in this bill, that the taxpayers will have an ownership stake 
if there is an upside, and that it will pay down debt. It is not going 
anywhere else but paying down debt to start getting our fiscal house in 
order. Then the House put in a provision that I thought was very sound. 
After 5 years, if the Government is facing a loss in the program, the 
President will be required to submit a plan to determine how we recoup 
from the financial companies that have been benefited, whatever the 
loss might be to the taxpayer.
  This legislation also increases the FDIC limits to protect those 
people who have their life savings in a bank, so they will not worry 
they might be wiped out when it is announced, when they wake up in the 
morning, that their bank has gone under.
  There is very important tax policy in this bill that was added since 
the House turned down the bill, that was agreed to by the bipartisan 
working group, very important tax policies. It will give relief of the 
AMT to 23 million more low- and middle-income taxpayers in our country. 
AMT is eating up the ability for families to be able to save for their 
college education for their children.
  It also extends the tax incentives that will spur energy production 
and innovation, wind energy, production tax credit, research and 
development tax credits, sales tax deductions for States that do not 
have an income tax.
  It also includes help for our disaster areas, to give tax credits to 
developers who will help build low-income housing in the 29 Texas 
counties that still have not even been able to clean up their streets 
yet from Hurricane Ike.
  We have added much to this bill from the original proposal. I agree 
with something the Senator from California said a few minutes ago: 
People think this is the same proffer that was made a week ago that had 
no oversight, no taxpayer protections, no upside for the taxpayer, no 
limits on executive compensation. That is not what we are talking up 
tonight. What we are talking up tonight does have improvements made by 
Congress, doing everything we can, that if this is passed and it is run 
right, the taxpayers will actually benefit, and we will start paying 
down the debt of our country.
  Senators Reid and McConnell, Senators Dodd and Judd Gregg, Speaker 
Pelosi, Congressman Frank, Congressman Boehner, Congressman Blunt, have 
been a bipartisan working group with the President of the United States 
and the Secretary of the Treasury, to attempt to do all that we laid 
out to the Secretary that we wanted to see in the legislation that was 
not there when he first came forward. He has bent over backwards to try 
to make sure that we have those protections in place. I urge my 
colleagues to remember they have been elected by the people of their 
State to make the tough decisions. They have been elected not to go on 
what would be their preference for one part of the bill that might not 
have gotten in. None of us would have written this exactly the way it 
is written. But we all did have the basic standards of taxpayer 
protection, giving the taxpayers an upside, of limiting executive 
compensation when somebody has run a financial institution into the 
ground, increasing the FDIC limits so that people who have their life 
savings in a bank will be able to know that is safe.
  If anything, the Government of the United States of America ought to 
be able to stabilize its financial markets to show the world that we 
are the most stable and leading democracy in the world, and that we can 
get our house in order. I hope every one of us will think carefully 
about a tough vote, yes, but a vote that is right for the long term of 
our country.
  If the program is done correctly, it provides every possibility for 
taxpayers to have an upside. It also provides every possibility that 
there will be the oversight that will make sure everything is done with 
transparency.
  This isn't a $700 billion package. This is a $250 billion package 
with contingencies and strings, if we have to go beyond that, strings 
the President would have to agree to, strings Congress would have to 
agree to. That is a much more measured and responsible approach than 
what was presented by the Secretary early on--a $700 billion bailout. 
It is not that anymore. It is a responsible, bipartisan effort to stand 
up for the economy of the United States and for every banker and every 
small investor and every saver and every working person who depends on 
that stability and depends on their elected officials to do the right 
thing in the toughest of times. That is what we promised when every one 
of us ran for election. I hope we will deliver it tonight.
  I yield the floor and reserve the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, we are about to take up a vote that is 
going to decide whether our country is committed to a 21st-century 
transportation system. This is a vote that was considered under the 
cloture process earlier this week. This is a decision that is going to 
give a real option to travelers from frustrating lines at the airport, 
high gas prices at the pump, one that is going to make trains safer for 
rail passengers and rail workers, and a decision that will expand 
energy-efficient train travel to more of our cities.
  Much of the industrialized world has already made such a commitment. 
France, China, Japan, Spain, Germany, and Korea are all focused on 
connecting major cities of 500 miles or less by fast and efficient 
trains. A 210-mile trip from Brussels, Belgium, to Paris, France, takes 
only 85 minutes--an hour and 25 minutes--compared to our 3 hours from 
New York to Washington, DC. The question is, Why can't we have 
something comparable to that in this country? Even now, more people 
take the trains between Washington and New York on a regular basis than 
those who fly. It is time to bring reliable, fast train service to 
other regions of the country as well. The American public wants this 
option.
  Yesterday, the Secretary of Transportation announced that Americans 
are driving less and taking trains more frequently. In fact, according 
to Amtrak, the fiscal year that ended yesterday carried over 28 million 
riders. That is a record for the sixth straight year.
  Our bill provides $13 billion over 5 years for Amtrak and various 
States so they can explore their corridor opportunities. This is over a 
5-year period for Amtrak and those States, so we can modernize and 
expand our network of trains, tracks, and stations.
  With all the demand for rail travel, one thing we also have to make 
sure of is that trains are safe. Unfortunately, we have been reminded 
recently of the acute need for safety improvements.
  Last month, America experienced the worst train collision in 15 
years. This took place at Chatsworth, CA, on September 12 of this year. 
Twenty-five people died and over 130 were injured when two trains 
collided in Chatsworth. What made this dreadful crash all the more 
tragic was that it might have been avoided had the necessary 
investments in technology been made. As we mourn the victims of the 
Chatsworth crash, our vote today will demonstrate the seriousness of 
our being here, about making sure this can't happen again.
  The State of South Carolina, for instance, not very long ago, in 
Graniteville, saw the rail catastrophe shown here. In 2005, this 
collision resulted in the release of chlorine gas

[[Page S10285]]

that killed 9 people, and over 5,400 people were evacuated from the 
surroundings that day.
  In Luther, OK, in August, the community witnessed this massive 
fireball after a train derailed and caused ethanol tank cars to 
explode. We can't even see the train because it was so engulfed by 
flames.
  One of the major reasons for train crashes is human error. Our bill 
addresses that problem with vital improvements.
  Thanks in part to Senators Feinstein and Boxer, our bill mandates 
that major railroads use positive train control or PTC systems. This 
technology is available today to keep two trains from colliding, to 
stop a train if the train is passing a red light, as we saw in 
Chatsworth.
  Secondly, our legislation limits the daily number of workhours per 
railroad employee. Laws now allow them to work 100 hours each and every 
week. It is wrong. Our bill is going to change those laws so that 
people who operate and maintain our trains get enough rest between 
shifts and remain alert on the job.
  Third, our bill is going to give inspectors the tools they need to 
better oversee the railroad industry's safety practices. The FRA--the 
Federal Railroad Administration--could punish infractions with fines of 
up to $100,000 when railroad companies disobey our safety laws.
  As I mentioned on Monday, this bill is long overdue. Since we last 
passed rail safety legislation in 1994, more than 9,000 people have 
been killed and more than 100,000 have been injured in train-related 
incidents. Since we last passed Amtrak legislation in 1997, gas prices 
have tripled. Congestion has grown substantially on the highways. We 
have suffered two of the worst years ever for flight delays, and 
everyone knows it is time to modernize our Nation's underfunded and 
outdated passenger rail system. In doing so, we will help solve many of 
today's challenges, such as energy independence, overcrowded highways, 
runways that are overcrowded, and global warming. To prevent tragedies 
like the Chatsworth crash from ever happening again, we must complete 
this bipartisan legislation today and send it to the President for his 
signature.
  The Senate has already passed our bills on Amtrak and railroad safety 
with overwhelming majorities. On this past Monday, 69 of us voted for 
cloture for this package, obviously meaning that debate was to be cut 
off and get on with business. I urge my colleagues to finish the job 
and support this landmark legislation for the sake of America's 
travelers.
  How much time do we have on our side?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 7\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. I wish to thank some of my colleagues for their vital 
support for this critical legislation. This is truly a bipartisan bill. 
I wish to take a minute and thank those who worked so hard to put this 
package together. First and foremost, I thank Senate majority leader 
Harry Reid for his leadership. I also thank a former colleague, Senator 
Trent Lott, for his hard work and longstanding commitment to passenger 
rail service. From the Commerce Committee, I thank chairman Dan Inouye 
and ranking member Kay Bailey Hutchison. I thank her for her 
cooperation. It has been terrific working with Senator Hutchison. I 
thank Senator Stevens as well, and my subcommittee ranking member, 
Senator Smith, and all of our cosponsors, particularly Senators Carper, 
Feinstein, Clinton, Menendez, Specter, Schumer, and Warner, for their 
dedication and commitment to improving travel in America.
  To our partners in the House Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure, I thank Committee Chairman Oberstar, Ranking Member 
Mica, Railroads Subcommittee leaders Chairman Brown and Ranking Member 
Shuster. These people in the House were all exceptional champions, and 
we thank them.
  Everybody I mentioned and many more legislative staff and experts 
contributed to this bill. We look forward to it becoming law and making 
a difference for our rail industry and travelers everywhere. I note 
that it has been several years that this Senator has been working on 
this. I am so pleased to see that we will have an opportunity to pass 
it.
  I thank again my dear friend and colleague, whom we will all miss. He 
leaves with our admiration and affection--Senator John Warner. He and I 
each served in the war. I don't want to tell which war. It goes back a 
long way. But we did serve in the war together, not in the same theater 
but we served. He will be missed.
  At this point, I yield the floor to the Senator from California, Mrs. 
Feinstein.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I wish to begin by thanking Senator 
Lautenberg and Senator Hutchison for their work on this bill. It is 
very a good bill. I am very proud of it. I am proud of them. I hope all 
Members will support it.
  This bill does much to benefit rail. I deeply believe that rail has a 
future. My own State, California, has a $10 billion bond issue on the 
ballot this November to begin the funding of a high-speed rail down the 
center of California. So rail can be very important in the future.
  The bill has many good points. I want to concentrate on just one 
thing and what I just learned from the National Transportation and 
Safety Board. That one thing is that this bill would give the rail 
administration the ability to prohibit cell phone use.
  I would like the chairman and the ranking member to know what I just 
learned through an NTSB press conference. The engineer on the Metrolink 
train, the day of the accident, from about a quarter of 7 to a quarter 
of 9 in the morning, as he was an engineer on the train, sent and 
received 45 text messages on his cell phone in a little more than an 
hour. In the afternoon, when he was on duty from 2 p.m. to about 3:30, 
he sent and received 12 messages on his cell phone. One of them was 22 
seconds before the accident. With this kind of cell phone use while an 
active engineer on a Metrolink train right around the time of an 
accident, you can see the kind of problem it is. There is no second set 
of eyes on this train. So this National Transportation Safety Board 
press release this afternoon is a revelation.
  This cannot be happening on other trains. A great deal of our track 
in California is single track. It has both freight and passenger rail 
on it, sometimes in opposite directions. To have an engineer in an hour 
and 15 minutes sending or being part of 45 text messages on a cell 
phone is not what an operating engineer should be doing on a train.
  I thank the chairman. He has done a great job. My pal Senator 
Hutchison has done a great job. This is a bill that will stand the test 
of time. It is an important bill for Amtrak, for the rail 
administration, and for rail safety and positive train controls.
  I thank them all for their work and yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas has 4 minutes 
remaining.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, is there time left on the majority 
side?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. A minute and a half on the majority side.
  The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, again, I rise to reiterate the fact 
that this is a chance to make a huge difference in the way we travel in 
this country. We know you cannot get there from here if you get on the 
roads, whether they be major highways or streets. Airplanes are ever 
more delinquent in their ability to deliver service on time. So this is 
a chance for everybody to step up and declare we are going to have a 
refined, up-to-date, modern system that enables us to carry the 
passenger load that is available for us.
  I ask my colleagues to vote for this legislation and hope we will see 
its passage very shortly.
  Mr. President, I yield any time remaining.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I want to reiterate something the 
Senator from California mentioned, and that is, the rail safety part of 
this bill is actually a bill that was negotiated separately from the 
Amtrak bill. We put them together because time was of the essence. 
After that terrible crash in California, I think it spurred us to be

[[Page S10286]]

able to put these together and go forward. The positive train control 
that will be required for every rail carrier by the year 2015 is going 
to also have a major impact on safety and stop the crashes that are 
preventable that we have seen in the past. So I think there are a 
number of rail safety issues that are so important here that can make a 
difference.
  At this time, Mr. President, I wish to yield up to 2 minutes to the 
Senator from Virginia.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my good friend and colleague from 
Texas. And I thank my good friend, the senior Senator from New Jersey, 
for his gracious remarks. I also commend the cooperation of both of 
these managers, together with Senators Webb, Cardin, and Mikulski, in 
bringing together in this bill the lifeline of the Metro system in the 
Nation's Capital. We are a region, and we speak for the District of 
Columbia, as spokesmen tonight, and for the States of Maryland and 
Virginia, all of which are essential partners in this system which 
supports this institution, the Congress.


                            RAILROAD SAFETY

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I rise today to address the railroad 
safety legislation, H. Res. 1492 providing for agreement by the House 
of Representatives to the Senate amendment to the bill, H.R. 2095, with 
an amendment. First, I must emphasize the importance of strengthening 
our safeguards for railroads, to protect the lives and safety of our 
citizens. We have just been reminded of how critical it is for us to 
pay attention to this issue by the tragedy in my home State of 
California on September 12, 2008. On that day, a Metrolink train 
crashed head on into a Union Pacific freight train in Chatsworth, 
northwest of downtown Los Angeles, killing 25 people and injuring at 
least 135 in the most deadly commuter rail accident in modern 
California history, and one of the worst rail accidents in recent U.S. 
history. The families of all of those killed or injured in that 
accident are in our thoughts and our prayers.
  I also would like to enter into a colloquy one aspect in this 
legislation, the provisions entitled the ``Clean Railroads Act of 
2008,'' with my good friend, Senator Lautenberg, the distinguished 
chairman of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee's 
Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine 
Infrastructure, Safety, and Security, and the lead author of this 
legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, this legislation makes clear that any solid waste rail 
transfer facility must comply with all applicable Federal and State 
requirements, both substantive and procedural, including judicial and 
administrative orders and fines, respecting the prevention and 
abatement of pollution, the protection and restoration of the 
environment, and the protection of public health and safety, including 
laws governing solid waste, to the same extent as required for any 
similar solid waste management facility, as defined under the Solid 
Waste Disposal Act, or SWDA, that is not owned or operated by or on 
behalf of a rail carrier. There is an exception in section 604 of this 
bill, which creates a new section 10909 of title 49 of the United 
States Code allowing the Surface Transportation Board to issue a land-
use exemption for a solid waste rail transfer facility operated by or 
on behalf of a rail carrier if the Board finds that a State, local, or 
municipal requirement affecting the siting of such facility meets 
certain specific criteria.
  For these purposes, the bill defines several terms, including 
``commercial and retail waste,'' ``construction and demolition 
debris,'' ``household waste,'' ``industrial waste,'' ``institutional 
waste,'' ``municipal solid waste,'' and ``solid waste.'' The bill 
explicitly excludes hazardous waste regulated under subtitle C of the 
SWDA, mining or oil and gas waste from being covered under this law and 
leaves in place the structure under which these substances are 
currently regulated.
  Mr. Chairman, is my understanding correct that, by clarifying that 
any solid waste rail transfer facility must comply with all applicable 
Federal and State requirements, both substantive and procedural, in the 
same manner as any other solid waste management facility as defined 
under the SWDA, and by expressly excluding such hazardous waste, and 
mining or oil and gas waste, from this law, that this legislation 
ensures that the Environmental Protection Agency's and States' 
authorities dealing with hazardous waste, mining or oil and gas wastes 
are not impacted by this law or by the jurisdiction of the Surface 
Transportation Board?
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, the distinguished Chairman of the 
Committee on Environment and Public Works, and my colleague as a senior 
member of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, is 
correct. This legislation ensures that solid waste rail transfer 
facilities must fully comply with the substantive and procedural 
requirements in State and Federal environmental and public health and 
safety laws, including all permitting requirements, and generally 
allows the Surface Transportation Board to issue land-use exemptions so 
that the Board may continue to be the single agency to guide our 
country's policies concerning the placement of railroad facilities, 
which enables a unified national rail system and promotes energy-
efficient interstate rail transportation. In addition, the 
distinguished chairman is correct that the legislation does not 
diminish the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency or the 
States with respect to hazardous wastes, mining or oil and gas wastes. 
This legislation also does not affect in any way the application of the 
statutory definition of solid waste under the SWDA. This legislation 
also does not intend to affect any preexisting authority to respond to 
imminent hazards under Sections 7002 and 7003 of the RCRA. Lastly, this 
bill ensures that solid waste rail transfer facilities, as defined in 
this legislation, obtain the State permits that any other similar solid 
waste management facility is required to obtain and comply in full with 
State law, as described in Sections 603 and 604 of Division A of the 
bill, and this bill affirms the States' traditional police powers to 
require rail carriers to comply with State and local environmental, 
public health, and public safety standards as described in Section 605 
of Division A.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I support H.R. 2095, the Amtrak 
reauthorization bill, which was passed by the House of Representatives 
and is expected to pass the Senate today. I believe the economic 
strength of our Nation and the State of Michigan is dependent on our 
transportation infrastructure. Reliable passenger rail service is an 
important component of that infrastructure.
  I have been a strong supporter of Amtrak and have voted repeatedly to 
give Amtrak the funds it needs to continue to operate safely and 
effectively. I am a cosponsor of the Passenger Rail Investment & 
Improvement Act which reauthorizes and increases funding for Amtrak, 
the national passenger rail system. A version of that bill is included 
in the package we are voting on today.
  Also included in this legislation are important railroad safety 
improvements designed to avoid tragic rail crashes such as the recent 
horrible collision between a commuter train and a freight train that 
killed 25 people in California. Federal investigators have said that a 
collision warning system could have prevented that crash. This 
legislation would require that new technology to prevent crashes be 
installed in high-risk tracks. In addition, it would limit the amount 
of hours train crews can work each month. Both the funding and the 
safety components of this bill are urgently needed to ensure the 
viability of our nation's passenger rail transportation system in the 
years to come.
  A healthy and adequately funded Amtrak benefits Michigan and the 
nation as a whole. Amtrak service in Michigan includes the Pere 
Marquette which provides daily service between Grand Rapids and 
Chicago, the Wolverine which provides daily service between Pontiac/
Detroit and Chicago, and the Blue Water which provides daily service 
between Port Huron and Chicago. Amtrak gives travelers and commuters 
more transportation options, relieves crowding on highways and in 
airports, and reduces oil consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. 
This legislation would strengthen Amtrak by authorizing $13 billion for 
Amtrak over 5 years and require oversight, management, and accounting 
improvements.

[[Page S10287]]

  This legislation is long overdue as Congress has not passed Amtrak 
legislation since 1997. Unfortunately, in 2005, bipartisan attempts by 
the Senate to improve and modernize Amtrak's operations were blocked by 
Republican leadership in the House of Representatives. That same year, 
President Bush actually proposed sending the railroad into bankruptcy, 
and in other years he has proposed killing off Amtrak service by 
underfunding the railroad. In the interim, Amtrak has been muddling 
through with barely enough funds to keep operating and certainly not 
enough funding to significantly improve service or expand into new 
towns and cities. This bill would address past neglect and improve our 
Nation's passenger rail system.
  An improved national passenger rail system means people who are 
accustomed to commuting in their cars will be able to rely on train 
service, reducing congestion and stress for those who choose to 
continue to drive and offering an alternative for those who would 
prefer to take the train. Those who take the train will be able to 
relax while someone else does the driving. Improved Amtrak service also 
provides people who do not drive or do not have access to cars with a 
viable transportation alternative, especially for medium-distance 
trips. Rather than relying on friends and family to drive them from 
place to place, these people will be able to depend on Amtrak for their 
middle-distance transportation needs. This is especially important for 
elderly individuals who were once accustomed to driving but, because of 
age or illness, have become unable to drive safely. For example, two 
grandparents who live in Michigan and who no longer drive will be able 
to more easily visit their grandchildren in Chicago because of Amtrak's 
improved service in Michigan. Amtrak's train service is important to 
the cities and communities of Michigan because it reduces congestion on 
the roads, reduces pollution and commuting stress, and because it 
improves middle-distance transportation alternatives for the citizens 
of Michigan.
  Also important for Michigan and other States, this legislation 
establishes a $1.5 billion grant program for the construction of high-
speed rail projects in any of the 11 designated high-speed rail 
corridors, one of which is the Midwest High-Speed Rail Corridor, also 
known as the Chicago hub corridor. This grant program would assist 
Michigan in the development of its portion of the Midwest Regional Rail 
Initiative which includes making investments in high-speed rail 
capabilities in the Chicago-Detroit corridor.
  I support this bill because it provides a much needed boost to Amtrak 
and makes and important commitment to preserving and strengthening our 
national passenger rail system.
  Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, this bill represents years of hard work 
and partnership between Members of Congress from both sides of the 
aisle and across the country. I am so pleased that we will finally be 
able to send it to the President for his signature.
  Amtrak has enjoyed a huge resurgence in recent years. Infrastructure 
has been repaired, ontime performance has surpassed the airlines, and 
people are coming back to the train.
  When the final numbers for fiscal year 2008, which ended yesterday, 
are calculated, ridership is expected to reach over 28.7 million 
passengers and revenues over $1.7 billion for the year. That represents 
an increase of almost 3 million riders and $200 million in revenues 
over the previous year.
  Passing this bill today will capitalize on this enthusiasm for 
passenger rail and will show that Congress hears the demand for more.
  Today, Amtrak operates approximately 44 routes over 22,000 miles of 
track, 97 percent of which is owned by freight rail companies. Those 
freight tracks are increasingly congested and not built with modern 
passenger rail in mind. Where the Federal Government does own the 
tracks, we have failed to maintain them as we should.
  Amtrak was created in 1970 after the freight railroads asked the 
Federal Government to take over passenger rail service because they 
were losing so much money.
  Some in the Nixon administration believed they were temporary 
caretakers for a railroad that would be dead within a few years. So 
there was little effort to repair the rails or cars or to create a true 
modern passenger rail system.
  But Amtrak limped along for decades. In spite of the lack of 
commitment at the Federal level, the American people were unwilling to 
give up on rail. Amtrak was a lifeline for people in remote rural 
communities that were not served by airports and for business and other 
travelers in the Northeast corridor.
  Then, starting in the late 1990s, interest in rail began to grow. 
People got tired of sitting in traffic or waiting at airports for 
delayed flights. Local governments realized rail stations often 
increased property values and attracted people to their community.
  New leadership at Amtrak put the focus on repairing old cars and 
rail, leading to smoother, ontime travel.
  Still, Washington was slow to catch on. President Bush proposed no 
funding for Amtrak for years and even suggested putting the railroad 
into bankruptcy and letting a judge determine what to do with it. He 
also failed to make bipartisan appointments to the Amtrak Board, 
leaving it without a quorum for a time.
  Congress, however, recognized the importance of investing in age rail 
infrastructure and joined with Presidents David Gunn and, later, Alex 
Kummant to increase the Federal investment.
  But without an authorization, like the bill we will pass soon, there 
was no clear, consistent direction. Amtrak had to wait for the yearly 
spending bills to get funding and a sense of where Congress wanted that 
investment to go.
  Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act--this legislation 
changes that. It authorizes Amtrak through 2013. It also represents a 
fundamental shift away from the Federal Government providing operating 
support more toward providing capital investment in rail.
  The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act creates a funding 
model for new rail infrastructure much like the one we have used so 
successfully for highways and airports.
  Right now, State and local governments have to shoulder all the costs 
if they want to build or expand passenger rail within their boundaries.
  When I was Governor of Delaware, we might consider several approaches 
to relieving congestion along a corridor. We would quickly realize that 
if we built or expanded a roadway, the Federal Government would pay 80 
percent of the cost. If we built a transit line, we could secure around 
50 percent of the cost from the Federal Government.
  But if we chose to invest in intercity passenger rail--even if it was 
the most effective, cheapest option--the Federal Government would 
provide no support at all. I have to imagine that this policy has led 
more than one State to choose the wrong project.
  Under the new model in the legislation before us today, the Federal 
Government could fund up to 80 percent of the cost of new passenger 
rail service. With this increased Federal commitment comes a 
requirement for renewed State commitment.
  The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act establishes 
advisory commissions for the Northeast corridor and State-supported 
routes with representatives from Amtrak, the States along the route, 
and the Federal Railroad Commission.
  These commissions will provide advice and oversight of the corridor 
and determine the proper costs and access fees for the routes they 
oversee.
  I understand that some of my colleagues expressed some criticism for 
Amtrak on Monday. Just like them, I would like to see Amtrak perform 
better. That is why I am happy that this bill includes so many reforms, 
which I will get into in a minute. But the criticisms issued on Monday 
deserve some attention.
  It is important to recognize that we have spent more than a 
generation watching passenger rail infrastructure fall into disrepair 
and reducing or canceling train service across the Nation.
  Some are happy to utilize this neglect, and the inevitable reduction 
in the quality of train service, against the railroad. That very 
neglect becomes an excuse for some elected officials to further neglect 
and eventually abandon passenger rail altogether.
  At the same time, I have always found it interesting how many of our 
constituents are willing to put up with

[[Page S10288]]

trains that come infrequently, at inconvenient times, and move slowly. 
It shows that even a train that sometimes doesn't run as well as it 
should is needed in an era of extreme traffic congestion and high oil 
prices.
  The junior Senator from Alabama spoke against this bill on Monday, 
indicating that he did not think Amtrak would ever work in his State. 
He mentioned that the train from Birmingham to Washington, DC, came but 
once a day, moved slowly, and cost $440 round trip. The Crescent train 
does, in fact, come infrequently and move more slowly than it should. 
And there are parts of this bill that will address both issues--from 
the Federal-State partnership to invest in new rail corridors to the 
reevaluation of the route system to the language ensuring that 
passenger trains can move faster on freight tracks.
  But I asked a member of my staff to look into the cost of this train 
and found two interesting pieces of information. First, if you buy a 
ticket with a week's notice, a round-trip ticket from Birmingham to DC 
is not $440 but $286. And with 2 week's notice, it goes down to $228. 
The second interesting fact that I learned about the train from 
Birmingham to Washington was today's train is sold out.
  My colleague also mentioned that his constituents are spending a 
larger percentage of their income on gasoline than other Americans. The 
high cost of gasoline is a burden we are all facing and one that 
deserves our utmost attention and focus. But walking away from Amtrak 
and other alternatives to driving will only make the situation worse.
  A report called ``Driven to Spend,'' written by the Surface 
Transportation Policy Project and the Center for Neighborhood 
Technology in 2006, found that metropolitan areas with fewer 
transportation options tended to impose higher transportation costs on 
their residents.
  For example, at a time when gas was around $2.50 per gallon, the 
average family in the Wilmington-Philadelphia area spent $3,381 less 
per year--or 5 percent less of their income--than a family in Houston.
  We should work together to offer all of our constituents more 
convenient, cheaper transportation options that includes roads, 
passenger rail, and transit.
  As I alluded to earlier, the Passenger Rail Investment and 
Improvement Act includes several reforms aimed at reducing Amtrak's 
operating costs and creating a more efficient system.
  Amtrak's long-distance trains would be subject to a review process 
based on new standards for financial performance, ontime performance, 
and customer satisfaction, laid out by the Federal Railroad 
Administration. Based on those standards, Amtrak will be required to 
create and implement performance improvement plans for the 5 long-
distance routes with the worst performance.
  In future years, the remaining 10 long-distance routes would undergo 
the same restructuring process.
  Additionally, this legislation would look at the cause of poor ontime 
performance outside of the Northeast corridor. If it is found that the 
problem is caused by a freight railroad, the Surface Transportation 
Board is given new authority to address the issue.
  The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act also allows the 
Federal Government to explore competition for providing passenger rail 
service in a responsible way. One provision in the bill permits freight 
railroads to bid to operate some passenger trains that run on their 
tracks.
  Another provision allows a private entity to bid to provide service 
on a corridor, though Congress would have to act again before that bid 
could be acted on.
  Moreover, States wishing to use operators other than Amtrak for 
State-supported services would be permitted to do so and would have 
access to Amtrak facilities and equipment for that particular route.
  This important bill has been combined with another very important 
bill, the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008. This is the first major 
reform of the rail safety program since the Federal Railroad Safety 
Authorization Act expired in 1998.
  This bill requires railroads to install positive train control 
systems by 2015. These systems are designed to prevent train 
derailments and collisions, like the one that occurred in southern 
California last month, taking the lives of 25 people.
  The package would also limit the amount that certain rail employees, 
such as locomotive engineers, can work to 276 hours a month. Current 
law allows railroads to require more than 400 hours of work per month, 
or approximately 13 hours every single day.
  This package--the Amtrak reauthorization and rail safety bill--is 
truly bipartisan and shows that Congress is catching up to our 
constituents. Americans have been pleading for more rail service for 
years, and their need only increased with the recent spike in oil 
prices.
  A recent study by Reconnecting America finds that 30 percent of those 
living within half a mile of a rail station use it regularly. 
Unfortunately, only 1 in 20 people lives that close to a rail station.
  With the passage of this bill, Congress is showing that we understand 
the need for convenient, reliable passenger rail service across this 
country, and we are renewing our commitment to giving Americans 
affordable alternatives to driving.
  With a modern passenger rail system, we can get people out of 
traffic, prevent a few trips to the gas station and reduce the amount 
of pollution in our air. Not bad for one bill.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I am pleased to support the Rail Safety--
Amtrak package under consideration today.
  Of highest importance to me though is a much-needed authorization for 
the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, WMATA, the metro 
system that probably brought a majority of our staffers to work this 
morning.
  I thank the many Members with whom I worked to obtain passage of this 
authorization legislation, leading with my area colleagues, Senators 
Webb, Cardin, and Mikulski. I also thank the Commerce Committee 
leadership of Senators Lautenberg and Hutchison and the leadership of 
the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, Senators 
Lieberman and Collins.
  WMATA has been one of the greater metropolitan area's most successful 
partnerships with the Federal Government.
  In 1960, President Eisenhower signed legislation to provide for the 
development of a regional rail system for the Nation's Capital and to 
support the Federal Government. Since 1960, Congress has continually 
reaffirmed the Federal Government's commitment to Metro by passing 
periodic reauthorizing bills.
  Over 50 Federal agencies in the National Capital region are located 
adjacent to Metro stations. Federal agencies rely on WMATA to get their 
employees to and from the workplace year-round, in all types of 
weather.
  Based on Metro's 2007 rail ridership survey, approximately 40 percent 
of respondents identified themselves as Federal workers who ride 
Metrorail to work.
  We are talking about thousands of cars taken off the major roadways 
each day because of our area's metro system.
  The Railway Safety--Amtrak bill includes funding over 10 years for 
capital and preventative maintenance projects for WMATA. This language 
was added by voice vote to the Amtrak bill by Congressman Tom Davis 
during the House's Amtrak debate this summer.
  This critical investment will help provide for much-needed 
improvements to this stressed transit system. Projects such as station 
and facility rehabilitation, tunnel repairs, and addition of new rail 
cars and buses will help ease congestion during peak hours.
  This legislation, which would authorize much-needed Federal funding, 
contingent on State and local dedicated matches, recognizes how vital 
Metro is to the region and the Federal Government. Let me repeat: these 
dollars will be matched by the Commonwealth of Virginia, Washington, 
DC, and the State of Maryland.
  Such legislation is integral to the well being of the area's 
transportation system, as we struggle to address traffic congestion, 
skyrocketing gas prices, global climate change, and the local quality 
of life concerns.

[[Page S10289]]

  From its inception, the Federal Government has played a significant 
role in funding the construction and operation of the Metrorail system. 
I hope this Congress will continue to show that support.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise in strong support of the Federal 
Railroad Safety Improvement Act. This bill is long overdue. It 
authorizes funding for Amtrak and improves rail safety. It also 
includes the National Capital Transportation Amendments Act, which 
authorizes funding for the Washington Metro system--America's Metro.
  More funding for America's Metro is important for several reasons. 
First, Federal employees, visitors to our Nation's Capital, and 
residents all depend on Metro. Mr. President, I don't know how your 
staff gets to work, but more than half of mine take Metro. In fact, 
Federal employees make up over 40 percent of commuters and nearly half 
of all Metro stations are located at Federal facilities. If you 
remember, Metro also evacuated everyone during September 11. Metro 
makes it easier for visitors from across the country to learn about our 
Nation's history and be a part of history. During Presidential 
inaugurations, funerals, celebrations, and demonstrations on the 
National Mall, Metro extends its hours. Metro also helps working 
families eliminate costly bills at the gas pump. During this period of 
high gas prices, my constituents are choosing Metro and leaving their 
cars at home. Because of this, Metro has seen recordbreaking ridership.
  Second, the Washington metro area must expand its transportation 
infrastructure to handle base realignment and closure, BRAC, growth. In 
Maryland, we are planning for 40,000 new jobs. I know Virginia is 
planning for BRAC growth too. The Metro funding in this bill will BRAC-
ready our region's largest transit system.
  Third, it is estimated that Metro needs $11 million for capital 
improvements over 10 years. The authorized and dedicated funding in 
this bill will help Metro meet these needs. Metro will be able to grow 
as the region grows instead of cutting service.
  Fourth, Metro is safe for the commuter and environmentally sound. We 
all know commuting in the region has become increasingly difficult. I 
have been commuting to Washington from Baltimore for 31 years. I have 
to budget an hour and a half to 2 hours to get to work. There always 
seems to be some tie-up on the highway and increasing levels of road 
rage. Driving a car in the National Capital Region is serious business 
whether you are on the Capital Beltway, Route 50, or Central Avenue. 
Yet I see many drivers multitasking at high speeds. Drivers are talking 
on cell phones, sending text messages, and putting on makeup. This 
Metro funding will make our lives a little safer and saner and help the 
environment by reducing air pollution.
  Metro means more than just transportation. It means residents and 
visitors to our Nation's Capital can live, work, worship, and play 
without ever getting in a car. It means more jobs and access to jobs 
and improved neighborhoods and economic development.
  I commend Senator Cardin for his hard work and leadership on this 
Metro bill. I thank Senators Warner and Webb for partnering with 
Senator Cardin and me to get this done. Senator Warner and I have been 
regional allies for many years. I am going to miss working with him. I 
thank Majority Leader Reid and Senator Lautenberg for helping us bring 
the Metro bill to the Senate floor and their hard work on the 
underlying bill. I urge all my colleagues to get on board and vote for 
this bill.
  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, in what has become a frequent occurrence in 
this Congress, the majority has unnecessarily combined two bills--one 
that I support and one that I don't--in order to ensure quick passage 
of both bills. As a result, I must weigh the two bills together. Of 
course, I want to improve rail safety. However, I cannot support a rail 
safety bill when it is combined with a bill that is essentially a $13.1 
billion taxpayer subsidy to Amtrak.
  The need for rail safety was recently highlighted after the tragic 
rail accident in California on September 12 that killed 25 people. 
Clearly, we need to ensure that Americans are safe traveling to work 
and moving the Nation's freight. This bill does augment rail safety by 
revamping the Federal Railroad Administration and providing over $1.6 
billion for rail safety programs. It also mandates many much needed 
safety changes, including: installing positive train controls; amending 
the hours of service requirements so operators are not overworked; 
requiring a risk reduction program, which includes a technology 
implementation and fatigue management for all Class I and rail carriers 
with poor safety records; requiring certain mandatory training; and 
making changes to grade crossing safety management practices. A similar 
version of the rail safety legislation passed the Senate by unanimous 
consent on August 1. I suspect that if the majority were to allow a 
vote on final passage of the rail safety bill, it would easily pass the 
Senate.
  The majority, however, decided to take a different route. Instead of 
quickly passing the final version of the rail safety legislation by 
unanimous consent, it attached the bill to a more controversial piece 
of legislation--the Amtrak reauthorization bill. This maneuver was 
obviously done so that the Amtrak reauthorization bill would pass. 
Unfortunately, the Amtrak reauthorization bill is riddled with bad 
policy. Since its inception in 1971, Amtrak has required over $30 
billion in taxpayer subsidies. According to the Congressional Research 
Service, Amtrak runs over a billion dollar deficit each year, and 
requires Federal assistance to cover operating losses and capital 
investment. Without a yearly Federal grant to cover operating losses, 
Amtrak would not survive as currently configured. This bill extends 
Amtrak's dependency on the Federal Government by authorizing $13.1 
billion for Amtrak through fiscal year 2013, more than double the 
amount authorized in the previous Amtrak bill that expired in 2002. 
Rather than keep Amtrak dependent on taxpayer support, I believe the 
rail carrier should modify its financial strategy to become self-
sufficient and profitable.
  This bill also includes five new provisions that expand the Davis-
Bacon Act requirements. These provisions would force Amtrak to ensure 
that laborers and mechanics employed by contractors and subcontractors 
in construction work financed under this bill are paid wages no less 
than the prevailing wages on similar construction projects. The Davis-
Bacon requirement seems harmless enough, but in practice, forcing 
contractors to pay their laborers a wage standard, which many argue is 
set on a flawed wage determination, only raises construction costs for 
that locality. Why would American taxpayers want to set a floor on the 
cost of construction if it can be done more efficiently and 
inexpensively? Again, this is just bad policy.
  It is with regret that I will be forced to register a ``no'' vote on 
this bill.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I regrettably do not support H.R. 2095. The 
bill we have before us packages together three bills into one vote with 
no amendments dealing with Rail Safety, Amtrak, and capital and 
preventive maintenance grants for the Washington Metropolitan Area 
Transit Authority, WMATA.
  The Rail Safety provisions of the package by themselves would have 
had my support. I fully support efforts to address hours of service 
requirements for train operators and positive train control for our 
freight and passenger railroads. However, I remain concerned about both 
Amtrak provisions and the WMATA portion of the full package that we are 
voting on tonight. The majority leader has filled the amendment tree so 
that no amendments can be offered on this package, and we are faced 
with an up or down vote on some very key funding areas under the 
jurisdiction of Transportation Appropriations.
  This extra spending will place a strain in excess of what our current 
budget allows. I understand the need to have passenger rail service as 
an alternative mode of transportation. However, I feel strongly that 
Amtrak should undertake the reforms necessary to be worthy of taxpayer 
dollars by tying funding to certain expectations and benchmarks.
  As the Appropriations Subcommittee ranking member for the 
Transportation and Housing and Urban Development, THUD, I am not given 
enough of an allocation to meet all of our funding needs. This 
authorization package provides levels of appropriations that can

[[Page S10290]]

not be realized, including both Amtrak and WMATA, and will further 
strain our subcommittee funding decisions.
  Regrettably, the Amtrak provision in this bill offers none of the key 
reforms in Amtrak's governance or operations that link resource 
allocation to consumer demand. With no reforms and an authorization 
level of $13.3 billion over the next 5 years, I find it hard to support 
these levels when the money will not be there.
  With regard to funding for WMATA, the bill includes an authorization 
level of $1.5 billion over 10 years for capital and maintenance 
projects. These grants would be over and above the grants for which 
WMATA is otherwise eligible. The authorized grants would not be 
available to any other jurisdiction. Although WMATA should be 
encouraged to make necessary reforms in its governance and financing, 
such encouragement should not require the creation of an entirely new 
Federal funding program which excludes other jurisdictions which have 
long since taken such prudent steps to upgrade and maintain their 
existing capital.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I fully support passage of H.R. 2095, a 
bill that will help move America's railroads into the 21st century. The 
reauthorizations of the Federal rail safety programs and Amtrak are 
long overdue and this bill will give direction to Amtrak and the 
Federal Railroad Administration, FRA, to help them both better 
accomplish their missions. Given the higher price of oil, continuing 
climate change concerns, and our challenging economic times, it is more 
important than ever that we ensure that our Nation's passenger and 
freight rail systems are adequately prepared to safely accommodate our 
transportation needs.
  Safety is a key element if we are to continue to expand our Nation's 
use of trains. H.R. 2095 will improve railroad safety and provide the 
resources we need to develop our rail network into the first-class 
system our Nation deserves. Key improvements include reforming the 
hours of service requirements for train and signal workers, requiring 
risk-based safety programs for large railroad companies, mandating the 
installation of positive train control systems and other safety 
technology, and encouraging and funding grade crossing and pedestrian 
safety and trespasser prevention programs.
  This bill will also encourage the further development of passenger 
rail corridors, provide incentives for Amtrak to operate more 
efficiently, and strengthen the relationship between Amtrak and the 
States in which it operates. These improvements will help Amtrak 
further increase its ridership, which has reached record levels this 
year and last, and will allow Amtrak to better serve its customers. I 
believe this bill will further fortify Amtrak as an important, 
necessary, and viable option in our nation's transportation landscape.
  I congratulate Senator Lautenberg for crafting his railroad safety 
and Amtrak bills, working hard to move them through the Senate, and 
developing this bipartisan compromise with the House. I call on my 
colleagues in the Senate to pass H.R. 2095 as soon as possible and send 
it to the President for his signature.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I want to take a moment to express my 
gratitude to Chairman Inouye and Senator Lautenberg for their support 
and efforts in working to pass this important piece of rail safety 
legislation, the Federal Railroad Safety Improvement Act.
  As many of my colleagues know, southern California and the community 
of Chatsworth suffered the worst train collision in California's modern 
history last month when a Union Pacific freight train and a Metrolink 
commuter train collided head on during rush hour.
  This tragedy claimed 25 lives, and injured 135 people, many of whom 
have sustained lifelong injuries.
  Last month's deadly Metrolink accident made clear the urgent need to 
fix our rail system and ensure the safety of passengers.
  While Senator Feinstein and I will continue to push for the rapid 
deployment of positive train control technology, this legislation 
includes important safety provisions that will immediately help improve 
rail safety and help prevent accidents.
  I am pleased this legislation included grant funding for positive 
train control systems, anti-fatigue measures for train crews, increased 
penalties for violators, and grant funding for grade crossings.
  In addition to these safety measures, this bill also provides much 
needed funding for Amtrak and authorizes more than $1.5 billion in 
grants to States to fund the construction of high-speed rail projects 
in designated corridors, including a California corridor.
  This is an important piece of legislation and I thank my colleagues 
for their support. I urge the President to take action immediately to 
sign this bill into law.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. REID. 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. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Under the previous order, the motion to concur with an amendment is 
withdrawn.
  Under the previous order, the question occurs on agreeing to the 
motion to concur in the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 
2095.
  The yeas and nays have been ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Biden) and 
the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Salazar). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 74, nays 24, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 210 Leg.]

                                YEAS--74

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Brown
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Clinton
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Conrad
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     Dodd
     Dole
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Grassley
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inouye
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Kerry
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lugar
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Obama
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Tester
     Warner
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden

                                NAYS--24

     Allard
     Barrasso
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coburn
     Craig
     DeMint
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Graham
     Gregg
     Inhofe
     Kyl
     Martinez
     McCain
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Sununu
     Thune
     Vitter
     Voinovich

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Biden
     Kennedy
       
  The motion was agreed to.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. LEAHY. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut is recognized.

                          ____________________