[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 168 (Tuesday, November 10, 2009)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11337-S11338]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     STATUS OF THE HIGHWAY PROGRAM

  Mr. GREGG. Madam President, last month, efforts by Senate Democratic 
leaders to add roughly $250 billion to the U.S. debt over the next 10 
years by increasing Medicare payments to physicians were put off by 
arguments from other Democrats that the cost of the proposal should be 
offset so as not to burden future generations with more debt. A series 
of press releases, editorials, and op-eds declared the proposal to be 
fiscally irresponsible and the Democratic leadership foolish for trying 
to take it up as a standalone bill. And yet, a Senate highway bill that 
would add roughly $150 billion to the U.S. debt over the next 10 years 
remains below the radar and far more likely to be approved.
  The last highway bill, SAFETEA-LU expired at the end of September 
2009. But highway programs, like much of the rest of government, 
continue to operate by virtue of the continuing resolution, CR, now in 
place through December 18, 2009. Until the authorization committees can 
agree on how to underwrite the $500 billion over 6 years that they 
desire in highway spending, a CR or another legislative vehicle will 
carry a highway programs extension. Meanwhile, the highway trust fund 
is already insolvent and cannot support baseline spending levels equal 
to the highway program levels in fiscal year 2009, much less an 
authorization bill amounting to half a trillion dollars.
  The House and Senate authorizing committees advertise they are simply 
arguing over the length--3 months v. 6 months v. 18 months--of a 
``clean'' extension. A clean extension, however, already exists in law 
in the CR and can be perpetuated indefinitely. The authorizers really 
want to combine a highway extension bill with an increase in highway 
spending authority above the fiscal year 2009 level for contract 
authority.
  The various ``clean'' extension bills being advocated by the highway 
authorizers are anything but clean, and they are certainly not 
extensions. For example, the latest Senate version to be hotlined on 
October 26 is a massive highway expansion bill--it would increase 
spending authority by $20.8 billion over the CBO baseline in 2010 and 
in every year after that.
  Madam President, $20.8 billion per year over the baseline is a lot of 
money. Why so much? Because authorizers set, back in 2005, the overall 
5-year net level of highway spending in the last authorization bill, 
SAFETEA-LU, by rescinding $8.7 billion on the day that bill expired--
September 30, 2009. They had always planned to repeal that rescission 
before it occurred, but failed to do so. They are so irritated by the 
failure to avert the rescission that they propose to re-enact the 
funds--twice!
  I will ask that a table showing the components of the $20.8 billion 
above the CBO baseline be printed in the Record at the end of my 
statement.
  CBO projects that limiting highway spending to the fiscal year 2009 
program level, as the CR does, will exceed the gas tax revenue to the 
highway trust fund by $87 billion over the next 10 years. If Congress 
continues to cover trust fund shortfalls as it has been--by 
transferring money from the Treasury's General Fund--then $87 billion 
of

[[Page S11338]]

transfers and debt would be required to continue just this fiscal year 
2009 level of spending. The general fund, however, is also broke--
incurring a $1.4 trillion deficit in fiscal year 2009, and the fiscal 
year 2010 deficit is likely to be about the same. Consequently, when 
Congress transfers money from the broke general fund to the broke 
highway trust fund, the debt of the U.S. Government goes up by exactly 
that amount and immediately counts against the debt limit.
  Despite the unaffordability of the baseline, Congress adopted a 2010 
budget resolution in May 2009 that allocated amounts to authorizing 
committees to write a highway bill that would spend more than current 
law revenues collected by the trust fund. The Senate highway expansion 
bill, which would restore the $8.7 billion rescission twice, would not 
only enact the levels magically assumed by the 2010 budget resolution 
but would also increase outlays by another $62 billion over 10 years, 
bringing the total draw on the general fund, the debt, and future 
generations to nearly $150 billion, just from a so-called 6-month 
extension bill.
  The authorizers brush off any deficit concerns by saying that, under 
the Byzantine system of split jurisdiction with the appropriators, they 
don't control outlays and so there is no ``pay-go'' problem with their 
expansion bill. But it's too late to raise any objection if you wait to 
measure highway program outlays for budget enforcement until they are 
triggered by an appropriations bill, since the outlays are already 
baked into the baseline and into the allocations of the appropriators. 
The only point where taxpayers or their watchdogs can measure whether 
proposed future spending is higher than current law is at the 
authorization stage. Extra special vigilance is required whenever 
authorizers claim they just want to enact a ``simple clean extension.''
  When Republicans controlled Congress in 1998, they enacted a 
bipartisan highway bill dedicated to spending all gas tax revenues only 
on highways. When they enacted the next highway bill in 2005, it was 
also a bipartisan goal to spend every penny of gas tax revenue. They 
succeeded beyond their imaginations. And now that Democrats are 
responsible for writing the next highway bill, their proposal is to 
spend all the gas taxes plus an additional $150 billion. This can only 
be done by increasing the Nation's debt, in other words--handing the 
bill to our children so today's politicians can take credit for highway 
projects.
  I ask unanimous consent that the components to which I referred be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

   Components of the $20.8 Billion in Highway Spending Above the CBO 
                                Baseline

       The $20.8 billion consists of 4 pieces:
       $11.9 billion from the highway title of the bill, made up 
     of $8.7 billion from restoring the funds lost due to the 
     rescission enacted in SAFETEA-LU and $3.2 billion from 
     restoring the funds lost due to the rescission enacted in the 
     FY09 Transportation/HUD appropriation bill;
       Another $8.7 billion in additional appropriations to again 
     restore the amount that was rescinded on September 30, 2009, 
     just to make sure;
       $0.1 billion for the safety title of the bill; and
       $0.1 billion for the transit title of the bill.
       The $8.7 billion appears twice in the bill:
       In Section 101, which provides highway funding for FY10 and 
     beyond at the FY09 level but defines the FY09 level as if no 
     rescissions occurred in FY09, and
       In Section 103, which adds another $8.7 billion.

                          ____________________