[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 25 (Wednesday, February 15, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Pages S661-S663]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
AMERICA'S INFRASTRUCTURE
Mr. REID. Madam President, we are here today as a result of stalling
by my Republican colleagues. We have a judge for whom the vote was
overwhelmingly in his favor. It was 89 for him, with 4 or 5 against him
on a motion to proceed. But now we are being forced to eat up 30 hours
of valuable time, just sitting around and doing nothing. It is really
unfortunate.
We have not confirmed the judge yet because under the rules I have
had to file cloture on this noncontroversial judge. After I file
cloture, and cloture is invoked, and then the Republicans get 30 hours
under the Senate rules. This has happened scores of times--scores of
times--during the past year, all last year, and certainly it is already
happening this year. We can't move to anything unless we file cloture.
Early in this Congress, Senators Tom Udall of New Mexico, Merkley of
Oregon, and others suggested the rules be changed, and in good faith a
number of Senators believed: Well, let's see how the system works if we
make a few minor changes--hoping things would get better because they
were told they would get better. We were told the other side would not
make us file motions to proceed to every piece of legislation that came
up. Absolutely untrue. We have virtually had to file cloture on
everything. We have wasted weeks of this Congress, months of this
Congress, on dilatory tactics.
We have a bill before this body that is so very important, creating 2
million jobs. Is it something that Senator Boxer, the chairman of the
committee, and Senator Inhofe, the ranking member, just dreamed up and
said let's try something new for a change? No. The legislation allowing
us to have a highway system expires at the end of March. So we have to
do something.
This isn't something where Senator Boxer said: Well, I think this is
a great idea. Her idea is not unique, nor is Senator Inhofe's idea
unique. It goes back to when Eisenhower was a major in the Army, and he
was asked to bring a caravan of vehicles across the country. He was
struck with this idea when he saw that the roads were awful. So after
his successful tour of duty in the military and he became President of
our country, he decided he wanted to do something about it.
Here is what President Eisenhower did: He got the Congress to
appropriate $50 billion. In today's dollars, that would be $\1/2\
trillion. He got that through Congress. He wanted to build about 50,000
miles of roads in this country so that when another young major was
directed to bring military vehicles across the country, he would have
roads, highways, and freeways to do
[[Page S662]]
that. Eisenhower said it would free the Nation from the ``antiquated
shackles of secondary roads.'' That is what General Eisenhower said. It
would give America a modern highway system for moving people and goods
across the country.
Presidents since that period of time have recommitted to this idea.
Johnson did it. Someone who spoke about it as much, if not more, than
anyone since Eisenhower was President Reagan. Reagan said:
Common sense tells us it will cost a lot less to keep the
[transportation] system we have in good repair than let it
disintegrate and have to start over.
Since those 8 years of President Reagan, here is where we are today.
We have 70,000 bridges in this country that are in a state of
disrepair. They are unsafe.
I was in a meeting yesterday where they talked about a bridge in
Reno, NV, that was built during the Depression by the Works Progress
Administration. I was meeting with a flood control district from Washoe
County, NV, and they said they have a bridge--a beautiful bridge--that
is so unsafe they will not let schoolbuses drive over it anymore with
kids in it. The bus can go without kids in it. There are hundreds and
hundreds of bridges in our country in this same state of disrepair.
It is time to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure, and this bill
does it in a good way. We talk about this system as if it didn't have
any bearing on individuals, but people's lives depend on it--not only
on the bridge I just talked about, but the highways I talked about and
the sidewalks. We have a person injured or killed as a pedestrian every
7 minutes in the United States. Why? Because they are walking in unsafe
conditions. There are lots of roads back here in Washington and lots of
them in Nevada where there are no sidewalks. So investing in our
infrastructure, as I have said, and I continue to say, will create 2
million jobs.
The Republican caucus is not doing this all in one big band. There
are a few Republican Senators over there who are ruining it for
everybody. No one can accuse Jim Inhofe of being some radical liberal.
He represents the State of Oklahoma. So what do we have here? We have
100 amendments that have been filed already on this bill. Very few of
them are related to the bill. We have an amendment that some refer to
as an abortion amendment, we have some referring to an amendment
dealing with contraceptives, and we have an amendment to cut off aid to
Egypt.
Now, tell me, what in the world does aid to Egypt have to do with
this highway bill? We have a Foreign Relations Committee. They have TV
cameras there. Let them have a hearing in that committee, and the
person offering the amendment can make his speech before the Foreign
Relations Committee. There is no chance of this amendment passing.
None. Zero.
Senator McCain is going to Egypt next week. Why? Because he is a
person who is an expert in foreign affairs. He is respected around the
world, and he is going to go there to try to work with the Egyptians to
resolve some of these problems. He does not even want this amendment to
be voted on. He has told me that.
We have an amendment to keep poisons out of the air. It is called
Boiler MACT. It is to keep arsenic and mercury and stuff out of the
air--excuse me, to keep it in the air. I thank the Senator from
California, chairman of that committee.
We have an amendment that takes us back to Keystone--building a
pipeline from Canada to the southern part of our country. I would
consider that or take a look at it. If they were going to use American
products in doing that and the oil would be used in the United States,
I might even consider that. I am not sure, but I would consider it. But
that is not where we are.
So we have a handful of Republican Senators holding up what we are
doing.
Mrs. BOXER. Would the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. REID. I would be glad to yield to my colleague.
Mrs. BOXER. I thank the leader.
First, I just want to thank the Leader so much for his remarks this
morning. They are so close to my heart. Frankly, they are close to the
hearts of the members of the Environment and Public Works Committee and
all the committees that have done their work in a bipartisan way. It is
a unique moment when we have four committees complete their work and
here we sit.
Before I ask my question, I think the people of this country need to
understand what is going on. We are wasting, as my friend said, minute
after minute, hour after hour, day after day because Republican
Senators, for whatever their reasons, want to bring progress in this
country to a halt, to a stop. We have to wonder, is this politically
motivated?
As my friend said, 2 million jobs are at stake. I would say to my
friend, it is actually up to 2.8 million because there are 1.8 million
jobs we protect, and up to 1 million new jobs we would create because
of the bipartisan cooperation we have had across the board in the
Senate on the highway bill. So I thank my friend.
My question is, Is my friend aware we have more than 1,000
organizations representing millions of Americans who are Republicans
and Democrats and Independents, who work out there on the roads or who
are the business leaders from the Chamber of Commerce to the AFL CIO,
to the general contractors or the granite people--it goes on and on--
the cement people, to the coal ash people, and the fact is a thousand
groups are out there and they are watching us, minute after minute?
I hope this is an opportunity to tell them to activate their people
and let them know why we are not passing a bill that will save or
create 2.8 million jobs and help our businesses across the board and
help our States. When we talk about safety, as my friend pointed out,
Senator Inhofe tells an eloquent story of a woman killed in Oklahoma
walking with her child under a bridge and concrete falls on her. She is
gone, and he is so motivated by that.
So I hope my friend will address whether he is aware of the broad
support in America for this bill regardless of party label.
Mr. REID. I say through the Chair to my friend from California that
yesterday I gave some remarks, and the outline of the speech mentioned
there were scores of organizations supporting this bill. I looked at
that and said to myself: There are hundreds and hundreds of
organizations supporting this bill. So I recognize that, I say to my
friend, the chairman of that committee.
To rub salt in the wound of what we are going through, the House of
Representatives, led by the Republican caucus--which is overwhelmingly
tea party--decided they were going to do some legislation.
That is dandy. Their legislation is so bad that the Congressional
Budget Office said it would bankrupt the trust fund. We are trying to
replenish the trust fund; they are bankrupting the trust fund. But as I
hear on the news this morning, the Republican caucus over in the House
is fractured, and now they can't figure out what to do with that bill.
They are thinking, maybe we will break it into three different pieces.
Even with the power of the tea party, it is so obnoxious and so out of
control, that piece of legislation, they appear they are not going to
allow a vote to take place on that bill itself because it is so bad.
There is a simple way to avoid this headache; that is, Democrats and
Republicans work together. We are here. We want to do this. Let's
assume that I decide to file cloture on this bill. What I would do is
have a substitute amendment. Let's say I decide to do that. I can't
imagine why the Republicans wouldn't join with us in doing that. If
there is something in the substitute that I disagree with, the
amendment process is still there. To not allow the bill to go forward
is repulsive. I can't imagine how a majority of the Republicans who say
they want this bill done wouldn't allow us at least to get on the bill
itself and move forward with amendments.
I am terribly disappointed where we are. I hope the House will take a
page out of our playbook over here and work together, as Boxer and
Inhofe have done, to come up with a bill that is a good bill. That bill
we are trying to get through was passed unanimously out of committee.
So I am cautiously optimistic that the American people will see what is
going on and put some pressure on my Republican colleagues to get this
bill passed. It is just unfair what is happening on this and other
pieces of legislation.
[[Page S663]]
____________________