[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 37 (Wednesday, March 7, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1440-S1441]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION ACT
Mr. MERKLEY. Madam President, I rise to address the surface
transportation bill that is on the floor. It has been a mark of the
challenges this body faces in deliberation that we have now been on
this bill for 3 weeks, and we have not had a debate over transportation
amendments. But hope does spring eternal.
In that spirit, I wished to come to the floor and share some thinking
about the amendments that we should be debating and should be approving
in this process. Certainly, the underlying Transportation bill is a
great step toward our No. 1 goal of passing legislation that would
create jobs, put people back to work in the hardest hit sectors of our
economy.
Building and repairing our transportation infrastructure will create
or save 2 million jobs nationwide, good-paying jobs that would provide
a huge boost to our struggling construction industry, the families, to
the workers, and to our economy. This infrastructure we would be
building is a downpayment for the success of our future economy.
China is spending 10 percent of its GDP on infrastructure. They are
preparing for a stronger economy in the future. Europe is spending 5
percent of their GDP, but in America we are spending only 2 percent.
Indeed, it was not but a few months ago that our colleagues on the
House side of Capitol Hill said we should cut transportation spending
by 30 to 35 percent, which would devastate the infrastructure efforts
that are underway, even within the existing 2 percent, the small amount
we are spending.
Is it any wonder our communities are struggling to repair the bridges
and roads we have, let alone to solve the challenges, the bottlenecks
in the transportation lines that need to be addressed for the future.
We have made a good start in committee on this bill, despite the
paralysis on the floor of the Senate. We had elements of this bill go
through four different committees and incorporate good ideas from both
sides of the aisle in each of those committees and come to the floor in
a bipartisan fashion.
I wish to share a couple other thoughts to build on this groundwork
that came out of our committees, commonsense fixes, cutting redtape,
and closing loopholes. The first amendment, No. 1653, is one I am
sponsoring with my colleagues Senator Toomey and Senator Blunt. Right
now, farmers are exempt from certain Federal regulations when they
transport their products in farm vehicles, as long as they are
transporting these products inside their own State. But should they
venture across State lines, even by just a short distance, then the
Federal regulations are triggered. So we have farmers who are simply
trying to get their products to market, to the local grain elevator, if
you will, and they have to cross a State border and suddenly their
challenge becomes very complex indeed.
For instance, Oregon farmers who live just across the border from
Idaho, in these cases, the best market might be the nearest processing
facility just across the State line. These farmers are exactly the same
as their counterparts elsewhere, except for one small fact, the
processing facility is across the border. This arbitrary distinction
can mean major differences in how these farmers and ranchers have to do
business in the form of additional burdensome regulations, regulations
such as vehicle inspections for every trip the vehicle makes, even if
the farm vehicle is simply driving from the field to the barn or having
to adhere to reporting requirements for things like hours of service
rules, even though the farmer is just driving an hour down the road; or
obtaining medical certifications meant for commercial truck drivers.
This amendment would simply make life a little easier and more
logical for these farmers by exempting them from these regulations
designed for interstate transport, not designed to intervene or
interfere when a farmer is attempting to take his product to market. We
have put limits on mileage and limits on purpose to make sure it serves
the intended function--to get rid of that arbitrary boundary that
creates a regulatory nightmare.
A second amendment is related to freight. The underlying bill has a
freight program to improve the performance of the national freight
network. That is a proposal that will help make desperately needed
improvements. There are a few technical improvements that would further
improve the bill; that is, to recognize that funding should be used in
the most efficient and effective way to ensure that high-value goods
are being moved quickly to market.
We often think of freight in terms of volume or tonnage. But when we
start looking at the high-tech sector, we can have enormously high-
value content such as that produced by the microchip industry in Oregon
and the roads necessary to make sure that high-value freight gets to
market, which drives a tremendous number of jobs. It is just as
important to address as are the routes that involve high tonnage and
volume.
Let's turn to a third issue, which is ``Buy American.'' I salute my
colleagues, Sherrod Brown and Bernie Sanders, for working on these
issues. We already recognize the principle that if we are paying to
complete a public infrastructure project in America, it only makes
sense for American businesses and workers to do as much of the work as
possible.
Unfortunately, there are several loopholes that have undermined this
basic premise in recent years. My amendment No. 1599 is an amendment
that addresses one of these loopholes.
This summer, construction of a rail bridge in Alaska to a military
base will
[[Page S1441]]
be undertaken by a Chinese company because the Federal Rail
Administration, unlike the Federal Transit and Federal Highway
Administration, doesn't have the ``Buy American'' provision. An
American company was ready to build this bridge, but because of this
loophole the contract went to a Chinese company using Chinese steel.
Isn't it frustrating that the infrastructure to provide access to a
military base involves jobs and the steel going across the Pacific
Ocean?
Then I wanted to note that a related amendment led by Senator Sherrod
Brown, No. 1807, addresses another ``Buy American'' challenge. States
have been using a project segmentation loophole to avoid putting
Americans to work, to avoid the ``Buy American'' seal.
The Bay Bridge in California put in 12 separate projects so that
Federal funds would only apply to a couple of those pieces. This allows
the bulk of the bridge to be built--you guessed it--with Chinese steel,
by Chinese workers. My amendment is modeled after a Republican
amendment in the House Transportation bill, by Representative Cravaack
of Minnesota, to close this loophole and ensure that the spirit of the
law is upheld. These provisions were incorporated into the amendment
led by Senator Sherrod Brown.
I urge my colleagues to support these amendments to make these
commonsense fixes to our transportation program. We must have debate on
the amendments on the Senate floor. This room should not be empty. The
conversation should not be quiet because transportation is at the heart
of our economy.
We have a construction industry that is flat on its back. We have
interest rates that are low. We have infrastructure that needs to be
built. This is a win-win for our future economy and our current workers
and our current economy.
Let's get to work. I ask my colleagues to continuously object to
amendments being debated--for those listening in, the Senate has had a
rule that any Senator can block an amendment. We have to get 100
percent of the Senators to agree to bring an amendment to the floor.
The social contract that allows this to happen on a regular and orderly
fashion in the past has been broken. So while families across this
country look to us to put a transportation plan into place for our
future economy and to put America back to work now, we are sitting here
fiddling. Let's end the fiddling and do our work so America can do its
work of rebuilding our highway infrastructure.
Madam President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a
quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
____________________