[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 41 (Tuesday, March 13, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1592-S1596]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           MOVING AHEAD FOR PROGRESS IN THE 21ST CENTURY ACT

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate will resume consideration of S. 1813, which the clerk will 
report.

[[Page S1593]]

  The bill clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 1813) to reauthorize Federal-aid highway and 
     highway safety construction programs, and for other purposes.

  Pending:

       Roberts modified amendment No. 1826, of a perfecting 
     nature.
       McCain modified amendment No. 1669, to enhance the natural 
     quiet and safety of airspace of the Grand Canyon National 
     Park.
       Corker amendment No. 1785, to lower the fiscal year 2013 
     discretionary budget authority cap as set in the Balanced 
     Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 by 
     $20,000,000,000 in order to offset the general fund transfers 
     to the highway trust fund.
       Corker amendment No. 1810, to ensure that the aggregate 
     amount made available for transportation projects for a 
     fiscal year does not exceed the estimated amount available 
     for those projects in the highway trust fund for the fiscal 
     year.
       Portman/Coburn amendment No. 1736, to free States to spend 
     gas taxes on their transportation priorities.
       Portman amendment No. 1742, to allow States to permit 
     nonhighway uses in rest areas along any highway.
       Coats (for Alexander) amendment No. 1779, to make technical 
     corrections to certain provisions relating to overflights of 
     National Parks.
       Coats (for DeMint) amendment No. 1589, to amend the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to terminate certain energy tax 
     subsidies and lower the corporate income tax rate.
       Coats (for DeMint) amendment No. 1756, to return to the 
     individual States maximum discretionary authority and fiscal 
     responsibility for all elements of the national surface 
     transportation systems that are not within the direct purview 
     of the Federal Government.
       Coats/Lugar amendment No. 1517, to modify the apportionment 
     formula to ensure that the percentage of apportioned funds 
     received by a State is the same as the percentage of total 
     gas taxes paid by the State.
       Blunt/Casey amendment No. 1540, to modify the section 
     relating to off-system bridges.

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I know Senator Bingaman is here, so I will 
ask a quick unanimous consent that the time until noon be equally 
divided between the two leaders or their designees, that there be 2 
minutes equally divided prior to each vote, and all votes after the 
first vote following the recess be 10-minute votes.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mrs. BOXER. I yield the floor.


                             Amendment 1759

  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I believe the second amendment that we 
will be voting on here right after lunch or right after noon is the 
amendment that Senator Durbin and I are proposing related to privatized 
toll roads. When a State privatizes an existing toll road, it shifts to 
a private company all responsibility for operations and maintenance in 
exchange for a cash payment, essentially. Under existing law, 
privatized toll roads are still included in the calculation of how much 
each State receives in Federal highway funds.
  In my view, it does not make good sense for a State to be credited 
with Federal highway funding needed to maintain that road once it has 
been shifted out of the public sphere to a private entity and the 
private entity has taken on the legal responsibility to operate and 
maintain the road. The amendment would simply remove these privatized 
toll roads from consideration when we allocate highway funds.
  The amendment is very narrow. It applies only when a State sells off 
an existing toll road. It does not apply at all to any new 
construction. When I say it sells off an existing toll road, I mean 
that it enters into a lease--in most cases a lease of 75 years or 
more--with a private entity to operate a toll road and collect the 
tolls and maintain the road.
  The amendment has the support of the American Automobile Association 
and the American Trucking Association. I think it is good legislation. 
It also has the support of the Owner-Operators Independent Drivers 
Association and American Highway Users Alliance. This is a modest 
change in the law governing the allocation of Federal funds for 
highways, but I think it is a commonsense proposal that should be 
supported by the Members of the Senate.
  I hope very much we can adopt this amendment when it comes to a vote. 
As I say, it is not the first amendment that we are going to consider 
for this bill; it is the second of the two votes prior to the recess 
for the weekly caucuses.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to call up the amendment I 
have just been speaking about, amendment No. 1759, and ask that the 
clerk report the amendment by number.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from New Mexico [Mr. Bingaman] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 1759.

  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

     (Purpose: To remove privatized highways from consideration in 
               apportioning highway funding among States)

       On page 51, between lines 16 and 17, insert the following:
       ``(C) Further adjustment for privatized highways.--
       ``(i) Definition of privatized highway.--In this 
     subparagraph:

       ``(I) In general.--The term `privatized highway' means a 
     highway that was formerly a publically operated toll road 
     that is subject to an agreement giving a private entity--

       ``(aa) control over the operation of the highway; and
       ``(bb) ownership over the toll revenues collected from the 
     operation of the highway.

       ``(II) Exclusion.--The term `privatized highway' does not 
     include any highway or toll road that was originally--

       ``(aa) financed and constructed using private funds; and
       ``(bb) operated by a private entity.
       ``(ii) Adjustment.--After making the adjustments to the 
     apportionment of a State under subparagraphs (A) and (B), the 
     Secretary shall further adjust the amount to be apportioned 
     to the State by reducing the apportionment by an amount equal 
     to the product obtained by multiplying--

       ``(I) the amount to be apportioned to the State, as so 
     adjusted under those subparagraphs; and
       ``(II) the percentage described in clause (iii).

       ``(iii) Percentage.--The percentage referred to in clause 
     (ii) is the percentage equal to the sum obtained by adding--

       ``(I) the product obtained by multiplying--

       ``(aa) \1/2\; and
       ``(bb) the proportion that--
       ``(AA) the total number of lane miles on privatized highway 
     lanes on National Highway System routes in a State; bears to
       ``(BB) the total number of all lane miles on National 
     Highway System routes in the State; and

       ``(II) the product obtained by multiplying--

       ``(aa) \1/2\; and
       ``(bb) the proportion that--
       ``(AA) the total number of vehicle miles traveled on 
     privatized highway lanes on National Highway System routes in 
     the State; bears to
       ``(BB) the total number of vehicle miles traveled on all 
     lanes on National Highway System routes in the State.
       ``(iv) Reapportionment.--An amount withheld from 
     apportionment to a State under clause (ii) shall be 
     reapportioned among all other States based on the proportions 
     calculated under subparagraph (A).

  Mr. DURBIN. The Senate will vote today on the Bingaman-Durbin 
amendment to the Transportation bill. This amendment will help protect 
taxpayers when local governments sell or lease public roads and 
bridges.
  The Federal Government provides States and local governments billions 
of dollars to build, maintain, and improve transportation projects 
across the country. Federal funding has helped build and maintain roads 
when local and State governments couldn't afford construction or upkeep 
on their own. Federal taxpayers have picked up the tab for millions of 
transportation projects across the country.
  The Senate Transportation bill provides States with an average of $40 
billion per year to help them upgrade their roads and bridges. These 
Federal investments have created thousands of jobs and helped our 
economy. But the temptation to cash in on these projects is great, 
particularly as States and cities are looking under every rock to find 
new sources of revenue. Some local governments and States are 
interested in selling or leasing their highways.
  Private hedge funds, banks and investment groups offer States and 
local governments large, lump sum payments in exchange for the complete 
control of critical transportation assets. Local governments receive 
massive, upfront payments to help them fund other local priorities. The 
private financiers get complete control of a highway for decades--
sometimes for as long as 99 years. Sometimes those private entities are 
able to provide responsible upkeep of the asset over the

[[Page S1594]]

long run. But too often, the services are reduced, prices go up, and 
maintenance isn't all it should be. The Federal taxpayer is left 
holding the bag.
  Privatization deals like this set up a turn-key operation where the 
Federal taxpayer pays for critical infrastructure improvements, only to 
have local governments turn around and sell or lease this 
infrastructure for a one-time payment they keep themselves. All levels 
of governments are facing serious budget shortfalls. The Federal 
Government shouldn't incentivize local and State governments to make 
rash, short-term decisions that lease transportation projects for 
generations just to solve temporary budget shortfalls.
  The Bingaman-Durbin amendment will ensure taxpayers are not paying 
States twice for highways that are sold or leased to private operators. 
Highway funding has historically been distributed through complex 
formulas that include the number of lane miles of major roads in each 
State and the amount of traffic on those roads.
  The FHWA formulas are meant to help States pay for the maintenance 
and upkeep of those roads. However, when States sell or lease their 
highways, they are paid massive lump sums in exchange for transferring 
responsibility for maintenance to the private operators. But the road 
miles and traffic counts on the privatized highway still contribute to 
each State's formula funding.
  The current highway formulas do not take into account how many roads 
are privatized in each State so the Federal Government continues to pay 
States for maintaining roads they have handed off to private operators. 
It doesn't make sense for States to be credited with and given Federal 
highway funding for privatized toll roads, which it no longer operates 
or maintains. The private operators of leased roads also get a generous 
tax benefit from depreciating the road as an asset.
  The CBO has found this depreciation reduces Federal revenues and has 
a negative impact on our deficit. These deals set up a double whammy 
for the taxpayer--the private operator gets generous tax benefits and 
the State continues to receive Federal funding for roads they no longer 
maintain. Taxpayers are literally paying for privatized roads twice by 
subsidizing tax breaks for private operators who buy public roads and 
continuing to pay the States for upkeep on roads they are no longer 
responsible for.
  The Bingaman-Durbin amendment will end this practice by removing 
factors associated with privatized roads from the formulas used to 
calculate a State's annual highway funding amount. Three States, 
including Illinois, have privatized some of their highways in exchange 
for a lump sum payment. In 2006, the city of Chicago leased the 7.8 
mile Chicago Skyway for 99 years in exchange for a lump sum payment of 
$1.8 billion.
  The private operator has since raised the tolls on the Skyway and has 
taken over sole responsibility for maintenance of the roadway. However, 
those 7.8 miles are still included in the formula calculations that add 
to a State's share of Federal highway funds. Illinois continues to 
receive roughly $1.2 million each year because the Chicago Skyway is 
still included in the Federal highway formulas. Motorists are also 
paying more to use the road. Under public control, the tolls for the 
skyway decreased by about 25 percent when adjusted for inflation 
between 1989 and 2004. But Chicago Skyway tolls have risen 60 percent 
since the road was privatized in 2005.
  The Bingaman-Durbin amendment will stop paying States to maintain 
roads they have been paid to no longer maintain. The amendment will 
take those funds and distribute them to other States to help pay for 
the maintenance of public roads and bridges across the country.
  In 2006, I requested a GAO study of highway public-private 
partnerships along with Senator Inhofe and Representative Peter 
DeFazio. The GAO study found ``there is no `free' money in public-
private partnerships, and it is likely that tolls on a privately 
operated highway will increase to a greater extent than they would on a 
publicly operated toll road.'' The GAO called for Congress to require 
more upfront analysis of these privatization deals to ensure they 
protect the public interest.
  I introduced legislation earlier this year that would provide for a 
rigorous examination of privatization deals of all transportation 
assets--highways, airports, bridges and mass transit systems. The 
Protecting Taxpayers in Transportation Asset Transfers Act would ensure 
the Federal taxpayer has a seat at the table when State and local 
governments sell publicly owned transportation assets.
  This amendment does not go far enough to protect the public interest 
in transportation privatization deals, but it does take away an 
unnecessary incentive for States and local governments to sell publicly 
funded roads and highways. This amendment will not stop States from 
privatizing roads, but it will stop the Federal taxpayer from paying 
twice for privatized roads.
  The amendment is supported by AAA, the American Trucking Association, 
the American Highway Users Alliance, the American Federation of State, 
County and Municipal Employees, UPS, and the U.S. Public Interest 
Research Group. CBO has indicated the amendment does not score and will 
not increase the deficit in anyway.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from South Carolina.
  Mr. DeMINT. Mr. 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.


                             Amendment 1756

  Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, thank you for the opportunity to talk 
about the amendment that we call the Transportation Empowerment Act. 
This is actually legislation that has been worked on for over 10 years. 
Our ranking member, Senator Inhofe, helped to develop this legislation, 
and it is essentially the same as when he introduced it 10 years ago. 
He pointed out that he had long believed that the best decisions are 
those made at the local level. Unfortunately, many of the 
transportation choices made by cities and States are governed by 
Federal rules and regulations.
  This bill returns to the States the responsibility and resources to 
make their own transportation decisions--those were Senator Inhofe's 
words. I think we all know, as a Nation, that we are not going to solve 
our spending and debt problems unless we are willing to begin to move 
some public services from Washington back to the States where they can 
be done more effectively and less expensively, and one of those public 
services is transportation.
  I would point out that the Transportation Department at the Federal 
level was formed almost 60 years ago to build our Interstate Highway 
System and this system is essentially complete. The States maintain 
most of the interstate highways now with some Federal support. The 
problem we have now is that 18 cents out of every gallon of gasoline 
comes to Washington and a majority of States get back less than they 
send.
  We have what I think could be called an infrastructure crisis in 
America. Roads and bridges are decaying everywhere and we are behind on 
our maintenance in the building of new roads, so it is obvious that 
what we are doing is not working. Instead of solving the problems with 
real reforms, the underlying bill is adding to what we are spending 
above the trust fund--above the 18 cents--without any real reforms to 
make the system work better. So I think I can conclude that the current 
Federal transportation finance system is broken.
  Since 2007, rather than evaluate true infrastructure priorities and 
attempt to live within our means by eliminating special interest 
programs, Congress has bailed out the highway trust fund to the tune of 
$35 billion. With the pending reauthorization, the trust fund will 
require a bailout of another $13 billion.
  At the end of this big-spending 2-year reauthorization, Congress will 
be back at the drawing board scrambling for additional budgetary 
gimmicks and offsets to keep this charade from imploding. If this were 
a traditional 6-

[[Page S1595]]

year highway bill, at this rate of runaway spending it would require a 
bailout of $39 billion from the general fund.
  There is a better way. It is time to get the Washington bureaucracy 
and costly regulations out of the way and empower States to be the 
primary decisionmakers for their own local and State infrastructure. My 
amendment allows for States to keep their gas taxes and set their own 
priorities while avoiding an additional layer of Washington 
bureaucracy.
  We should devolve the Federal highway program from Washington to the 
States. We can dramatically cut the Federal gas tax to a few pennies, 
which would be enough to fund the limited number of highway programs 
that serve a clear national purpose. In turn, States could adjust their 
own gas taxes to make their own construction and repair decisions 
without costly rules such as Davis-Bacon regulations and without having 
to funnel the money through Washington's wasteful bureaucracy and some 
self-serving politicians.
  My amendment would free States from the wasteful and corrupt Davis-
Bacon Act, which needlessly focuses or forces the government to pay 
labor union wages for construction projects. Davis-Bacon harms workers 
who choose not to join unions, and it raised the costs to taxpayers 
last year by nearly $11 billion.
  Our Nation's fiscal situation is perilous, with a $15 trillion debt 
set to double to $30 trillion in the next decade. Bipartisan 
compromises on spending like this bill got us into this mess and we 
will never get out of it if we don't embrace bold commonsense reforms.
  I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and empower the States 
by giving them the flexibility they need to maintain their 
infrastructures.
  If I could take a second to summarize, I know some Members have 
stepped into this legislation that has been under development for many 
years. It is one that has been talked about by the States, with over 
half of our States what we consider donor States. If we were able to 
not only remove the Federal bureaucracy but also the regulations that 
force States to spend money in ways they don't like, the overwhelming 
majority of States would have a lot more money to spend on roads and 
bridges than they do now.
  We are not talking about cutting spending on transportation. What we 
are talking about is actually increasing it by moving this service back 
to the States where it can be guided with a lot more on-the-ground 
knowledge of what needs to be done, without all of the political 
maneuvering in Washington to send money to one State versus another. 
This is a way to maintain our Federal priority with a small part of the 
gas tax and allow the States to basically keep the rest of the gas tax 
to serve their own needs.
  If we cannot do this, I don't see any way that we are going to be 
able to deal with our national debt. If we can recognize there is an 
obvious service here that can be done better and less expensively and 
quicker at the State and local level and we can move that bureaucracy 
out of Washington, we can make the highway trust fund solvent.
  If we can't do something that makes this much common sense and saves 
the taxpayers money and actually delivers a better service, it is 
difficult for me to understand how we are ever going to deal with the 
huge debt and spending problem we have now in Washington.
  I reserve the remainder of my time.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator's time has expired.
  The Senator from California.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I have a parliamentary inquiry: Did 
Senator DeMint use his 1 minute he had before the vote?
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. That is correct.
  Mrs. BOXER. I ask to have an additional 15 seconds, since he went 
over by that much.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, there 
will be 1 minute of debate in opposition prior to a vote in relation to 
amendment No. 1756 offered by the Senator from South Carolina.
  Mrs. BOXER. I am asking for that. Fine.
  I think this is so critical. The DeMint amendment is the end of the 
Federal highway and transportation system. It is a system that has been 
in place since Republican President Dwight Eisenhower told us how 
critical it was. He said in the 1950s: The Transportation bill's impact 
on the American economy--the jobs it would produce in manufacturing, 
construction, the rural areas it would open--are beyond calculation.
  Ronald Reagan said: It has enabled our commerce to thrive, our 
country to grow, and our people to roam freely.
  Senator DeMint is taking on two icons in the Republican Party, 
President Eisenhower and President Reagan.
  Today, the National Association of Manufacturers said they oppose 
this amendment. They oppose it. It would reduce future revenues, they 
said.
  The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said they are against it, and without 
this Transportation bill there is no guarantee that States would 
prioritize transportation investments that support national interests.
  The American Road and Transportation Builders Association said they 
are against this amendment, and it would force your State to raise its 
own taxes or force cuts elsewhere to offset massive cuts in Federal 
highway and transit investments.
  I respect my friend, but this is a disaster if it were to pass. I 
urge a ``no'' vote.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to 
amendment No. 1756.
  Mrs. BOXER. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there a sufficient second? There 
appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. 
Lautenberg) is necessarily absent.
  Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Illinois (Mr. Kirk) and the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch) 
would have voted ``yea.''
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Are there any other Senators in the 
Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 30, nays 67, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 36 Leg.]

                                YEAS--30

     Ayotte
     Boozman
     Burr
     Chambliss
     Coats
     Coburn
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson (WI)
     Kyl
     Lee
     Lugar
     McCain
     Moran
     Paul
     Portman
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rubio
     Sessions
     Toomey
     Vitter
     Wicker

                                NAYS--67

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Barrasso
     Baucus
     Begich
     Bennet
     Bingaman
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Boxer
     Brown (MA)
     Brown (OH)
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Coons
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Hagan
     Harkin
     Heller
     Hoeven
     Inouye
     Johanns
     Johnson (SD)
     Kerry
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Manchin
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (NE)
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Snowe
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Thune
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Warner
     Webb
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Hatch
     Kirk
     Lautenberg
  The amendment (No. 1756) was rejected.


                           Amendment No. 1759

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, there 
will now be 2 minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote in 
relation to amendment No. 1759 offered by the Senator from New Mexico, 
Mr. Bingaman.
  The Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. When any of our States privatize an existing toll road, 
it, of course, shifts the responsibility to operate and maintain that 
toll road to a private entity and gets a cash payment in return.
  Under existing law, these privatized toll roads continue to be 
included in the calculation for receipt of Federal highway funds. I do 
not think that makes any sense. This is a commonsense amendment to 
correct that. This amendment simply ensures that privatized toll roads 
are removed from consideration when we allocate Federal highway funds.

[[Page S1596]]

  As I say, I think it makes a lot of sense and should apply equally to 
all States. I urge support for the Bingaman-Durbin amendment.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Who yields time in opposition?
  The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, what this amendment does is it ultimately 
eliminates a State's right to leverage its assets over an amortization 
schedule that would allow it to expand its highway system. What we are 
doing is we are taking money we have taken from the States, sending it 
up here, and saying: If you have an asset in your State--unless you are 
building a brandnew road--you cannot use that asset to leverage your 
capital to build more roads in your State. It is against the 10th 
amendment. It is morally wrong to take away a State's right to enhance 
its capital assets.
  I urge a ``no'' vote.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to 
amendment No. 1759.
  Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. 
Lautenberg) is necessarily absent.
  Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Utah (Mr. Hatch) and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch) 
would have voted ``nay.''
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Are there any other Senators in the 
Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 50, nays 47, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 37 Leg.]

                                YEAS--50

     Akaka
     Begich
     Bennet
     Bingaman
     Blumenthal
     Brown (OH)
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Casey
     Cochran
     Conrad
     Durbin
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Grassley
     Hagan
     Harkin
     Heller
     Hoeven
     Hutchison
     Inouye
     Johnson (SD)
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Manchin
     McCaskill
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (NE)
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--47

     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Barrasso
     Baucus
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Boxer
     Brown (MA)
     Burr
     Carper
     Chambliss
     Coats
     Coburn
     Collins
     Coons
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Crapo
     DeMint
     Enzi
     Feinstein
     Graham
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johanns
     Johnson (WI)
     Kerry
     Kyl
     Lee
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Moran
     Paul
     Portman
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rubio
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Snowe
     Thune
     Toomey
     Vitter
     Warner
     Webb
     Wicker

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Hatch
     Kirk
     Lautenberg
  The amendment (No. 1759) was agreed to.

                          ____________________