[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 157 (Monday, October 26, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7484-S7485]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  TRANSPORTATION REAUTHORIZATION BILL

  Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, I came back today and had really good 
news over the weekend. I think a lot of people have gotten together on 
both sides, in the House and the Senate, to do what we are supposed to 
be doing.
  I often refer to that old instrument called the Constitution, which 
says there are two main things we are supposed to be doing here: One is 
defending America, and the other is building roads and bridges. That is 
what we are supposed to be doing.
  The Presiding Officer has heard me say before that my top priority as 
chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee is, and 
continues to be, passing a long-term highway reauthorization bill. The 
last one we passed was in 2005. I was proud to be the author of it at 
that time. It expired in 2009. Since that time, we have not had 
anything except short-term extensions. I have to remind my conservative 
friends, because I am a conservative, that the conservative position is 
to have a long-term reauthorization bill, because the short-term costs 
about 30 percent off the top. As a result, the industry stakeholders 
and local government leaders have lost faith in Congress's ability to 
provide funding certainty to maintain and advance our surface 
transportation and infrastructure. Ranking Member Barbara Boxer and I 
have been fighting for a long period of time to change this and reverse 
the trend of wasteful short-term patches.
  On June 24, our committee--and this is very unusual for this to 
happen. Our committee unanimously voted to advance to the Senate the 
DRIVE Act, which is a 6-year reauthorization bill. In July, the Senate 
gave strong bipartisan support by a vote of 65 to 34, a 2-to-1 
majority. Again, this is not something that normally happens with a 
major piece of legislation. It also included contributions from the 
Senate Commerce Committee and the Senate Banking Committee, so it is 
not just the Environment and Public Works Committee. Other committees 
have parts of this legislation also.
  The Senate worked hard across party lines to put forward a solution 
for our Nation's roads and bridges. We ended the summer by passing yet 
another short-term patch in order to give more time for the House to 
join our efforts. Unfortunately, we are now 3 days away

[[Page S7485]]

from facing another cliff and the two Chambers have not yet been able 
to conference a long-term transportation solution. I just talked to 
Chairman Shuster of the House Transportation and Infrastructure 
Committee. They marked up a 6-year reauthorization bill just this last 
Thursday. I am proud to see that both Chambers are on similar pages.
  Both bills recognize the need for a national freight program. We 
approach it just a little differently, but there is nothing that can't 
be reconciled in a matter of minutes. Further, environmental 
streamlining is absolutely necessary. Both bills are doing that. We 
place a new focus on innovation which provides States with flexibility, 
as in my State of Oklahoma. When we give flexibility to the States, we 
get a lot more done. This idea that no good ideas are put to work 
unless they originate in Washington is just not true. Also, long-term 
certainty, which we are very much concerned with, is there, and it is 
now a reality. We are now one step closer to putting America back on 
the map as a place to do business.
  It is my understanding that the House intends to move Chairman 
Shuster's 6-year reauthorization bill through the full House over the 
next 2 weeks. I just spoke with him a few minutes ago. Unlike in years 
past, I expect a very short conference period. Because we still face 
this important process, Congress will need one more extension to get us 
to the finish line. The finish line should be the 20th of November, and 
it can be done. When I say a very short conference period, it is 
because there is very little difference between the House bill and the 
Senate bill. I have talked to the likely conferees, and they are in 
accord with the idea that we can do this in a matter of hours, not 
days. I realize there are a lot of moving discussions on larger deals 
on the debt limit and budget caps; however, there is agreement that the 
surface transportation bill can and will move on its own timeline.
  The House will move a short-term extension to November 20 this week. 
The ones I have talked to assure me that is going to happen. I hope the 
Senate passes it quickly so the House can move the T&I-reported bill on 
the floor and we can move to a quickly resolved conference. Due to the 
similarity in both bills, I am confident we can and should have this on 
the President's desk by Thanksgiving.
  If we fail to get this done by November 20, we are going to be faced 
with two significant hurdles: First, Congress has other pressing 
deadlines to address in December--to include December 11, when funding 
of the Federal Government expires, and December 31, when a host of 
important tax provisions will expire. Another December 31 deadline 
would be the provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act.
  I can remember in years past when we got dangerously close to 
December 31. One time the Big Four had to take it, and it was not even 
a product of the committees. I was one of the Big Four. We were able to 
pass it, but we came so close to December 31, it was scary. Here we 
are, in the middle of a bunch of wars, and all of a sudden we would 
have provisions out there--reenlistment bonuses, hazard pay, and things 
that would expire. Nothing would be worse than to have our kids in 
combat facing that.
  We are addressing these deadlines that will require Congress's 
undivided attention. Some of the solutions for these bills could 
result, I fear, in Members attempting to siphon off the payoffs of the 
DRIVE Act. That is why this is important.
  The second significant hurdle we face is that later this year the 
highway trust fund will drop to a dangerously low level, as DOT 
Secretary Foxx has warned. At that point, agencies at the Federal and 
State level will begin to implement cash management procedures that 
significantly affect the States' construction seasons. In the majority 
of the United States, we would lose a construction season in States 
such as Iowa and in Northern States. Mark my words: A failure by 
Congress to enact a long-term bill by Thanksgiving will result in a 
loss of the 2016 construction season. Congress is going to return to 
its current pattern of short-term extensions. Again, short-term 
extensions syphon about 30 percent off the top. It is a terrible 
outcome that should be avoided at all costs. We have the opportunity to 
do it now. By making industry and States continue to hold their breath 
and budgets, we rob taxpayers of cost-efficient project planning and 
continue to stall on launching major economy-boosting projects.

  Look at my State of Oklahoma, which lost $63 million in construction 
dollars over the last few years as a direct result of inefficiency and 
contracting uncertainty that comes from short-term extensions. I have 
used that figure of 30 percent off the top with some of my conservative 
friends. I said: If you oppose a long-term extension, a long-term 
reauthorization bill, then you are saying that you want to have the 
liberal alternative, which is to lose 30 percent off the top.
  With a fully funded long-term reauthorization, Oklahoma would 
actually see a savings of $122 million and millions more in efficiency 
savings from long-term commitments and early completion savings from 
contracts. This is something a lot of people don't realize. The 
streamline you get--many of the NEPA requirements and the environmental 
requirements can be offset if you are able to get to a long-term bill. 
But you can't do it, you can't start any large projects--not any of 
these big projects--the bridge projects and others you can't do on 
short-term extensions. We haven't had an authorization bill since 2005, 
and I believe it is time for Congress to fulfill its constitutional 
duty to fund our roads and our bridges.
  As I said earlier, I am confident that the Senate and House will work 
together to get this bill to the President's desk within the next few 
weeks. That is my wish for my counterpart on the House side, Chairman 
Shuster--the best of luck in moving forward. He is now committed to 
doing that. He is going to get this done. He kept his word in getting 
the job done last Thursday, and now he is going to be able to get this 
bill up so that we can conference it together. I anticipate we can do a 
conference in a matter of a few hours. It wouldn't take the normal 
time.
  That is good news. It is good news to come back on a Monday and find 
that we are going to be doing what the Constitution says we ought to be 
doing, and that is roads and bridges.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________