[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 25572-25573]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                        TRUCK SIZES AND WEIGHTS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk to my colleagues 
about the issue of bigger and heavier trucks on America's highways. As 
many of my colleagues know, I am a strong proponent of keeping the 
current truck size and weight limitations in place. Last year, the 
gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella) and I sent a letter to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), chairman of the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure, signed by 60 other Members of 
Congress from districts along Interstate 95. The letter urged the 
chairman to reject any effort to increase the 80,000-pound weight limit 
for trucks traveling on any part of I-95.
  Earlier this year, I introduced House Concurrent Resolution 306, the 
safe highways resolution, along with the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Horn), the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), and the gentlewoman 
from Maryland (Mrs. Morella). House Concurrent Resolution 306 expresses 
the sense of the Congress that the Federal freeze on triple tractor 
trailer trucks and other longer combination vehicle, LCVs, should not 
be lifted and the current Federal limits on heavy truck weight should 
remain in place.
  Now since April, this legislation has gained over 135 House 
cosponsors. Additionally, the legislation is supported by a number of 
public safety and law enforcement organizations such as AAA, the 
National Public Health Organization, the International Brotherhood of 
Police Officers, the National Association of Police Organizations, and 
the National Troopers Coalition.
  Mr. Speaker, probably the best argument against lifting the Federal 
80,000-pound weight limitation or freezing the current geographic limit 
taking on LCVs is force equals mass times acceleration. It is simple 
high school physics. The bigger the truck, the harder it is to stop; 
the harder it is on the highway itself; and in the event of an accident 
the harder it hits anything in its path.
  Additionally, a number of truck drivers that I have talked to have 
told me that bigger trucks are more difficult to handle and more 
stressful to drive. There is no doubt that heavy trucks have inherent 
dangers. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, in 1998 
more than 5,000 Americans died and an additional 128,000 were injured 
in heavy truck accidents. Allowing trucks to get heavier only increases 
the danger. Heavier trucks are more likely to roll over, suffer from 
braking problems, and deviate from the flow of traffic, increasing the 
danger of a collision.
  Moreover, the heavier the truck, the more likely a collision with an 
automobile will be fatal for the occupants of the car.
  As many of my colleagues on the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure know, the United States Department of Transportation 
recently released the Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study. This 
study took 4 years to complete and is the most definitive study of its 
kind on the topic of truck size and weight. The study projected that 
LCVs would have fatal accident rates 11 percent higher than single 
trailers if they operated nationwide. Additionally, heavier trucks will 
have a heavier impact on America's highway infrastructure. Again, 
according to the Department of Transportation study, nationwide 
operation of LCVs would add $53 billion in new bridge reconstruction 
costs. This is a particularly important concern to my

[[Page 25573]]

constituents in Massachusetts, as well as to many of my colleagues in 
the Northeast, where bridges are significantly older than in most other 
parts of the country.
  In addition, there would be $266 billion in lost time and extra fuel 
burnt by auto drivers stuck in traffic because of bridge work. But 
traffic safety is not about statistics or abstractions. The damage done 
by motor vehicle accidents has a very human face. For me, that face 
most recently in the face of Linda Russell. Linda is a nursing 
supervisor at the University of Massachusetts Hospital in Worcester. 
She was badly injured when her car collided with a tractor trailer. As 
a result of the collision, Ms. Russell's right foot was almost 
completely severed, and she will be confined to a wheelchair for the 
rest of her life.
  She wrote me in June of 1998 urging me to ask the Department of 
Transportation to accelerate the issuance of a final rule requiring 
tractor trailer trucks to be equipped with reflective tape.

                              {time}  1615

  A number of my colleagues have asked me why I introduced House 
concurrent resolution 306 when there are already Federal restrictions 
in place. The answer is that I have worked in Washington long enough to 
know that the status quo is only the status quo. If one feels 
passionately about an issue, one needs to be proactive. The smallest 
changes add up incrementally.
  For example, in 1974, States were given the option to increase 
maximum truck weights on interstate highways from 72,000 to 80,000 
pounds and to permit operations of a twin 28-foot double trailer truck. 
Less than 10 years later in 1982, Congress forced every State to permit 
these bigger rigs.
  Mr. Speaker, I will just end by simply saying that I want to thank my 
colleagues for standing with me in supporting this legislation, and I 
urge the next Congress to take this issue up early on next year when we 
reconvene.

                          ____________________