[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 17]
[Senate]
[Page 23765]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                   2002--CONFERENCE REPORT--Continued

  Mr. JEFFORDS. Madam President, as chairman of the Environment and 
Public Works Committee, which is the lead authorizing committee for 
many of the programs authorized in the Transportation Equity Act for 
the 21st Century, I would like to comment on the pending FY 2002 
transportation appropriations conference report.
  Overall, this is an excellent bill and I intend to vote for it. 
However, there are a few provisions in the highway portion of this 
legislation that concern me. TEA-21 represented a carefully negotiated 
compromise between many different points of view, numerous committees, 
and the entire House and Senate. One key provision of this compromise 
legislation was Revenue Aligned Budget Authority--RABA--which ensured 
that obligations from the Highway Trust Fund would equal revenues into 
the fund, called TEA-21. TEA-21 determined a carefully negotiated 
breakdown between the share of RABA funds that would flow to the States 
through the apportionment formulas and the share that would be 
competitively distributed through the allocated programs.
  Unfortunately, the conference report makes significant changes to the 
authorization for RABA funding. As it has done in each of the past 2 
years, the conference report ignores the authorized distribution of 
funds for allocated programs under RABA. However, this time, rather 
than giving the money back to the States through the formulas, this 
legislation earmarks it for special projects. In addition, the 
conference report earmarks nearly $500 million that was supposed to be 
distributed to States through the apportionment formulas. As a result, 
some States will lose significant amounts of highway funding. In 
essence, I am very concerned that the appropriators are rewriting the 
apportionment formulas that were so carefully negotiated in TEA-21.
  I do not mean to begrudge the appropriators their prerogative to 
earmark funding for specific projects. In fact, I am very pleased that 
some of the funding is set aside for Vermont. However, at some point we 
do have to draw the line on earmarking when it threatens the very 
fabric of a carefully negotiated authorization. Unfortunately, this 
year we may have finally crossed that line.
  I look forward to working with the appropriators next year and 
throughout the reauthorization process to make sure we do a better job 
of maintaining the integrity of TEA-21 while providing the 
appropriators flexibility within the guidelines set forth in that law. 
TEA-21 is a delicately balanced piece of legislation and we must be 
careful not to upset that balance.
  I yield back any time I have.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Durbin). The Senator from Michigan is 
recognized.

                          ____________________