[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 23214-23215]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  2045
                     TEA-LU EQUALS JOBS, JOBS, JOBS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Franks of Arizona). Under the Speaker's 
announced policy of January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Lipinski) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority 
leader.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, on May 14 of this year, after months and 
months of delay, the administration finally released their TEA-21 
reauthorization proposal. Called SAFETEA, the administration's proposal 
will authorize $247 billion for surface transportation programs.
  In contrast, TEA-21 authorized $218 billion over 6 years for our 
Nation's surface transportation needs. While the landmark legislation 
made tremendous advancements towards addressing those needs, we still 
have much work to do. The next reauthorization must advance on the 
successes and priorities of TEA-21 and take into account our future 
needs as well.
  Unfortunately, SAFETEA fails miserably in that regard. When we factor 
in inflation, SAFETEA's $247 billion funding level would mean a 
flatline of current transportation spending.
  While I admire the administration's laser-like focus on flatlining 
surface transportation investments in their proposal, the fact of the 
matter is that SAFETEA is shortsighted and inadequate.
  The administration's SAFETEA proposal is too little, too late, 
especially in today's gloomy economy. We now have 6.1 percent 
unemployment rate. This is the highest level since July, 1994. The 
unemployment rate for construction workers is even higher at 7.1 
percent. In a time where nearly 9 million Americans are out of work, 
over 4 million Americans are underemployed, and nearly 2 million 
Americans have been out of a job for more than 6 months, we need 
something more than SAFETEA.
  What this Nation needs is a bold and innovative economic stimulus 
plan. What this Nation needs is a robust public works funding package, 
and what the administration has proposed just is not it.
  What we need is the proposal laid out by the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure. Under the leadership of the 
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), the committee is working on a $375 
billion reauthorization bill. Mr. Speaker, $375 billion is within the 
funding levels recommended by the U.S. DOT's ``Conditions and 
Performance Report.'' Mr. Speaker, $375 billion is needed to maintain 
and improve our highways and transit systems.
  I strongly believe that TEA-LU will adequately fund our national 
surface transportation needs. And just as important, it will be a shot 
in the arm for our struggling national economy. It will create jobs and 
put people back to work.
  Over the last several months, much of the debate has centered on the 
highway user fee, or gas tax. User fees and taxes are never popular, 
but leadership requires making tough decisions.
  Let us be perfectly clear. I support an increase in the highway user 
fee. I support depositing these revenues in the Highway Trust Fund to 
pay for surface transportation needs, and I do not stand alone on this.
  In fact, I stand with the majority of Americans on this issue. In a 
poll conducted by Zogby International in June 2003, 67 percent of those 
surveyed supported an increase in the highway user fee of up to 5 cents 
per gallon, provided those revenues went towards infrastructure 
improvements.
  Putting this into perspective, a 5-cent increase in the highway user 
fee on gasoline will cost the average motorist an additional $30 per 
year, which is about the same price as an oil change nowadays.
  Instead of getting bogged down with the concept of user fees and 
taxes, we should all take a page from the history books.
  Let us look back to 1982. Let us not forget that this Nation was in 
the midst of a recession when Ronald Wilson Reagan, a native 
Illinoisan, signed into law the Surface Transportation Assistance Act 
of 1982, a bill that raised the gas tax by 5 cents. In his wisdom, he 
knew the importance of increasing highway and transit funding. He knew 
the importance of investing for the future. He knew that the cost to 
the average motorist would be small, while the benefits to the national 
transportation system would be immense. But most importantly, Ronald 
Reagan knew that a $151 billion surface transportation funding bill 
would create jobs and provide immense benefits for a sluggish economy 
stuck in a recession back in 1982.
  Reagan also pointed out that the gas tax is not a tax, it is a user 
fee. An increase in the highway user fee would simply be deposited in 
the Highway Trust Fund, and there it would be used to improve our 
Nation's transportation system and would have no impact on our Federal 
deficit.
  Highway user fees are, as President Reagan noted, simply good tax 
policy.
  His successor, President George Herbert Walker Bush, also recognized 
the importance of public works investments and economic vitality. When 
he

[[Page 23215]]

signed ISTEA into law in 1991, he said the highway bill could be summed 
up in three words: ``jobs, jobs, jobs.'' That is just as true today.
  Each $1 billion invested in infrastructure creates 47,500 jobs and 
$6.1 billion in related economic activity. For the price of a few cents 
per gallon, we can craft a $375 billion transportation investment bill 
that would potentially create millions of new jobs. That is an 
investment for our American working families today as well as an 
investment for our Nation's future. For the price of a simple oil 
change, we can reauthorize the Highway Trust Fund at $375 billion. It 
would not only ensure our transportation system will be second to none 
in the world; it would also create jobs and stimulate the economy 
without impacting the Federal deficit. What is not to like?
  But right here, right now, it is really about jobs, jobs, jobs. We 
need to create good-paying jobs. We need to put people back to work. We 
need a $375 billion surface transportation bill.
  Let us not lose sight of these public policy objectives in these 
trying economic times.
  In conclusion, let me once again say that the sure way to improve 
this economy, to improve transportation, to improve highways in this 
country is to support a bill for $375 billion that will ensure America 
being, as it is today, the leader in the world in transportation.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would like to 
thank Ranking Member Lipinski for his leadership and for organizing 
this time for a special order this evening.
  The need for infrastructure investment is greater than ever.
  The U.S. economy desperately needs a shot in the arm.
  Our economy is in dismal shape. Unemployment numbers are the highest 
ever in the last decade.
  With this Bush Recession, family incomes are falling across the 
board, and falling most rapidly among lower-income workers.
  The increase in unemployment of the last two and a half years has had 
a disproportionate effect on people of color.
  The rate of unemployment for African Americans is 10.9 percent--more 
than twice the rate for whites.
  We need to put people back to work in this country, and we need to 
get this economy going again.
  Transportation infrastructure investment will do just that.
  According to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), every $1 
billion invested in infrastructure generates 47,500 jobs and $6.1 
billion in related economic activity.
  The 375 billion dollar surface transportation bill that the 
bipartisan membership of the Transportation Committee supports reflects 
the needs expressed in the Department of Transportation's own needs 
assessments!
  The legislation would potentially create over 1.3 million new good-
paying jobs. This bill would put people back to work, and this is just 
what the American economy needs.
  We face rising costs--in congestion, in wasted fuel, in frustration, 
and in air quality.
  I support an increase in the gas user fee because we can not afford 
to allow infrastructure to continue to crumble.
  We cannot afford to bare the increasing cost of congestion (which was 
67.5 billion dollars in 2000).
  We cannot afford the healthcare costs we will face as a result of 
breathing polluted air.
  Unfortunately, the Bush Administration and the House and Senate 
Republican leaderships now obstruct our efforts to pass a 6 year bill 
that adequately funds transportation infrastructure.
  But the need to invest in public infrastructure is genuine, and 
moving forward requires additional funding.
  Investment in infrastructure will improve mobility, productivity, and 
our quality of life.
  President Bush's tax cuts have only further harmed our economy.
  The Transportation Committee's legislation will provide REAL stimulus 
to our economy, and it will finally put people back to work.

                          ____________________