[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 18016-18019]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          DRIVE ACT--Continued

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the time until 2:45 
p.m. is equally divided.
  The Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 10 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, in a few moments we are going to vote on a 
motion to instruct the conferees on the highway bill. It will be a 
motion to instruct them not to proceed with a Federal mandate that 
would force these long double trailers called twin 33s on the 38 States 
where currently they are illegal.
  This Senator would observe that it is not often we get a chance to 
vote on a

[[Page 18017]]

motion that will accomplish so much. We are going to get a chance in 30 
minutes or so to vote on a motion that will save lives. It is a motion 
that would prohibit a Federal mandate, that supports small business, 
and that would save $1.2 billion to $1.8 billion per year in highway 
maintenance. It is a vote that is supported by an overwhelming majority 
of the American people. This is a rare opportunity for us to come 
together on a motion that does all of those things.
  It is also a bipartisan motion to instruct. It will be sponsored by 
the Senator from California, Senator Feinstein, and there will be 
bipartisan votes for the motion on both sides of the aisle.
  Now, why are we here? The motion is here because it stems from an 
amendment in the Appropriations Committee to the Transportation 
appropriations bill, which would require every State to allow these 
twin 33-foot trailers on Federal highways. Currently some 12 States do 
allow them. They have a right to do that, and if they made a considered 
decision in their State legislatures and in consultation with their 
departments of transportation, then more power to them.
  Well, 38 States say that these trucks are not safe and that these 
trucks are too long. They tell us they don't want them on the highways. 
I think we should respect that decision by these 38 States.
  Who supports the Wicker-Feinstein motion to instruct the conferees? I 
go back to the point that this is a vote to save lives. Who says this? 
AAA, a respected nationwide organization that knows quite a bit about 
highway safety, says support the Wicker amendment. Don't mandate on 38 
States something they don't want to do with these extra long trucks.
  I would point out on this diagram the size of the average passenger 
car. Look how much longer this proposed twin 33 double rig with the 
tractor part on the front is. Frankly, the American people don't want 
to contend with these long double trailers on their roads.
  The Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety say this isn't safe. A 
``yes'' vote on the Wicker-Feinstein motion would be a vote for safety.
  The National Troopers Coalition--we ought to listen to them--say 
these trucks are not safe, and at the very least, there should be no 
mandate from Washington, DC. In the time remaining, I would suggest to 
Members and legislative staff back in their offices to call their local 
troopers in their various States and see what the troopers say about 
this. I will tell you that troopers in State after State say don't 
mandate these long trucks. Sheriff's associations say don't mandate 
these long trucks.
  Chiefs of police say don't mandate these long, twin 33 double 
trailers. So you may ask yourself what a chief of police in a 
municipality has to do with this. Aren't we talking about interstate 
highways and big old Federal highways? Not true at all. I don't know 
about you, but in the place where I live, if something comes in by 
truck, they bring it right into town. So the chiefs of police say: We 
don't want these twin 33s on our two-lane streets; we don't want them 
on the two-lane highways. That would be the result of the mandate that 
is contained in the appropriations bill unless we turn that around.
  Who else is opposed to mandating twin 33s on the 38 States that don't 
want them? The State trucking associations are opposed to this mandate. 
One would think that the truckers would be for this. After all, if you 
are a big enough trucking company and you have enough money, you can 
buy the truck, haul more, and make more money. That is the idea, but we 
need to bear in mind that most of the truckers in the United States are 
small business owners. Frankly, some of them have told me that if this 
mandate on all 50 States is passed, they are going out of business.
  We have resolutions from the Mississippi Trucking Association, the 
Arizona Trucking Association, Louisiana Trucking Association, and we 
have an alliance of small business truckers from States that include 
Indiana, Texas, Tennessee, Nebraska, Louisiana, Maryland, Washington, 
Iowa, Mississippi, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Oregon, and Arkansas--and I 
can go on. Trucking companies and small truckers in all of these States 
are saying: Please don't put us out of business by having us try to 
compete with these large twin 33s.
  I would submit to my colleagues that 20 minutes from now we are going 
to have a vote. This is the only opportunity that 100 Senators elected 
by the people of the 50 States will have to address this issue. This 
vote we are going to take in just a few moments will send a strong 
signal to the people in some office here on Capitol Hill, in some room 
on Capitol Hill, where they are devising the Omnibus appropriations 
bill. We need to send a strong signal to them that we don't want this 
mandate in the omnibus. We don't want the mandate in the highway bill.
  We need a strong vote. This is a chance to vote on how we stand with 
small business in our States, with the troopers, the sheriffs, the 
chiefs of police, the trucking associations, and the advocates for 
highway safety.
  I would urge my colleagues to thoroughly consider this in the next 20 
or 25 minutes. When you come to vote, a ``yes'' vote will be a vote to 
avoid the Federal mandate. I urge my colleagues to join me on a 
bipartisan basis--and I believe they will join me on a bipartisan 
basis--in allowing the 38 States that opt out of this to continue to do 
so, making a stand for small business, for the States' decisionmaking, 
and for safety.
  Mr. President, I understand we are going to move to a vote at 2:45 
p.m.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the remaining 
time while we are in quorum calls be divided equally between the 
parties.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. WICKER. 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.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, we are about to vote on whether we want to 
go to conference with our Transportation bill that passed this body 
with well over 60 votes in July. We have been pushing hard--Senators on 
both sides of the aisle--to move the House toward a situation where we 
can finally go to conference and reconcile the two bills. We are at 
that point, and I certainly hope we get a very solid vote.
  I am also hopeful the Wicker-Feinstein motion does succeed, and I 
certainly will try my best to raise it in the conference. We still have 
about
1.5 million unemployed construction workers since the recession. We 
have seen terrific job growth, but we know it hasn't hit all the 
sectors, so this is an extremely important bill.
  Also, we know that thousands in businesses rely on a robust highway 
trust fund. Whether it is the granite people, the cement people, they 
are all for going to conference. Whether it is the international 
association of machinists or it is the labor union, the chamber of 
commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, it is a rare and 
glorious occasion to see everybody come together and say: Let's get a 
bill.
  We want to have a robust bill. We don't want to have a bill that is 
business as usual and this is why--we have 60,000 bridges that are 
deficient. They were not built with the kinds of traffic they are now 
withstanding in mind, so we must have this vote to go to conference.
  I thank the majority leader, Senator McConnell, for his work and the 
Democratic leader, Senator Reid. I also extend my thanks to Senator 
Cantwell, who worked so hard with other Senators on this side to get 
Ex-Im included in this bill. We will have the
Export-Import reauthorization in this bill.
  I am very excited to get to conference. My goal is just to put it on 
the

[[Page 18018]]

table, to bring to that conference the bipartisan spirit we had when we 
did this bill in the Senate. When I thank both the majority leader and 
the Democratic leader, it is because they put strong people on this 
conference. I think it is going to be a strong conference. We have a 
lot of similarities. Somebody who looked at both bills said the House 
bill is about 90 percent similar to the Senate bill. This is a good 
thing. This means we don't have to take our time because the trust 
fund, the authorization runs out very soon, right before Thanksgiving. 
So it is a good moment for the Senate.
  I think we showed leadership on both sides of the aisle on getting 
this bill done. We continue to work well together, both leaders have 
sent strong conferees to the conference. I know our staffs are already 
speaking, and I am hopeful we get a strong vote, which I think we are 
going to have in a few minutes. Am I correct it is about 3 minutes from 
that vote?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mrs. BOXER. All right. So in 3 minutes I hope we have a solid vote to 
take our bill to conference with the House, where I will work very 
closely with Chairman Shuster and the rest.
  The last point I make is I read that Congressman DeFazio--who is our 
Democratic ranking member in the House T&I Committee--has had a very 
serious eye situation and had to go for emergency surgery. I wish to 
say my heart is with him. He is a very important person in terms of 
weighing in on the transportation needs. I will work with him, I will 
speak with him, and I am very hopeful that although he may not be 
present--I hope he will be present for the conference--if he is not, I 
wish to reassure him that we will take his concerns into this 
conference.
  I am looking forward to a strong vote.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to yield back all time and 
proceed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, all time is yielded back.


                             Cloture Motion

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before 
the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

                             Cloture Motion

       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the 
     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, 
     do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to 
     disagree to the amendment of the House, agree to the request 
     from the House for a conference, and authorize the Presiding 
     Officer to appoint conferees with respect to H.R. 22.
         Mitch McConnell, Mike Rounds, Lamar Alexander, Johnny 
           Isakson, Deb Fischer, John Cornyn, Chuck Grassley, Thad 
           Cochran, Joni Ernst, Cory Gardner, John Thune, Daniel 
           Coats, Orrin G. Hatch, John Barrasso, James M. Inhofe, 
           Thom Tillis, Roy Blunt.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum 
call has been waived.
  The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the 
motion to disagree to the amendment of the House, agree to the request 
from the House for a conference, and authorize the Presiding Officer to 
appoint conferees with respect to H.R. 22 shall be brought to a close?
  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Idaho (Mr. Crapo), the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cruz), the 
Senator from Colorado (Mr. Gardner), the Senator from South Carolina 
(Mr. Graham), the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Heller), the Senator from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Johnson), the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Paul), the 
Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio), and the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. 
Vitter).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Heller) 
would have voted ``yea'' and the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter) 
would have voted ``yea.''
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) and 
the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Warner) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Lankford). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 82, nays 7, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 303 Leg.]

                                YEAS--82

     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Booker
     Boozman
     Boxer
     Brown
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Coats
     Cochran
     Collins
     Coons
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Daines
     Donnelly
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Heinrich
     Heitkamp
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Kaine
     King
     Kirk
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Manchin
     Markey
     McCain
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Nelson
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Reid
     Roberts
     Rounds
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sessions
     Shaheen
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Udall
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden

                                NAYS--7

     Corker
     Flake
     Lee
     Perdue
     Risch
     Sasse
     Shelby

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Crapo
     Cruz
     Gardner
     Graham
     Heller
     Johnson
     Leahy
     Paul
     Rubio
     Vitter
     Warner
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 82, the nays are 7.
  Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in 
the affirmative, the motion is agreed to.
  Under the previous order, the compound motion is agreed to.
  The Senator from Mississippi.


                           Motion to Instruct

  Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I have a motion to instruct at the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the motion.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Wicker] moves that the 
     managers on the part of the Senate at the conference on the 
     disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the Senate amendment 
     to the bill H.R. 22 be instructed to insist upon the 
     inclusion of the following section in title XXXII:

     SEC. 32__. TRUCK TRACTOR-SEMITRAILER-TRAILER COMBINATION 
                   LENGTH LIMITATION.

       The Secretary may promulgate a rule to increase the minimum 
     length limitation that a State may prescribe for a truck 
     tractor-semitrailer-trailer combination under section 
     31111(b)(1)(A) of title 49, United States Code, from 28 feet 
     to 33 feet if the Secretary makes a statistically significant 
     finding, based on the final Comprehensive Truck Size and 
     Weight Limits Study required under section 32801 of the 
     Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Enhancement Act of 2012 
     (title II of division C of Public Law 112-141), that such 
     increase would not have a net negative impact on public 
     safety.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I understand I have 2 minutes. I will 
speak briefly and then yield to Senator Feinstein.
  This is what this is about, these twin 33 double trailers, which are 
longer than is legal in 38 States. The question is whether we as a 
Senate, we as a Congress, we as a Federal Government, are going to 
mandate on the 38 States that don't allow these to allow them on their 
roads at any rate. So a ``yes'' vote would be a vote against the 
Federal mandate.
  When do you get in one fell swoop an opportunity to vote--a vote that 
will save lives, a vote to prevent a Federal mandate, a vote for small 
business, a vote to save $1.2 to $1.8 billion a year in highway 
maintenance, and a vote supported by the overwhelming majority of the 
people?
  Vote yes not to mandate this on the States.
  I yield the floor to the Senator from California.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, if we look at that, that is 91 feet 
with the twin 33s and the cab, 91 feet of truck. Thirty-eight States do 
not want that in

[[Page 18019]]

their States. This bill overwhelms that. We had an amendment in the 
Appropriations Committee that would prevent that. It was a tie vote.
  Senator Wicker and I ask you, please don't force States to do this 
before the safety work is done by the Secretary. We have 4,000 people 
killed every year from these trucks in all kinds of horrific 
accidents--and they are not as long as this one. These trucks would not 
only be on the freeways, but they would be in the villages, the towns, 
and the cities as well.
  I hope you will support this motion to instruct to protect the 38 
States and say: Before you do this, do the safety investigations and 
tell us these trucks are safe.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there time taken in opposition?
  If not, the question is on agreeing to the motion.
  Mr. WICKER. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. 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. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Idaho (Mr. Crapo), the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cruz), the 
Senator from Colorado (Mr. Gardner), the Senator from South Carolina 
(Mr. Graham), the Senator from Nevada (Mr. Heller), the Senator from 
Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. Johnson), the 
Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Paul), the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio), 
and the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. 
Vitter) would have voted ``yea.''
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer), 
the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy), and the Senator from Virginia 
(Mr. Warner) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 56, nays 31, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 304 Leg.]

                                YEAS--56

     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Brown
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Coats
     Cochran
     Coons
     Donnelly
     Durbin
     Ernst
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Flake
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Grassley
     Heinrich
     Hirono
     Isakson
     Kaine
     King
     Klobuchar
     Manchin
     Markey
     McCain
     McCaskill
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Nelson
     Perdue
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Reid
     Sanders
     Sasse
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Stabenow
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Udall
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden
  


                                NAYS--31

     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Barrasso
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Capito
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Daines
     Enzi
     Hatch
     Heitkamp
     Hoeven
     Kirk
     Lankford
     Lee
     McConnell
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rounds
     Scott
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Boxer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Gardner
     Graham
     Heller
     Inhofe
     Johnson
     Leahy
     Paul
     Rubio
     Vitter
     Warner
  The motion was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.


                           Motion to Instruct

  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I have a motion to instruct at the 
desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the motion.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Blumenthal] moves that 
     the managers on the part of the Senate at the conference on 
     the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the House 
     amendment to the bill H.R. 22 be instructed to insist upon 
     the inclusion of the rail safety provisions contained in the 
     amendment passed by the Senate on July 30, 2015, including 
     the authorization of grants for the installation of positive 
     train control.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will be 4 minutes of debate equally 
divided.
  The Senator from Connecticut is recognized.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, in recent years all of our 
constituents have seen a scourge in rail accidents. There have been 
similar accidents all around the country. This motion insists that the 
Senate's provisions be included in this conference and in what comes 
out of the conference committee, including the authorization of grants 
for the installation of positive train control.
  This summer, with the leadership of the committee chairman, Senator 
Thune, and the ranking member, Bill Nelson, who are both champions of 
rail safety, in this instance it resulted in some very key reforms, and 
the Senate passed the DRIVE Act which is not perfect--troublesome in 
some highway safety elements--but forward thinking on rail safety. It 
includes funding for PTC, redundant signal protection, improved 
inspection practices, and a followup on the FRA's deep dive 
investigation. Along with cameras and grade crossing, these provisions 
help to advance the cause of rail safety.
  The House has done nothing. The House bill is completely and abjectly 
lacking on rail safety, and therefore this motion instructs our 
conferees to insist on the Senate's provisions. I know that our 
conferees will be extremely sympathetic and supportive, but in order to 
simply to express our views, I ask unanimous consent that this measure 
be approved and that the motion be taken on a voice vote.
  I ask unanimous consent that all remaining time be yielded back.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The question occurs on agreeing to the motion.
  The motion was agreed to.
  The Presiding Officer appointed Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Thune, Mr. Hatch, Ms. 
Murkowski, Mrs. Fischer, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Cornyn, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. 
Brown, Mr. Nelson, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Durbin, and Mr. Schumer conferees on 
the part of the Senate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.

                          ____________________