[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 11833-11835]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                               DRIVE ACT

  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, we are going to be moving to the highway 
bill. In fact, we are going to have the motion to proceed today at 2:15 
p.m., and I think it is important that people realize the significance 
of this.
  We do a lot of work around here that is not really critical. There 
are some issues that are. If you would like to read the Constitution 
sometime when you have nothing else to do, it will tell you that what 
we are supposed to be doing are two things: defending America and roads 
and bridges. That is what it says in Article I, Section 8 of the 
Constitution. So anytime you are sitting around with nothing to do, you 
ought to read it, and you will realize that what we are going to do at 
2:15 today is very significant.
  Passing a long-term transportation reauthorization bill has been my 
top priority since I resumed the office of the chairmanship of the 
Environment and Public Works Committee. It is probably the second most 
important thing we do, second only to the Defense authorization bill.
  In the first hearing we had in January, we had Secretary Foxx, the 
Secretary of Transportation, who is an outstanding Secretary. He is 
just as concerned about this as we are. Senator Boxer and I brought in 
Secretary Foxx as well as local government leaders to share the 
importance of ongoing Federal and State partnerships in maintaining the 
modern surface infrastructure system. Since that time, my committee has 
put forward a bipartisan bill called the DRIVE Act. It is significant, 
and it is not partisan. There is no such thing as a Democratic bridge 
or a Republican bridge or a Democratic road or a Republican road.
  Historically, Republicans have been recognized as leading in this 
area, from way back in the days when President Lincoln spearheaded the 
Transcontinental Railroad; Teddy Roosevelt and the Panama Canal; and, 
of course, the Interstate Highway System, created by President 
Eisenhower.
  President Eisenhower recognized that weakened defense and interstate 
commerce made our Nation vulnerable to the world. In 1952, when he 
proposed the Interstate Highway System, he commented that this was 
every bit as much about defending America as it was about the economy 
and being able to transport commerce around the States. In laying out 
the full interstate system, he envisioned it to be the physical 
backbone of the economy, fueling the growth of our GDP, our cities, and 
the competitiveness of our exports. This vision and certainty maximized 
the economic and mobility benefits of the system. Businesses and 
individuals knew that they could locate somewhere on the future 
interstate system and be connected to not just the rest of the country 
but the rest of the world.
  This legacy system, which was built over 50 years ago, had a design 
life of 50 years, and it has actually been over 60 years--close to 70 
years since it was built. We are beyond our warranty period, and we are 
in serious danger of eroding half a century of investments without 
proper maintenance, modernization, and reconstruction. We are on 
borrowed time with a system that is in full need of restoration. Our 
national interstate system currently has a maintenance backlog of $185 
billion on about 47,000 miles of interstate, and that is just to bring 
it back to the design it was in 1956.
  Maintaining Eisenhower's vision of economic opportunity and strength 
in defense requires a continued partnership between the Federal 
Government and the States, which is the hallmark of the DRIVE Act. Yet, 
due to 33 short-term patches since 2005--I have to say this because 
this is significant. We should be operating on a transportation 
reauthorization system all the time. The last one we did was in 2005. I 
was the author of it, in fact. That was a 5-year bill. Since that time, 
we have gone through some 30 different short-term extensions. A short-
term extension doesn't do any good. A transportation reauthorization 
bill is needed in order to accomplish all the reforms that are 
necessary and to have time to handle the major, large problems we have 
to deal with.
  Passing a long-term bill is crucial to many aspects of day-to-day 
life in America. More than 250 million vehicles and 18 billion tons--
valued at $17 trillion--in goods traverse across the country every 
year. Yet every day 20,000 miles of our highways slow below the posted 
speed limits or experience stop-and-go conditions. The National Highway 
System is only 5.5 percent of the Nation's total roads, but it carries 
55 percent of all vehicle traffic and 97 percent of the truck-borne 
freight. We are talking about 97 percent of the freight on only 5 
percent of the highways.

[[Page 11834]]

  Congress just passed a 2-month extension. Now we have a 
responsibility to pass a long-term bill.
  The highway trust fund currently needs $15 billion a year to maintain 
the current spending. When we started out with the highway trust fund, 
that was a percentage every year. When someone would drive up and pay a 
tax when buying gas, that was supposed to be for taking care of the 
highways--and it did.
  I can remember when I was serving in the House. The biggest problem 
we had at that time was we had too much money in the highway trust 
fund. We had more than we needed. I remember when President Clinton 
came in. He wanted to rob the highway trust fund for all of his 
programs. He got by with it for a while. That is not the problem 
anymore. The problem now is there is not enough money.
  The situation has changed. People are not using as much fuel. So we 
have fallen short by $15 billion a year of having the amount of money 
necessary to continue today's spending level. That is $15 billion a 
year. This is a 6-year bill. That means about $90 billion is needed in 
excess of the amount of money, revenue, that is derived from the 
highway trust fund.
  The DRIVE Act--that is what we call this--will put America back on 
the map as the best place to do business. The DRIVE Act has several key 
components that position America's transportation system to support our 
growing economy. It prioritizes funding for core transportation formula 
programs to provide States and local governments with a strong Federal 
partner. It prioritizes the Interstate Highway System, that national 
highway system, and the bridges at risk for funding shortfalls.
  It creates a new multibillion-dollar-per-year freight program to help 
States deliver projects and promotes the safe and efficient 
transportation of goods. It targets funds for major projects in the 
community, such as shown right here. This is a picture of the Brent 
Spence Bridge I have in the Chamber. This goes from Kentucky to Ohio 
and actually takes transportation also to Indiana. This is a very old 
bridge. You can see it is going to have to be replaced.
  These are the huge things you cannot do with short-term extensions. 
You are going to have to have a major bill, such as the one we are 
having right now.
  Lastly, the DRIVE Act provides greater efficiency in the project 
delivery process, reforms that put DOT in the driver's seat during the 
NEPA process by requiring agencies to bring all the issues to the 
table, keeping them under a deadline, and eliminating duplication.
  One of the problems we have with the environmental requirements is 
they end up delaying projects. So this bill gives exceptions. Let me 
say that I was very proud of Senator Boxer. Senator Boxer is a very 
proud liberal. I am a very proud conservative. One of the few things we 
agree on is the highway bill. It does require some changes that allow 
them to go ahead and keep working in spite of some of the NEPA 
requirements or the environmental requirements. This gives bridge 
projects special consideration, with new exemptions from section 4(f), 
the historic property reviews for concrete and steel bridges--a new 
exemption from the Migratory Bird Treaty Act for bridges in serious 
condition.
  Now, this sounds kind of off the wall, but one of the problems is the 
swallows. The swallows go in there and they block--they nest in there. 
So we are supposed to be repairing bridges. The swallow is not an 
endangered species. It is not listed, but the Migratory Bird Treaty Act 
does give them protection, and this waives that in the case of bridge 
construction. It also enforces greater transparency for Federal funds 
to show the taxpayers where the money is being spent.
  This is just a brief overview of the bill. As the DRIVE Act 
progresses on the floor, I intend to address the significance of each 
program in more detail. The most important point I must address about 
the DRIVE Act is that our bill sets funding levels for the next 6 
years.
  There is, at the very least, what the Federal Government should 
provide, so States, local officials, and the construction industry can 
gear up for the large $500 million to $2 billion major highway projects 
and bridge projects so we can get them off the ground. They have to get 
ready for it. That is what this bill does. Thousands of projects across 
the Nation are currently in jeopardy, and construction will come to a 
halt unless legislation becomes a reality.
  Future projects like--let's go back. You saw already the Brent Spence 
Bridge in Kentucky. There is also the $2.6 billion Mobile River Bridge 
in Alabama. This is a projection of what it will look like. This is as 
it is today. This would be impossible without something like a 6-year 
bill. In DC, the Memorial Bridge is literally crumbling into the 
Potomac. People do not understand what happens to these bridges. You 
can see--in our case in Oklahoma, we had a bridge over I-35. In the 
year 2005, as a part of that bill, that legislation, we were able to 
repair it. In 2004, right before that took place, one of the chunks 
came off--just like you are seeing here on the bridge--and actually 
killed a young lady who was driving under it with her three children. 
That is how serious this is. This is the Arlington Memorial Bridge. It 
was built in 1932. Something has to be done with that. We will be able 
to do projects like this.
  More than just a small part of the economic success enjoyed by the 
United States over the past 50 years has been the Interstate System. 
Today, we literally sit at the crossroads of its future. The solution 
is urgent. This is why Senator Boxer and I are bringing the DRIVE Act 
to the Senate floor as a solution. It will ensure that States have the 
tools and the certainty to make the necessary new investments to 
rebuild Eisenhower's vision, to fight growing congestion, to maintain 
the mobility of goods and services necessary to keep the economy going. 
By passing the DRIVE Act, Congress will be able to take pave the way 
for the next 50 years of American excellence in infrastructure.
  I have to say this. The importance of this is that the only 
alternative is to have short-term extensions. I am talking about 1- and 
2-month extensions, of which you cannot organize your labor. The cost 
of that--and by the way, I say this to my conservative friends--they 
will be friends, and I can say this, since I have been ranked as the 
most conservative Member of this body many times--that the conservative 
position is not to oppose this massive highway bill that we are going 
to have but to oppose the short-term extensions. It costs about 30 
percent more for a short-term extension than it does for a highway 
reauthorization bill. That is why this is so important.
  Later on, I am going to go over many of the other bridges and 
structures around that are going to have to be addressed. In the 
meantime, this is something we are supposed to do. I kind of will end 
up where we started off; that is, there is an old document that nobody 
reads anymore called the Constitution. You go back and read that, you 
will find out what we in this body are supposed to be doing. It is 
defending America and it is providing bridges and roads.
  So as we progress on this, there will not be time to go into any more 
detail now because we have Members wanting to come down and use both 
the Republican and Democratic time between now and the noon hour, but 
at 2:15 we are going to have a motion we will be voting on to move to 
the consideration of this bill. It doesn't say you have to be for it or 
against it or you want to change it.
  If you want to have amendments, you have to get to the bill before 
you can have amendments. So a motion-to-proceed vote will take place at 
2:15. Now, I want to tell all of the Members who are out there that if 
you have amendments--we are going to try to knock this thing out in 2 
weeks. We are going to be down here talking about it for 2 weeks. But 
if you have amendments, if you want a chance to offer your amendments, 
you can offer them, but bring them down, file your amendments. If you 
do not do that, we will

[[Page 11835]]

pass a deadline and you will not be able to do that. So I encourage our 
Members to do that. I look forward to the next 2 weeks of discussing 
and passing the second most significant bill we will consider this 
year.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________