[House Report 104-377]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
104th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 104-377
_______________________________________________________________________
BI-STATE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BY THE STATES OF MISSOURI AND ILLINOIS
_______
November 30, 1995.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Hyde, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.J. Res. 78]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the
joint resolution (H.J. Res. 78) to grant the consent of the
Congress to certain additional powers conferred upon the Bi-
State Development Agency by the States of Missouri and
Illinois, having considered the same, report favorably thereon
with an amendment and recommend that the joint resolution as
amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike out all after the resolving clause and insert in
lieu thereof the following:
That (a) the consent of Congress is hereby given to the additional
powers conferred on the Bi-State Development Agency of the Compact
Between Missouri and Illinois approved under the Joint Resolution of
August 31, 1950 (64 Stat. 568) by section 70.378 of the Act of May 26,
1993 (1993 Mo. Laws 382) and section 5 of Public Act 88-611, Laws of
Illinois 1994.
(b) The powers consented to in subsection (a) and conferred by the
laws referred to in such subsection shall take effect on January 1,
1995.
Sec. 2. The provisions of the Joint Resolution of August 31, 1950
(64 Stat. 568) shall apply to the additional powers approved under this
joint resolution to the same extent as if such additional powers were
conferred under the provisions of the compact consented to in such
Joint Resolution.
Sec. 3. The right to alter, amend, or repeal this joint resolution
is expressly reserved.
Sec. 4. The right is hereby reserved to the Congress to require the
disclosure and furnishings of such information or data by the Bi-State
Development Agency as is deemed appropriate by the Congress.
SUMMARY AND PURPOSE
H.J. Res. 78 grants congressional consent to certain
amendments to the compact between Missouri and Illinois
creating the Bi-State Development Agency and the Bi-State
Metropolitan District.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION
States often enter into compacts with one or several other
states in order to facilitate common responsibilities or
interests. However, Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 of the
United States Constitution provides that:
No State shall, without the consent of Congress * * * enter
into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a
foreign power * * *.
Congressional consent is required for such agreements or
compacts in order to insure that national interests or those of
other states are not adversely affected.
H.J. Res. 78 would give Congressional consent to the
granting of certain additional powers to the Bi-State
Development Agency by Missouri and Illinois. The original
compact was approved by Congress in 1950 as Public Law 743 (64
Stat. 568) and resulted in the establishment of the Bi-State
Development Agency of the Missouri-Illinois Metropolitan
District. The Bi-State Agency was intended to promote planning,
development and transportation in the area surrounding St.
Louis on both the Missouri and Illinois sides of the
Mississippi River and it was given specified power to
facilitate such activities. Article III of the compact provided
that the Agency could exercise such additional powers as were
conferred upon it by the Missouri and Illinois legislatures and
approved by the Congress.
In July of 1993, the Agency began operating a light rail
system passing through several municipalities and counties, and
crossing state boundaries. However, the original compact did
not grant the Agency the specific authority to appoint or
employ a security force or to enact rules and regulations
governing fare evasion or other conduct on its facilities and
conveyances. Consequently, the Agency has had difficulty
insuring that fare evasion and other prohibited conduct is
uniformly punished. In addition, issues have arisen regarding
the jurisdiction of local law enforcement to arrest persons for
conduct occurring on the system. The Agency sought from its
respective legislatures power to employ personnel to maintain
safety and order and to enforce Agency rules and regulations.
In addition, the Agency sought the authority to adopt rules and
regulations for proper operation of its passenger
transportation facilities and for users of the system. Missouri
in 1993 \1\ and Illinois in 1994 \2\ by law approved the
granting of these powers. There is no known controversy.
\1\ Section 70.378 of the Act of May 26, 1993 (1993 M. Laws 382).
\2\ Section 5 of Public Act 88-611, Laws of Illinois 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HEARINGS
The Committee's Subcommittee on Commercial and
Administrative Law held a hearing on H.J. Res. 78 on October
19, 1995. Testimony was received from U.S. Representative James
M. Talent of Missouri.
COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
On October 19, 1995, the Subcommittee on Commercial and
Administrative Law met in open session and ordered reported the
bill H.J. Res. 78, as amended by a voice vote, a quorum being
present. On October 31, 1995, the Committee met in open session
and ordered reported the bill H.J. Res. 78 with an amendment in
the nature of a substitute by voice vote, a quorum being
present.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS
In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee reports
that the findings and recommendations of the Committee, based
on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the
Rules of the House of Representatives are incorporated in the
descriptive portions of this report.
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM AND OVERSIGHT FINDINGS
No findings or recommendations of the Committee on
Government Reform and Oversight were received as referred to in
clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives.
NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY AND TAX EXPENDITURES
Clause 2(l)(3)(B) of House rule XI is inapplicable because
this legislation does not provide new budgetary authority or
increased tax expenditures.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE
In compliance with clause 2(l)(C)(3) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee sets
forth, with respect to H.J. Res. 78, the following estimate and
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, November 6, 1995.
Hon. Henry J. Hyde,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
reviewed H.J. Res. 78, as ordered reported by the House
Committee on the Judiciary on October 31, 1995. H.J. Res. 78
would give Congressional consent to certain additional powers
conferred upon the Bi-State Development Agency by the States of
Missouri and Illinois. CBO estimates that enacting this
legislation would result in no cost to the federal government
and no direct cost to state or local governments.
The joint resolution would grant the Bi-State Development
Agency power to adopt rules and regulations for proper
operation of its passenger transportation facilities. The
states of Missouri and Illinois already have approved these
additional powers. Enacting H.J. Res. 78 would not affect
direct spending or receipts. Therefore, pay-as-you-go
procedures would not apply to this legislation.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark
Grabowicz.
Sincerely,
June E. O'Neill,
Director.
inflationary impact statement
Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee estimates that H.J.
Res. 78 will have no significant inflationary impact on prices
and costs in the national economy.
section-by-section analysis
Sec. 1. This section gives consent of Congress to granting
additional powers to the Bi-State Development Agency
(established pursuant to the Compact between Missouri and
Illinois approved by the Congress by the Joint Resolution of
August 31, 1950 (64 Stat. 568)). These additional powers were
conferred on the Agency pursuant to actions of Missouri
(section 70.378 of the Act of May 26, 1993 (1993 Mo. Laws 382))
and Illinois (section 5 of Public Act 88-611, Laws of Illinois
1994).
Subsection 1(b) provides that the powers conferred under
the Acts consented to in subsection 1(a) shall take effect on
January 1, 1995.
Sec. 2. Section 2 applies the Joint Resolution that
established the original compact between Missouri and Illinois
(64 Stat. 568) to the additional powers approved under H.J.
Res. 78 to the same extent as if these had been consented to in
the original Joint Resolution.
Sec. 3. Section 3 expressly reserves the right to alter,
amend, or repeal the compact as amended and approved by H.J.
Res. 78.
Sec. 4. Section 4 reserves to the Congress the right to
require the Bi-State Development Agency to disclose and furnish
appropriate information and data.