Max Baucus

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, it is a good amendment. I urge its adoption.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I yield the floor. Mr. BOND addressed the Chair.

Mr. BAUCUS. That is true about the cooperation among our staffs. It is incredible. It is a joy to behold, frankly, to see Ann Loomis and Kathy and Tom and Dan and Jimmie. We have a real family here, I might say. As closely as we have worked together, it has been done without rancor, without anger, without any testy feelings. It has been a tremendous, seamless web of teamwork, and it has been wonderful. I mean that; I am not just saying it. In addition, Mike Evans and Jo-Ellen Darcy, Barbara Roberts, and John Hemphill have all worked just as hard. We may not see them much on the floor here, but behind the scenes they have worked extremely hard and intelligently. I have not worked that much with Ann Loomis until recently. She is a wonderful woman, a very talented young lady. When Senator Warner got up to speak on behalf of Ann, I thought, that's right, she is really good. The same is true with her counterpart, Kathy Ruffalo. They are a dynamo team. If you want to get two people working on a project and you want to win, get the two of them working together. In addition, Dan Corbett of Senator Chafee's staff is an expert. Also, there is Cheryl Tucker, Linda Jordan, and Amy Dunathan. I don't know her, but I have heard of her, and she is good. Also, Abigail Kinnison of Senator Chafee's staff. Jimmie Powell did a terrific job as majority staff director. Secretary Slater has been helpful, along with Jack Basso, who has been here to answer questions relating to the Department of Transportation. He is always available and helpful. In my State of Montana, Sandy Straehl, who is with the Montana Department of Transportation, has been terrific in working up data, amendments, and ways to help improve this bill. They worked very hard on this bill. I thank them very much. In addition, Janine Johnson, with the Senate legislative counsel. It is pretty hard, when you are working for the legislative counsel and putting up with urgent, immediate requests of Senators and staffs, to try to write legislation, write amendments in a way that makes sense, to advance the issues we are trying to proceed with. Janine Johnson has been terrific. There is also Ellen Stein with Senator Warner's office. Ellen has been working as hard as Ann and the rest of them. I could go on forever, but I see Senators who wish to speak. I can't speak enough about the staff. They have been first-rate.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, we are close to wrapping up this bill. I would like to just inform the Senate of the very, very hard work that a lot of my staff have performed, as well as the staff of many others. It is worth repeating every time we manage a bill or are involved with a bill. Each of us knows how very hard and how diligent each of our staffs is. They don't sleep nights. They stay here all night long, and they work very aggressively and diligently, and they struggle home to sleep a little, and they get up in the morning, without complaint, and come back to work. They also work over weekends. It is just incredible. I wish the American public could see just how hard our staffs work for the public good. I take my hat off to them. I believe, frankly, Mr. President, that a most noble human endeavor is public service, whether it is service to church, family, friends, whatever capacity each person might feel most comfortable with. But our staffs' dedication to the public service is above and beyond the call of duty by far, and they don't even get any recognition for it. Senators like to get headlines, like to be on TV; they like to get credit for what they do for the people in their home States and to the country. But the staff, I say, work harder and get no headlines, no recognition, no credit. Why are they doing it? They are doing it because they believe in service to our States and service to our Nation. They are just tremendous. I would like to highlight my staff, because I know each Senator will do his own. Tom Sliter is the minority staff director. Anybody that knows Tom Sliter knows there is none better. There are some as good, but there is none better than Tom Sliter for his dedication. And the same goes for everybody else on the minority side. Kathy Ruffalo. Those who work with Kathy, try to clear amendments with Kathy, and go to Kathy for advice on how to work out this or that amendment, also know there is nobody more of an expert on the transportation bill or the highway bill or who finds solutions to problems more than Kathy.

Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 1986 to Amendment No. 1676 (Purpose: To designate a commercial zone within which the transportation of certain property in commerce is exempt from certain provisions of Chapter 135 of title 49, United States Code)

Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 2013 to Amendment No. 1676 (Purpose: To modify a high priority corridor on the National Highway System)

Mr. BAUCUS. This amendment has been cleared, and I urge its approval.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, it is fine.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. I say to my gracious friend from Maine, I accept her invitation. I would love to see this process, not only because anyone would like to visit Maine, but, second, it is mutually beneficial to lots of other States which have a very prominent reinforced products industry. I thank the Senator.

Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Modification to Amendment No. 1951

Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay it on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendments Nos. 1974 and 1975, En Bloc, to Amendment No. 1676

Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. NEPA Process and Transportation Projects

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, this amendment has been worked out and cleared on our side. Mr. McCONNELL addressed the Chair.

Mr. BAUCUS. It's a deal.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I supplement what the chairman of the committee said. This has been a matter with the Senator from Colorado and is a matter that relates to CMAQ funding. I can assure the Senator from Colorado that, as I think the Senator from Rhode Island said, we will work with the Senator, work it out in conference, and try to come up with a solution that is workable and agreeable with the Senator from Colorado.

Mr. BAUCUS. I say to the Senator, that's fine. Mr. MACK addressed the Chair.

Mr. BAUCUS. I ask the Senator from Virginia when he expects this vote to occur.

Mr. BAUCUS. If I could very briefly say to my good friend from Florida, I think it is important for us to look at our national motto: E pluribus unum. We are different States. Florida is a very densely populated State. Western States are very thinly populated. There are large expanses. Western States have high State gasoline taxes to match the Federal funds. I can't speak for all the western States, but I know my State of Montana has a 27-cents-a-gallon State gasoline tax. I don't know what it is in Florida. The assumption that, with the passage of the amendment, States themselves can spend their own money that they otherwise send to Uncle Sam, that money would be spent on highways may work in more densely populated States where the present gasoline tax is a little lower and where those States can finance the spending of the additional highway dollars, but I say to my good friend, in the West that is much more difficult. In fact, if Montana were to spend the same dollars that it sends to Uncle Sam and spend it at home, the State of Montana would have to raise the gasoline tax 12 to 15 cents. So we would be up to about 42 cents a gallon State tax on top of Federal. That is typical of a lot of western States. It just can't be done. So, it is the nature of the beast that the very densely populated States, the smaller, densely populated States similar to the State of Florida, are by definition going to have to probably pay a little more into the trust fund so that the very thinly populated States that already have very high State gasoline taxes trying to make their State match can have highways built in their States so we have a truly national system. If you follow the logic of the amendment of the Senator, and I understand it, it is essentially moving toward 50 nations, 50 States. We had that argument about 200 years ago when we scrapped the Articles of Confederation. We decided under the principles of federalism--it is complicated, I grant you--that we are a nation and we are 50 States-- not 50 then but today 50. It is not an easy matter. It is complex. We have to find some rough justice here. The effect of the amendment of the Senator, I submit with all graciousness, would have put an unfair burden on the thinly populated States because they couldn't raise the money, frankly, to have a truly national interstate highway or primary road system. It is for that reason, in addition, that I do not think the Senator's amendment is good for our country.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, this sounds good, repeal the 4.3-cent gasoline tax. Nobody likes paying taxes. We all know that. We also know we want our highways. If this amendment were to pass, we would be going backwards. Why do I say that? I say that, first, because it would, as the Senator from Delaware said, kill this bill. This is a killer amendment. This amendment would take about $6 billion a year away from the highway bill, $6 billion that would not be spent on highway construction, maintenance, et cetera. In addition, it is inadvisable because we are now at this point, with the passage of this bill and the defeat of this amendment, spending the money that comes into the highway trust fund back out on to highways. That is, the revenue coming in as a consequence of this bill will be used to finance spending on our roads and our highways. I might say, Mr. President, that polls confirm that Americans support the gas tax so long as the funds are being used on our highways. That is what this bill does. This amendment says, sorry, folks, we are not going to repair the roads and highways, not to the degree we should, and we are going to be derelict and not live up to our responsibilities. Today, all levels of government spending on highways and roads and bridges is about $34 billion a year. The Department of Transportation says we need more than that. It says we need $54 billion just to maintain current conditions, just to maintain. We need about $74 billion a year to improve. If this amendment passes, we are going to take $6 billion a year away from what we otherwise would be spending. That is, today I say we spend $34 billion, and it is true with the passage of this bill we spend more than $34 billion, but I might say I think it is obvious to Senators who are listening to this that it sounds good but it is a bad idea. I urge Members to yield back time and get on with the vote. We all know where the votes are in this, and we are just wasting our time by debating this further.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I want to underline that last point about the availability of a point of order.

Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, it is a very simple amendment offered on behalf of Senator Daschle, Senator Thomas, and Senator Enzi. Essentially, it allows States that receive Amtrak money but States which have no Amtrak to be able to spend that money on light rail or rural rail service. That is the point of the amendment.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Inouye be added as a cosponsor.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I have an amendment which I send to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.