John Chafee

Mr. CHAFEE

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

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, this is an amendment that takes care of a particular situation that has arisen in New Hampshire and addresses the desires of the Senators there. They are doing extremely well as far as their seatbelt usage goes. This makes them continue in that path and move up to the national average as time goes on. It is an amendment that has been cleared by both sides, and I think it is a good one.

Mr. CHAFEE. Yes.

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, is there an amendment pending before this, the Exon amendment?

Mr. CHAFEE. I certainly will.

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I want to thank the Senator from Mississippi for his very generous comments. I appreciate the kind words he had to say about the work we have done. I discovered that I have come to the conclusion after a while around here that there are a few bills that attract more attention than highway bills. Everybody shows up when there is a highway bill. And I must say the Senators have exhibited tremendous restraint. Maybe the restraint came about because we did not adopt any. I do not [[Page S 8877]] think there is a single demonstration project in this bill. I would not know. Because if there was one, I would have one in there for Rhode Island. But the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee has resisted any such demonstration grants or specific authorizations for projects within this State or that State. And, so far, we are not through yet. We are not across the finish line. But we have done pretty well so far. If the word should get out that we did any, if we did, I am sure that we would have not four amendments left but 100. So, Mr. President, I hope we can continue the restraint we have shown. I appreciate the wonderful support of the Senator from Mississippi who has been long interested in these matters.

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I want to echo what the Senator from Virginia said about the bipartisan effort, that the senior Senator from Montana has been tremendously helpful in this. It is not easy. We all have friends that come up and want to remind us of what we want from their committee; and, two, what a modest little item it is that they are requesting. So far, so good. I hope we can continue in that regard.

Mr. CHAFEE. I wonder if we might have a quorum?

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. CHAFEE. Is the Smith amendment ready for consideration?

Mr. CHAFEE. All right. I urge its adoption.

Mr. CHAFEE. I understand the problem the Senator from Minnesota has raised. I will ask the chairman of the Finance Committee to examine this issue when the committee considers reconciliation, and specifically to consider the problem highlighted by the Senator's amendment.

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I am pleased the Senate is nearing completion of S. 440, the National Highway System Destination Act of 1995. And I want to thank all my colleagues for their cooperation on this legislation. The passage of this legislation brings us a big step closer to the deadline we must meet of September 30, if we are to receive a very substantial distribution of some $6.5 billion--that is ``b'' for ``billion''--of needed highway funds. And I want to commend the manager of the bill, the chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee, Senator Warner, for the wonderful job that he has done during the consideration of this legislation. He worked diligently to develop it and to secure the committee's approval by a vote of 15-1. I also want to thank Senator Baucus as a member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, who is also ranking member of this subcommittee, for the excellent work that he has done on this bill. He has been very cooperative in moving it forward. In fact, he provided the leadership in beginning this process, as mentioned by Senator Warner, in that Senator Baucus last year brought this legislation to the floor of the Senate. It passed, but unfortunately we were unable to reach an agreement with the House before Congress adjourned. So I am pleased the Senate has approved the National Highway System as the Secretary of Transportation and the local and State officials presented it to us. I think this underlines the fact that the process to designate this system has worked well and resulted in a high degree of consensus among Federal and State and local officials. Under this bill the cooperative process will continue. State and local officials, with the Secretary of Transportation's approval, will have the ability to continue to make changes in the National Highway System as long as the total mileage of 165,000 miles is not exceeded. This is a dynamic entity with which we are involved. This legislation preserves the important principles that the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, the so-called ISTEA legislation, put in place, emphasizing flexibility. I regret that we were not able to provide the States more flexibility with respect to the Davis-Bacon provisions. As you know, it emerged from the committee with a revocation of the Davis-Bacon language as it pertained to highway construction. That was removed on the floor of the Senate due to the presence of a filibuster on that item. I hope we will be able to deal with this Davis-Bacon situation in the future. I deeply regret that this legislation, in my judgment, represents a giant step backward in a particular area; that is, highway safety. I am extremely disappointed that the Senate made the decision to repeal the Federal speed limit as it pertains to automobiles. It was maintained as to trucks. That was a half a victory. As to automobiles, it was not maintained. And as for the motorcycle helmet requirements, they were repealed. Again, it was half a victory, if you would, or half a loss, in that of the two items, seatbelts and motorcycle helmets, the seatbelts were retained and the motorcycle helmet provision was repealed. I think that is a bad decision and will result in extremely unfortunate consequences. I believe lives will be lost that could have been preserved otherwise. I believe there will be more serious injuries that could have been avoided. And I believe the cost to Federal and State governments will go up. But that is life. We had a long debate on it. There is no question that the will of the Senate was expressed. Nothing went through in the dark of night on that one. Everybody knew the issues and a vote was held. The vote was very, very clear to repeal the helmet provision. I want to take this opportunity to thank the Secretary of Transportation, Mr. Pena, and Mr. Rodney Slater, the Administrator of the Federal Highway System. They did a splendid job in working with the States to develop this whole system. The system was adopted by the Senate as was proposed, as it came up to us. That is a testimony to the effective job that was done by the States and the Federal officials, particularly Mr. Slater, who has been very helpful to us not only during the designation of the National Highway System, but in the consideration of this measure on the floor, and his Deputy Administrator, Jane Garvey, and their staff. The staff they have was working with us over the past several days. Finally, I want to join in thanks to the staff who worked on this legislation. On our side, Steve Shimberg, Jean Lauver, Ann Loomis, Linda Jordan, and Larry Dwyer. And for the Democratic side, Tom Sliter, Kathy Ruffalo, and Alice Washburn. All have been absolutely splendid. There is no question we rely to a great degree on them, because we have confidence in them built up over the years. So I want to thank the Chair and thank all my colleagues for their assistance in this measure. Mr. BAUCUS addressed the Chair.

Mr. CHAFEE. We would prefer not to be here in the morning either.

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, if there is no other business to come before us immediately, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CHAFEE. That is resolved. There are only two.

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Smith and Senator Gregg, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

Mr. CHAFEE

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. CHAFEE. Right, by voice vote.

Mr. CHAFEE

Mr. CHAFEE. Well, in other words, I would not envision a vote on it.

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, the Smith amendment we are working out now, and the language. It is my understanding that will be an amendment that will be acceptable.

Mr. CHAFEE. There will be an amendment.

Mr. CHAFEE

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I wish to echo what the distinguished Senator from Virginia has said. We are here to do business. The shop is open. If people have amendments, bring them on over. We are working on several now to resolve them. But others who have problems, now is the time. The schedule is such that between now and 11:30 there is time for discussion and debate. There will be no votes before 11:30. At 11:30, we have a chance to vote. I would like to see us move to final passage and vote then. But if not, at 12 o'clock, we go back on the cloture motion. And the vote on that, as I understand, is at 2 o'clock. At the conclusion of that vote, if we have not finished this bill, we will be back on it again. But I know the leadership is very anxious to get this over with because there is a host of other measures with which they want to deal. So I say to all within listening and viewing distance, come over, bring your amendments and let us dispose of them.

Mr. CHAFEE

Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I agree with the analysis of the distinguished Senator from Virginia. We are making some progress. We would appreciate your sticking around a little longer, though. We have just disposed of three in 30 seconds. It is like a house of cards. If we pull one card out, perhaps the whole thing will come collapsing down and we will finish. In any event, we are striving. We will call on these individual Senators to see if they are satisfied. I think the point the managers make here is a very valid one. These amendments, many of them, do not involve this committee. They involve other committees. And we are caught in a crossfire here. The Commerce Committee or the Energy Committee--they have nothing to do with us. I do not even know why they are on this bill.