Jim Inhofe

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S.J. Res. 20.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. I ask that we yield 3 minutes to Senator Thomas.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I see the Senator from Delaware is in the Chamber. If he would like to go ahead, it would be acceptable.

Mr. INHOFE. Let him go ahead.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I would like to yield 8 minutes to probably the Senator who knows more about air quality and the Clean Air Act than any of the rest of us, the Senator from Ohio, Mr. Voinovich.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Missouri, Senator Bond.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, it is my understanding we are going to have 1-hour debate on the motion to proceed and Senator Leahy and myself are controlling that time. It is acceptable to me, if Senator Jeffords would like to be heard at this time, that he be recognized.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, section 403 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act requires that a statement of the cost of the reported bill, prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, be included in the report. At the time of filing of the report, the statement was unavailable. The statement has since been received by the committee. I ask unanimous consent that the statement be printed in the Record.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, section 403 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act requires that a statement of the cost of the reported bill, prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, be included in the report. At the time of filing of the report, the statement was unavailable. The statement has since been received by the committee. I ask unanimous consent that the statement be printed in the Record.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, section 403 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act requires that a statement of the cost of the reported bill, prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, be included in the report. At the time of filing of the report, the statement was unavailable. The statement has since been received by the committee. I ask unanimous consent that the statement be printed in the Record.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. I understand we have 15 minutes divided evenly between the majority and minority, and the Senator from Arizona has up to 30 minutes. I ask now to recognize the Senator from Arizona for up to 30 minutes.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Pennsylvania for his persistence in advocating on behalf of steel grid reinforced concrete decking as a way of modernizing and strengthening our Nation's bridges. Be assured that it was my intention to assist this technology gain greater prominence among transportation officials at the national, State, and local level. I understand my good friend from Pennsylvania's enthusiasm for this technology and desire to expand its use. I look forward to working with Senator Santorum to educate our colleagues and transportation officials about the vast benefits of this technology. exise tax on highway vehicles

Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, it is my understanding we have 6 minutes. I would like to yield 2 minutes each to three Senators, three of the hard workers on this bill. I did forget to mention Senator Grassley, who was so helpful. I would like to recognize Senators Bond, Lott, and Shelby for 2 minutes each.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I submit a report of the committee of conference on the bill (H.R. 3), and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. INHOFE. I yield back the remainder of my time and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. INHOFE. I thank Senator Jeffords for the great working relationship.

Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, today the Senate is taking the final step in a very long, and at times frustrating but overall rewarding process to address our national transportation needs. It has been 22 months since TEA-21 expired on September 30, 2003. The Federal-aid program has since been operating under a number of short-term extensions--a total of 11 to date. I urge the Senate to approve the conference report before us so that our States can start working on addressing their transportation needs. Both sides of the aisle in the Senate and House embraced a spirit of bipartisanship and collaboration that has delivered a quality piece of legislation. As in all legislative endeavors there has been much give and take. There are provisions in this bill for which I would have preferred another outcome, but on the whole, I believe we have produced a product that will continue the good work started in ISTEA and improved upon in TEA-21. The conference report provides $244 billion in guaranteed spending over the 2005-2009 period for our Nation's highways and mass transit systems. If you include 2004, the bill provides $286.5 billion in guaranteed spending--an almost $90 billion increase over TEA-21. Finally, the highway program is guaranteed $193 billion over the 2005- 2009 period. We worked very hard with our House colleagues to balance the needs of donor and donee States. I will be the first to acknowledge that this balance--as with any compromise--is not perfect. My colleagues representing donee and donor States that receive lower rates of return or growth rates than they feel fair have made this fact very clear to me. I am very sympathetic to the concerns of both donors and donees in this situation. Both have significant transportation needs that cannot be ignored. Addressing their concerns was even more difficult because we had very limited dollars to solve either group's issues. SAFETEA-LU tries to split the difference. Donee States have an average rate of growth of 19 percent above their TEA-21 levels, and donor States will reach a 92 percent rate of return by 2008. Also, if there is a positive revenue aligned budget authority in 2007, it will be directed to improve donor States rate of return. One concern of my donor State colleagues when we were on the floor was that not all donor States were treated equally--that concern has been addressed. Over the 6 years under TEA-21, we made great progress in preserving and improving the overall physical condition and operation of our transportation system; however, more needs to be done. A safe, effective transportation system is the foundation of our economy. We are past due to fulfill an obligation to this country and the American people--the conference report before us does just that. Finally, I would like to acknowledge all the staff time and effort that has gone into the bill. Specifically, I would like to single out my highway team: again, Ruth Van Mark and James O'Keeffe, Andrew Wheeler, Marty Hall, Nathan Richmond, Greg Murrill, Angie Giancarlo, Alex Herrgott, and Rudy Kapichak. From Senator Bond's staff: Ellen Stein, Heideh Shahmoradi, John Stoody, and Julie Daman. From Senator Jefford's staff: JC Sandberg, Malia Somerville, Ken Connolly, Cara Cookson, Chris Miller, and Jo-Ellen Darcy. From Senator Baucus's staff: Kathy Ruffalo. From Senator Frist's staff: Libby Jarvis, Sharon Soderstrom, and Erik Ueland. From the Federal Highway Administration: Today is Administrator Mary Peters last day before she heads back to Arizona. It is very appropriate that we finish the bill on her last day, because without the hard work of Mary and her staff at FHWA, we would not be here today. On Mary's staff I want to especially thank Susan Binder, Carolyn Edwards and Ross Crichton, who over the last 3 years have done more than 1600 formula runs. We really appreciate all of your hard work. Also, I want to personally thank the hard working attorneys in the Senate Legislative Counsel office. In particular, Darci Chan, Heather Arpin and Gary Endicott. Finally, Rachel Milberg with CBO has done great work in assisting staff work through the complicated scoring process. I am certain my colleagues share my strong desire to get a transportation reauthorization bill passed and urge them to support the bill before the Senate today. Let me say I do have a great deal of respect for both of my colleagues from Arizona. However, I will put them on my doubtful list. But I would say this and I will be very brief. We only have 7\1/2\ minutes on each side. I want to make sure that Senator Bond, with whom I have worked as chairman of the Subcommittee of Transportation, and a few others get their time. Working with Senator Jeffords and Senator Baucus and Senator Bond has been a great experience. We have worked very well together. This has been difficult. We have worked for 2 years on this bill. It is not easy. I would only say this: It is paid for. It didn't increase taxes. It is within the President's parameters.

Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, I would like to ask the Senator from Arizona, are you yielding back your time or just yielding the floor?

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. I ask unanimous consent that Heideh Shahmoradi, Greg Murrill, and John Stoody be granted the privilege of the floor for the consideration of the conference report accompanying H.R. 3.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to an exceptional officer of the United States Army, Lieutenant Colonel John D. Wason, upon his retirement after more than 20 years of distinguished service. Throughout his career, Lieutenant Colonel Wason has personified the Army values of duty, integrity, and selfless service across the many missions the Army provides in defense of our Nation. During his time as--a Congressional Legislative Liaison Officer in the office of the Secretary of the Army, many of us on Capitol Hill have enjoyed the opportunity to work with Lieutenant Colonel Wason on a wide variety of Army issues and programs, and it is my privilege to recognize his many accomplishments. I commend his superb service to the U.S. Army and this great Nation. Lieutenant Colonel John D. Wason was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant, Field Artillery, after graduating from California State University-Sacramento in 1985. His first assignment was as a Company Fire Support Officer, Battery Fire Direction Officer, and Battery Executive Officer for the 3rd Battalion, 19th Field Artillery, 5th Infantry Division at Ft. Polk, LA from 1985 to 1989. He commanded B Battery, 5th Battalion, 3rd Field Artillery in the Federal Republic of Germany from 1990 to 1992. Following his assignment in Germany, LTC Wason spent 28 months as a Recruiting Company Commander in Northern California from 1992 to 1994. In 1994, LTC Wason was selected as a member of the Army Acquisition workforce. From 1994 to 2001 LTC Wason served in a variety of Army Acquisition positions at White Sands Missile Range, NM and Picatinny Arsenal, NJ working on major Army weapons programs such as the Army Tactical Missiles System, Crusader, and the LW 155 Artillery system. In 2001, LTC Wason was selected as a Department of Defense Congressional Fellow. His selection was followed by a 1 year assignment working on my personal staff. Following his Fellowship, LTC Wason served in Programs Division, Office of the Chief of Legislative Liaison. Lieutenant Colonel Wason maintained a constant liaison with Professional Staff Members of the Senate and House Armed Services Committees on issues relating to Army Procurement programs focusing on Army Aviation, Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles. Throughout these varied and demanding assignments, Lieutenant Colonel Wason provided outstanding leadership, advice, and sound professional judgment on numerous critical issues of enduring importance to both the Army and Congress. John's counsel and support were invaluable to Army leaders and Members of Congress as they considered the impact of their decisions on these important issues. On behalf of Congress and the United States of America, I thank Colonel Wason, his wife Betsy, and his entire family for the commitment, sacrifices, and contribution that they have made throughout his honorable military service. I congratulate Lieutenant Colonel John Wason on completing an exceptional and extremely successful career, and wish him blessings and success in all his future endeavors.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, first of all, let me thank Chairman Grassley for the fine work he has done on a very difficult issue. I will start from a different perspective than others might have concerning this agreement. First of all, I have been leading the opposition to almost every multinational agreement that has come along. I have stood on the floor of the Senate for probably, collectively, 6 or 8 hours talking about how destructive the Kyoto agreement would be should we be a party to it. I have talked about the Law of the Sea Treaty. It was passed out of the Foreign Relations Committee unanimously and was ready for action when we found out what it was. I led the opposition, and we have not passed it yet. We would be losing our sovereignty to the U.N. on a lot of the areas of the sea and the air above it. This is something I have been active in for a long time. In 1994, I had a very interesting experience. I was in the House of Representatives. I led the opposition to NAFTA at that time. Then I was elected to the Senate in a special election, and it came up in the Senate, and I led the opposition to NAFTA at that time. In Oklahoma, my State, I was the only Member of the House or Senate who opposed NAFTA. I am here to say that this is not NAFTA. For those who use the argument that NAFTA was wrong and NAFTA should not have worked and, therefore, CAFTA is no good, they just don't know what they are talking about. CAFTA is totally different. I can recall standing on the Senate floor from this very desk saying if we support NAFTA and adopt it, we would have problems--transportation problems--where we would be allowing Mexican truckers to pick up a load in Brownsville, TX, and take it to Oklahoma City and not comply with our wage-an-hour requirements and environmental requirements, and all these things happened; they came true. That is not what CAFTA is. We have two reasons we need to support CAFTA. One is what the Senator from Iowa talked about--the tariffs. I talked to my farmers, the Oklahoma Farm Bureau, and the Farmers Union, and showed them the tariffs they are paying right now, and what the other side is paying, and this is a win-win situation for our farmers. For example, for grains, we pay 10.6 percent; they pay nothing today; for vegetables, we pay 16.7 percent, they pay nothing; for wood products, we pay 10 percent, they pay nothing. There is a long list--I can go on and on--of commodities and products where we are penalized and they are not. Under this bill, we will level that playing field and allow farmers in Oklahoma to be on the same level as those other countries. The other reason--and I think this is very important--is the national security reason. I am ranking member on the Armed Services Committee. I can remember the days in Central America when President Reagan was our President, and then the first President Bush, when we gave freedoms and democracies to all those countries down in Central America. We remember Daniel Ortega and the activities of the Sandinistas. Right now, we are in a position where we can either punish or reward our friends. These countries with whom we will be in an alliance are our friends. They are supporting us in Iraq and supporting us in everything we do. Those other countries are not supporting us. The Chavezes, the Ortegas, and the Castros are the ones starting to emerge again. Can you imagine, after what we went through with the Sandinistas in the 1980s, and we have Ortega running for President again? I am not about to reward him and give him what he wants, keeping us from having that trade. If you want to know the kinds of people who are opposing CAFTA, I will read you a few: Earth Justice, Friends of the Earth, EnviroCitizen, Freedom Socialist Party, and the Social Welfare Action Alliance, and others like that. The conservative groups supporting CAFTA are the American Conservative Union, Americans for Tax Reform, the Heritage Foundation, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Club for Growth, and it goes on and on. This is an issue where we are on the right side not just for our farmers and for national security and our friends in Central America and South America, but also it is right for America. I yield the floor.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to have a few minutes to respond to some of the substance of the two subjects discussed by the Senator from Utah. Then I would like to describe the amendments I have offered. It will probably take me 20 minutes.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I have two amendments I have already filed. The second amendment is going to require a new number. The two I am going to be discussing are the ICRC amendment. I have several cosponsors of the amendment, including Senator Kyl. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Enzi be added as a cosponsor to amendment No. 1313.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on amendment No. 1313.