James Oberstar

Mr. OBERSTAR

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire of the Chair how much time remains on both sides?

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, this brings us to the end of a very long and productive general debate period when we have heard fulsome praise for this legislation from all sectors of this country, all spectrums of our society, from urban and suburban and exurban and rural America, from coastal and border America, from all spectrums, all aspects of the economic slices of our country. It has been very encouraging to see the enormous outpouring of support from Members across the body for a truly visionary piece of legislation. It does, indeed, do all these things that all of our colleagues have praised the legislation for. I have a few things of my own that are very special to me. We continue the Rails to Trails Program, continue the Bicycling and Pedestrian Walkways Program that has made it possible for more than 10 million Americans to buy bicycles, become bicyclists. I am an avid cyclist myself. I have pedaled over 2,100 miles on the open road last year. I want to see more people using bike to commute from home to work, as is done in Chicago. We preserve and continue the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program which, in Chicago, has enabled that city with wise use and wise investment of those dollars to improve its Air Quality Index over 15 percent in the 6 years of ISTEA. We continue the Scenic America Program with the Scenic Byways Program that was initiated in ISTEA, again stimulating the tourism travel sector of our economy, which is nearly a $400 billion sector of our economy, one that generates a $20 billion surplus balance of payments for this country, inbound tourism expenditures here over what Americans spend traveling abroad. We will initiate in this legislation when it is finally enacted a very important part of our Welfare to Work Program that was passed in the last Congress. It is very hard to get people to jobs if they do not have the means to get there. My middle daughter, Annie, works in Jubilee Jobs in the Adams Morgan area of Washington, D.C., trying to place people from the homeless shelters, those who have fallen from the welfare net in the Hispanic and black community of Northeast/Northwest Washington. The biggest single problem she faces with her clients is getting them to and from their job. This innovative experimental program, pilot program, will help cities across this country do there what Chicago has done in its city with a program of welfare to work, provide means of transportation for those who need to get to the places where the jobs are located. All in all, all told, this is the bill that the visionaries of 1956 could not have foreseen. This is a bill that the Members of this Congress who stand on their shoulders, who look into the future have said to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), this bill will be an everlasting legacy of his service in this Congress. I hope he will serve many more years. But whatever those years, this will be his greatest achievement and the greatest legacy that we could leave to future generations.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, first, I want to thank Chairmen Shuster and Petri and Ranking Member Rahall for the cooperative manner in which we developed this amendment. Through their willingness to address Member concerns, we were able to agree on a significant number of Member requests. We have developed a good package that further strengthens BESTEA. I want to highlight a few of the provisions. First, the manager's amendment includes provisions that will provide CMAQ funding for newly-designated non-attainment communities. Because the EPA is currently reviewing the criteria for non-attainment, it is important that our bill clarify that if the new criteria lead to designation of additional non-attainment areas, those areas would qualify for funding. Also, the amendment ensures continued CMAQ funding for communities that progress from non-attainment to maintenance status. At the request of our friends on the Science Committee, this amendment adds several provisions from their surface transportation research bill, H.R. 860. For example, the provisions clarify the Department of Transportation's responsibility to develop a strategic planning process for surface transportation research and technology development activities. I want to note that these provisions are designed to be consistent with the Government Performance and Results Act requirements and not a separate effort. Also, the Science Committee provisions establish a cooperative research program to develop better tools for State and local governments to use when evaluating the complex economic, social, and environmental impacts various transportation alternatives have on communities. The amendment includes a number of additional provisions to continue fine tuning BESTEA. These include limited changes to Member highway and transit project requests and we will continue to address their concerns about these very important projects. I again thank Chairman Shuster and Petri, Ranking Member Rahall, and all the Members of the Committee who worked with us to improve BESTEA and I urge adoption of the en bloc amendment.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I just want to specify that the chairman does understand that this is an authorization, these are not contract authority dollars?

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 10 seconds. I would say to the distinguished Majority Whip that I can assure him that we will stand, on a bipartisan basis, in support of the principles that we have crafted so vigorously and, as the gentleman pointed out, so astutely in this legislation. We appreciate his support. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia).

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson).

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), the distinguished voice of the great outdoors and of livable cities.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Filner). (Mr. FILNER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, this is a reality check amendment. If you voted for welfare reform, then look in the mirror and say, did I really mean it? Was I serious about that? If you were, then you really ought to be serious about providing the means for people to get from where they are to where the jobs are. We made a start on it in this legislation with a pilot program of $42 million. I think it is well-crafted, I think it is a good initiative, but it is woefully inadequate in dollars to do the job that needs to be done. A study of 43 large metropolitan areas found that communities with the longest job commute times had the highest rates of unemployment. In Cleveland, inner-city residents can reach only about 8 to 15 percent of entry level jobs in a reasonable time with current public transportation. There are many other similar examples. Mr. Chairman, I want to emphasize, this is a general fund authorization. It does not require offsets. It is under the caps for the budget hawks. The Committee on Appropriations will decide among the many priorities that they have to contend with which of the funds will go to this program and which to other programs. It will not come out of contract authority dollars. It is reasonable and fair. It is far less than the Senate is providing in their version of this legislation. Mr. Chairman, finally, I want to say in Chicago, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Shuster) and I were there a year ago to look at their transportation, we saw their effective welfare-to-work program. It was a pilot, if you will. It was the spark of imagination for the program we have in this basic legislation. But, fundamentally, I drew this idea from my daughter and I who works for Jubilee Jobs in Northeast-Northwest Washington, in the Adams Morgan area. Trying to place people in work who are coming out of the welfare shelters, who are coming out, dropouts from the welfare system, she cannot get them to their jobs because they cannot afford transportation. If you cannot match the person with the job through a means of transport, then you have failed. Let us not fail. Let us pass this amendment.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr. Mascara), the gentleman from the Mon Valley.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, when all else fails, read the language of the legislation. The inherent contradiction that our esteemed Speaker talked about is in the amendment itself, not in the arguments on this side. The inherent contradiction is that the amendment goes on for line after line talking about all the good things it wants to do. Then in the end it defines preference in the last four lines as an advantage of any kind, a quota, set-aside, numerical goal, timetable, other numerical objective. Does it also mean outreach? They want to protect outreach? They do not do that in this legislation. The DBE program has worked wonderfully for the 6 years of ISTEA. The 10 percent goal is a national target. State and local recipients of DOT funds set their own goals for DOT participation and construction projects based on the availability of disadvantaged businesses in their markets. There is no absolute requirement that a particular goal be met. In fact, it is very acceptable business practice to set goals. Goals are a standard tool of good management worldwide. But by prohibiting goals, the amendment prevents States and localities from measuring progress against discrimination. That is what this is all about, progress against discrimination. I have heard all sorts of conversation today from the advocates of this amendment about freedom, freedom to choose, freedom to move, mobility. Let me just say, Mr. Chairman, rich and poor alike have the freedom to leap under a bridge. Only the poor wind up under the bridge. Do not stuff people under a bridge with this amendment. Let us defeat this amendment. Let us stand up for what is good in America and give poor, minorities, women, an opportunity to bid on this great highway program, this $270 billion program of ours that moves America forward into the next century.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri).

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall), a ranking member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and an architect of this legislation.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I just wish to observe that it is inappropriate for a Member to address directly another Member, and that all remarks should be addressed to the Chair in proper debate. Mr. Chairman, when all else fails, try the facts. The facts that are this committee went through a very appropriate process of asking all Members about projects that are priorities and important in their district, priorities that their State has not addressed. Point 8 of our 14-point questionnaire: ``Is the project included in the metropolitan and/or State transportation improvement plan or the State long-range plan? Is it scheduled for funding?'' And on through a very objective analysis of each project. That is a fair way to do it. Who said that all wisdom resides in the State? A statement was made earlier in this debate, decisions should be made by the States, who know what the needs and priorities are in their State. Well, the States will have the choice to match the required 20 percent or not to match it, to start projects under construction or not to start those projects. Those are decisions that are left to the States. But let me tell my colleagues what kind of wisdom there is in State government. There was a stretch of highway in my district on which, over 15 years, 57 people have died. Where did that appear on the State priority list? Nowhere, until I got involved in it and brought them together, and now we are going to address long-term and immediate needs on Highway 8, and there are not going to be any more deaths if I have my way and if we have the funding that is in this legislation. All of this talk about we are spending over the amount. Listen, we give up $9 billion of the Highway Trust Fund, taxes already paid by drivers in America who have been carrying for 30 years the burden of government on their back, and we give up the future interest, $13 billion dollars. We paid for it. The drivers of America paid for this bill over and over and over again, and now it is time to get their due and let us invest in America. We know what projects are good and important for our districts every bit as well as those governors do.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall), ranking member of the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina offers a very appealing and even compelling, rational, thoughtful argument. It is a neatly constructed syllogism which I appreciate. The horse should be before the cart, in very plain terms, the horse being the budget. We did that last year. We had the debate on the budget resolution. We had the Shuster-Oberstar amendment, which asked Members to make choices, to prioritize, to decide where they wanted to pin dollars on their values. We came within two votes of prevailing because we offered something that was very reasonable and very responsible. We had an across-the-board minuscule cut. Everybody is going to have a little cut. Little bit less in taxes, little bit less in defense, little bit less on domestic discretionary. And we exempted the mandatory programs and the entitlements. And we should have won. I think that the reason that we are not doing it that way this year, I say to my good friend, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), is there some way up there in the White House and in the clouds above Mount Gingrich who are afraid that we will win, that we will win that battle, that our values will prevail; and, so, they did not want to have it that way. Now, this 3-month extension, that is a nice idea, buy a little time. Let me tell my colleagues what that buys. In my State we have two seasons, winter and road construction. And this is going to put us right through road construction into winter again, and it is going to do that for a whole northern tier of the United States. I do not think that makes a whole lot of sense. We have had the debate. We have had all the numbers spelled out here. I think the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) have spelled it out; and I said it myself, look, we gave up $9 billion of taxes paid by the driving public of America that are in the Trust Fund. Commitments made, not delivered on. That is going to go off there into the ether somewhere to reduce that $3 trillion debt. I hope everyone feels good about that. It is not going to build any roads. Then we yield another $15 billion out into the future in interest on the dollars coming into the Trust Fund. I hope my colleagues feel awfully good about that, because that is not going to build any roads either. This bill builds roads and bridges and transit systems and keeps America mobile and productive, and we ought to defeat this amendment.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire what the distribution of time is at this point.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall), ranking member on the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of the time.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I am just delighted that the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kasich), the author of this amendment, was not in the Eisenhower Cabinet or in the Bureau of Roads, as it was known in those days, because goodness knows we would never have had a Highway Trust Fund, we would have never had an interstate highway program; he would have just let the States go on and fumble as they had been doing. He would take us back to a time that none of us here could possibly imagine, a time when some States started roads, others did not, they built it up to a certain point and then it stopped. Bridges were started and then stopped. If we follow the gentleman's logic all the way through, we would have bridges that go halfway across a river because one State would want to build it and the other State would not or would run out of money, or we would have roads that go up to a State's border and the other State would say, ``Well, we don't think we want to build a road there.'' I mean, he would have us in chaos, he would have us back in 14th century England when the rule was that the owner of a castle had to repair the road in front of their castle so that the carriages riding along would not be stuck in the potholes, and if they did, then they had to pull them out. He would set us back, not forward. This is a vote for the past, not a vote for the future. This is a vote for a chimerical view of transportation in America, one that exists solely in the mind of its author but does not exist in reality. If we are going to be a Nation, and if my colleagues believe in the Constitution that said a responsibility of the Congress shall be to build post roads, that it shall have authority over interstate and foreign commerce, then it is our duty to promote interstate and foreign commerce, and the way to do it is through transportation, and we do that. This legislation that we bring to the floor today continues the greatest movement of, mobility of people and goods, the greatest thrust for economic growth that this country or any country has undertaken. Our transportation network has given America the thrust to be a world power. Let us not retreat to the past. Let us vote for the future, for BESTEA, and vote down the Kasich amendment.

Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Poshard), a distinguished member of our committee.