Tom Petri

Mr. PETRI

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I am opposed to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Utah for a variety of reasons. First, the amendment includes contract authority within the definition of ``discretionary budget authority.'' In a letter to Members of the House, Mr. Orton has cited only spending from the aviation and highway trust funds as examples of programs his amendment would cover. But what other programs might be affected? We really do not know what the effect of this amendment might be. Second, it is important to note that rescinding aviation or highway trust fund dollars does not result in any real savings. Instead, these funds would simply languish in the trust funds since, by law, these funds which have been collected from the users of our highway and aviation systems may not be used for any purpose other than transportation. In addition, these programs are deficit-proof since outlays are restricted to the amount of receipts taken in. Those interested in deficit reduction should look elsewhere in our budget. Third, Members should be aware that this amendment does not simply affect highway projects--in fact, entire highway programs where funds are provided in multi-billion-dollar lump sums and distributed to States by formula would be subject to rescission. One of the major purposes in establishing the highway trust fund almost 40 years ago, was to provided to the States assurances that they could rely with some certainty on the level of Federal highway funding which would be received over the years. This is essential for administering an efficient highway program where each project involves literally years of study, planning, design, engineering and construction. If States could never be certain which programs might be rescinded at any given time in the future--perhaps interstate maintenance or the National Highway System Program or others--the effect on State programs would be devastating. Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding that the chairman and ranking Democrat of the Government Reform and Oversight Committee as well the chairman of the Rules Committee are all opposed to this amendment. The rest of the membership should be as well, and I urge a ``no'' vote on the Orton amendment.