The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“CONGRESS MUST CO-SIGN ACT” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Transportation was published in the Extensions of Remarks section on pages E378 on Feb. 16, 2007.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
CONGRESS MUST CO-SIGN ACT
______
HON. MARK UDALL
of colorado
in the house of representatives
Friday, February 16, 2007
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Madam Speaker, I am today introducing a bill to require focused, careful consideration and separate Congressional approval of a form of back-door spending that could leave the taxpayers exposed to serious financial liability.
It is cosponsored by our colleagues Mr. Walz, Mr. Flake, Ms. McCollum, Ms. Maloney, Ms. Bachmann, Mr. Garrett, Mr. Lamborn, Mr. Kline, Ms. Musgrave and Mr. Miller of Florida. I greatly appreciate their assistance and support.
The bill, entitled the ``Congress Must Co-Sign Act'' deals with proposals to have the Department of Transportation lend a billion dollars--or more--for any one purpose.
It would require greater transparency regarding such loans and a separate Congressional vote to approve each such loan, even if it had received preliminary approval either on its own or as part of a larger measure.
The purpose is to increase Congressional accountability and to reduce the chance the taxpayers will find themselves stuck with the bill if the lender should default on one of these loans.
The bill would require the Secretary of Transportation to provide Congress advance written notice at least 60 days before any Department of Transportation funds can be used to make a loan in an amount greater than $1 billion. This notice would have to include information about the purpose, the authority and the terms and conditions of the loan.
And the bill would require that after receiving the notice, Congress would have to pass legislation approving the loan before the Transportation Department could go forward and lend the money.
This is not just a theoretical matter--one such mega-loan is now being processed within the Administration. And that fact illustrates the need to broaden the focus in the debate about ``earmarks'' and special tax breaks. We in Congress need to take a harder look not just at direct spending and the indirect spending through the tax code, but also at backdoor spending through the lending of taxpayer dollars.
In all these areas, there is a need for greater transparency and accountability. That's why I have introduced H.R. 595, the
``Stimulating Leadership in Controlling Expenditures''--or ``SLICE''--
Act, to enact a constitutionally sound version of a line-item veto for individual spending items.
It's also why I have introduced H.R. 905, the Commission on Unfair Tax Breaks and Subsidies--or ``CUTS''--Act, which would provide another way to require action to increase equity and accountability in the federal budget.
And that is why I am introducing this bill today--not because I am convinced that the pending loan, or some similar loans in the future, would not be appropriate, but because I think it's essential that a decision to approve such a mega-loan should be made in a careful, deliberate way with full discussion of the merits and potential risks and a separate vote here in the Congress. At the end of the day, I might vote to approve the pending loan or some other loan of that type, or I might conclude that the potential costs outweigh the likely benefits. My purpose is not to prejudge the result, but to require a better, more open way of making a decision.
The federal budget remains awash in a sea of red ink and we are continuing to add to the Nation's towering pile of debt. People in Colorado and across the country expect greater transparency and accountability from their elected officials and our decisions on spending. This bill would take an important step in that direction and I think it deserves the support of all our colleagues.
____________________
