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.
“ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Transportation was published in the Senate section on pages S9431-S9432 on Sept. 16, 1997.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS
______
INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION ACT OF 1997
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, tomorrow, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works will conduct a markup of S. 1173, the Intermodal Transportation Act of 1997. It is time that a bill be reported to the Senate for thorough and careful consideration, as the expiration of ISTEA is only 2 weeks away. So far, we have very little information about the impact of this recently introduced bill. The committee's report to accompany the bill, and analyses from the U.S. Department of Transportation, should be very helpful to Senators in estimating the bill's merits. I look forward to reviewing that report in detail.
Some proponents of the bill say that States will be guaranteed 90 percent of their contributions into the highway trust fund. There were statements like this just before ISTEA was enacted, and which never materialized, so my colleagues will understand if I reserve judgment. The committee, with the help of the Federal Highway Administration, will hopefully show us that that 90 percent is actual. For the moment however, the information available now should concern all donor States.
According to technical assistance provided by the U.S. Department of Transportation, it seems that paying for a 90 percent of contributions guarantee would cause the ITA bill to exceed the amount allotted in the 5-year budget agreement by approximately $10.059 billion. Yet, committee staff have indicated that the bill is just within the budget targets. There seems to be a contradiction there somewhere.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal years--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budg. Auth. in Budget Agreement......................... 24.695 23.196 23.701 24.198 24.711 ..............
Budg. Auth. to get 90% of Contrib....................... 20.291 30.374 26.085 26.654 27.156 27.655
Difference.............................................. -4.404 +7.178 +2.384 +2.456 +2.445 ..............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to general information provided thus far by the committee, estimating the State-by-State average return from ITA, Michigan would see about $696 million annually over 6 years. However, according to Federal Highway Administration projected gas tax receipts, Michigan will contribute and would receive the following at a 90 percent guaranteed rate of return on contributions:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal years--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Average
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proj. Contributions (millions)............................... 795 1,198 1,027 1,049 1,066 1,087 1,037
Proj. Obligation Auth. (at 90% guarantee).................... 715 1,078 924 944 951 976 931
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, the average return to Michigan under a bill that provides a true guarantee of 90 percent of contributions would be about $931 million. That is about $230 million more annually than the committee's estimate. What's the explanation? It is not yet clear.
I would like to support a Transportation authorization bill that treats States fairly. Unfortunately, there is insufficient information available right now to make that assessment. I am concerned about what I have learned about the bill. I strongly encourage the committee or the Department to provide Senators, as soon as possible, with charts showing the likely apportionments and allocations that each State can expect for each year for the life of the bill, including information on the actual average return that each State can expect in terms of total obligation authority, assuming USDOT's gas tax receipts projections and the balanced budget agreement levels for transportation.
Mr. President, though I am generally pleased that the committee is proposing to modernize the factors in the basic allocation formula to do away with postal routes and other obsolete factors, I was dismayed to learn that S. 1173 would add a convoluted and highly suspect payment to States that seem to receive special treatment. I am referring to the ISTEA transition payments. I strongly urge the committee members to strike this unnecessary and unfair provision during markup.
There are many questions that need to be answered about that provision. For instance, are these ISTEA transition payments subject to an obligation limitation? Can they grow over time? Shouldn't they phase out if they are truly transition payments? Shouldn't the fiscal year 1997 basis used in calculating these transition payments be the authorized amount and not as amended in a supplemental appropriations bill?
Mr. President, I would like to support a fair bill to reauthorize our Nation's transportation systems. This bill holds some promise, but there are too many unanswered questions at this point to make a final conclusion.
____________________
