Texas Transit Association

The Senate approved a $318 billion highway and mass transit measure on Feb. 12, a 47 percent increase over the current six-year act, in the face of a presidential veto threat and resistance from conservatives who accused their colleagues of embarking on a spending spree despite a rising deficit.

Focus now shifts to the House of Representatives.

ARTICLE 1:
Senate Backs $318 Billion for Highways
By CARL HULSE New York Times February 13, 2004

WASHINGTON, Feb. 12 — After easily defeating a series of challenges aimed at cutting the cost of the measure, senators voted 76 to 21 in favor of the six-year proposal, which exceeds by $62 billion the spending level President Bush has said is acceptable.

“As a fiscal conservative, I say that I believe in spending more in certain areas,” said Senator James M. Inhofe, the Oklahoma Republican who is chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee. “One area is national defense, one area is infrastructure.”

While the bill had strong support from most Democrats, Republicans spent the day in a pitched intramural fight over the price tag of legislation that is developing into an early test of Republican willingness to hold down spending. Some conservative Republicans said their colleagues were ignoring the implications of a deficit estimated to reach $521 billion this year in a rush to win local road and bridge projects.

“It’s spend more now, get the political benefit and pass on the bill to the future generations,” said Senator Rick Santorum, Republican of Pennsylvania. He said he was fighting the measure in violation of a Washington axiom, “Never get between a congressman and asphalt because you will get run over.”

Despite such objections, the Senate voted 86 to 11 to cut off a filibuster slowing the measure, then voted 72 to 24 against requiring the spending in the bill to fall within limits set in the Congressionally approved budget. Senators also rejected 78 to 20 an effort to hold the spending to the $256 billion acceptable to the White House.

Backers of the measure that will pay for road and transportation projects across the nation said the spending level could be adjusted in future negotiations with the House and the administration. They said the bill would provide hundreds of thousands of new construction jobs while paying for needed repairs to the nation’s deteriorating and overcrowded highways.

“Are these roads magically going to fix themselves?” asked Senator Jim Talent, Republican of Missouri. “I think we should do our part here and we should face honestly what we need.”

The bill represents about a 47 percent increase in spending over the current six-year highway and mass transit program.

Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, called on Congress to demonstrate it was serious about reining in the cost of new legislation. “We urge Congress to hold the line on spending,” he said.

The $375 billion highway bill emerging in the House is even more expensive than the Senate version. The political push for highway dollars there sets up a probable collision between advocates of more road money and the Republican leadership, which this week said it would explore reducing spending below what the president has requested.

In the Senate, those opposed to the measure said it was time for Republicans to make good on their claim to be the party of fiscal responsibility.

“When are we going to start backing up our words with our actions?” asked Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, who said the measure was the product of “reckless fiscal insanity.”

Senator Don Nickles, Republican of Oklahoma and chairman of the Budget Committee, supported blocking the measure because it exceeded the budget limits.

“I’m amazed at people thinking we’re going to be able to get all these new highway monies for nothing,” Mr. Nickles said.

But the authors of the measure, backed by a majority of senators interested in the hundreds of millions of dollars the legislation would provide to each state, prevailed. “This is a good bill,” said Senator James M. Jeffords, an independent from Vermont and a senior member of the public works panel. “I’d like to see it a little bigger.”

The Senate majority leader, Bill Frist of Tennessee, said he recognized the objections being raised by some lawmakers and indicated he might favor eventually lowering the cost to about $290 billion. “I hope we will be able to find a compromise with the House of Representatives and the administration that will meet all concerns,” Dr. Frist said.

ARTICLE 2:
Bush Threatens to Veto $318B Highway Bill

President Bush Threatens to Veto $318 Billion Surface Transportation Bill Approved by the Senate
The Associated Press

WASHINGTON Feb. 13 — States would get an additional $100 billion over the next six years to build roads, repair bridges and improve public transit under a Senate-passed bill that the White House says is extravagant in an age of record deficits.

The Senate voted 76-21 Thursday to approve the $318 billion surface transportation bill, a winning margin that would be enough to override a presidential veto threatened by the administration.

The current six-year highway spending bill, which expires at the end of this month, provided $218 billion.

“This bill will make a difference in the life of every American by making it easier and safer to get from place to place,” said Sen. Jim Jeffords, I-Vt.

The legislation now moves to the House, where lawmakers are deeply divided over the measure. Some say even the Senate bill is inadequate to improve the nation’s congested and unsafe roads; others agree with the president that Congress must begin to show fiscal discipline.

The White House has recommended $256 billion over the six years and says the president will be advised to veto any bill that goes beyond that or uses tax increases or deficit spending to finance it.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said in a statement that the Senate “missed an important opportunity to rein in spending. It is disappointing that the bill significantly exceeds the president’s budget.”

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., predicted the legislation would be one of the most important Congress considers this year, citing what he said were conservative estimates that it would create 1.6 million jobs over its six-year lifetime.

He expressed hope that a compromise would be reached with the House and the White House, and said he would support a figure around $290 billion, which is the actual ceiling on spending over the six years.

The $318 billion about $255 billion for highways, $56 billion for mass transit and $7 billion for safety programs is the amount the government can contract over the period, which is slightly higher than the spending limit.

The House Transportation Committee has backed a $375 billion figure, saying anything less would do little more than maintain the current level of the nation’s deteriorating infrastructure. But the committee’s suggestion that the federal gas tax be raised to pay for the increase has been rebuffed by the White House and House GOP leaders.

The House this week voted to extend the current highway program another four months, anticipating that reaching a consensus on the issue will take time.

Highway spending comes from the highway trust fund, which is financed by the federal gas tax of 18.4 cents per gallon.

The Senate bill also has a complex formula, based on contributions to the trust fund, population growth and highway mileage, to determine how much each state will get from the federal government. Each state is to get from 10 percent to 46 percent more than during the last six-year period, and by 2009, every state is promised that it will get at least 95 cents back for every dollar it puts into the trust fund.

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nevada, a chief sponsor, said the formula was “remarkably fair,” but it met strong opposition from senators from some states that contribute more than they receive.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said the formula was “bizarre and Byzantine,” and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, tried unsuccessfully to shift $9 billion in unallocated money to fast growth states such as Texas, California and Florida.

The Senate also rejected, 78-20, an amendment by Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., which would have reduced the Senate spending to $256 billion, the amount sought by the White House.

Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said that even as a fiscal conservative, he believed in spending more in certain areas such as national defense and infrastructure. “I know that’s what we are supposed to be doing here.”

Supporters of full funding said 35 percent of the 42,000 people killed annually in vehicle crashes die because of road conditions. They also said congestion costs the average peak-hour driver $1,160 a year and the nation $67 billion in wasted fuel and lost productivity.

The Senate bill also includes approval of $15 billion in federal bonds to be sold for use in building roads, bridges and other infrastructure needs.

The Senate accepted an amendment by Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., that would reduce federal funding for those 14 states that don’t have laws banning open containers of alcohol in moving vehicles. Dorgan lost his mother to a drunken driver.

The Senate bill is S. 1072.