Departments Of Transportation And Housing And Urban Development, And Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010--Conference Report

Floor Speech

DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2010--CONFERENCE REPORT -- (Senate - December 12, 2009)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the conference report before us, which contains six of the seven remaining appropriations bills. Division D of the conference report contains the Financial Services and General Government appropriations bill. As ranking member of the subcommittee responsible for writing this division, I want to thank Senator Durbin for his leadership and collegiality throughout the past year. Since joining this subcommittee, I have seen Senator Durbin demonstrate the kind of bipartisan cooperation that is the hallmark of the Appropriations Committee. He and I worked in a collaborative fashion to produce a bipartisan bill.

The Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee has jurisdiction over a diverse group of agencies, many of which have a profound impact on the financial stability of our economy and on the lives of most Americans. This appropriations bill is a key part of efforts to restore the stability of, and the public confidence in, America's financial institutions. It makes needed investments to strengthen the Securities and Exchange Commission's ability to enforce rules governing our financial markets and to detect and prosecute fraudulent schemes. It also increases the Federal Trade Commission's capacity to protect consumers from scams and anticompetitive behavior.

Senator Durbin and I share many of the same concerns about the ability of our financial regulatory institutions to protect small investors and market participants. For years, the SEC's funding and staffing levels had declined, even as its oversight responsibilities rapidly increased. As a result, staffing shortages and an environment of lax oversight and enforcement at the SEC contributed to our current financial crisis. Funding shortfalls have hampered the ability of this agency to fulfill its mission of protecting the public through enforcement of securities laws.

We have included a 16-percent increase in funding for the SEC that will help the agency better fulfill its mission by giving it the resources to increase staffing levels and to make information technology upgrades.

The conference report also provides important increases above the President's budget request for the Consumer Product Safety Commission and the Federal Trade Commission. The CPSC protects American consumers from defective and unsafe products, while the FTC protects consumers from unscrupulous marketing scams.

The bill also provides ample funding for the Small Business Administration. Our economic strength and future are tied to the strength of small businesses. The conference report funds important SBA programs like Women's Business Centers, Veterans' Programs, Native American Outreach, and HUBZones above the President's budget request. As a former regional administrator of the SBA, I am particularly supportive of the increase of $16 million over the President's request for the Small Business Development Center Program. Each year, the SBDC network of over 900 service centers provides management and technical assistance to an estimated 1.2 million small business owners and aspiring entrepreneurs.

The conference agreement includes an important provision that protects the due process rights of auto dealers. The auto dealers are essential to the success of the auto manufacturers because the dealers facilitate distribution, sales, and servicing of hundreds of millions of vehicles annually. It is in the best interest of the public to have a competitive and viable automobile distribution network throughout the country, including in urban, suburban,
and rural areas. It is also in the interest of the local economies, the national economy, and our economic recovery to preserve jobs at successful small businesses.

Senator Durbin and I share similar views about the funding priorities for most of the agencies within this bill. One of the few areas where he and I disagree is the DC school voucher program. We both respect one another's different positions on this issue, but I am disappointed that this bill effectively ends this successful program.

The DC Opportunity Scholarship Program has provided additional educational options for some of the District's most at-risk, low-income children who had previously attended some of the lowest-performing schools in the country.

Sadly, DC's public schools continue to underperform despite a per-pupil expenditure rate that is the third highest in the Nation. Experts have carefully studied the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program and concluded that the educational success of the program's participants in reading has outpaced those in DC public schools.

Of the $75.4 million for DC public schools in this bill, $42.2 million is to improve the District's public schools, $20 million is to support DC public charter schools, and $13.2 million is for Opportunity Scholarships. Unfortunately, the conference report contains language that would only allow currently enrolled students to remain in the program. No new students would be permitted, despite the fact that the $7,500 per student cost for scholarship children is less than one-half the $15,511 per student cost for DC public schools.

In May, Senator Lieberman and I held a hearing in the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee during which we heard compelling success stories of current and former participants in the program. Their testimony helped to highlight the real world implications of discontinuing the program. The fear about this program ending was poignantly stated by a little girl wearing a T-shirt asking: ``What About Me?''

By all accounts, students are succeeding and thriving in their scholarship schools, and their parents are overwhelmingly satisfied with the education that their children are receiving. So I do not see the wisdom of blocking new students from participating in this successful program.

I am disappointed that the full Senate never had an opportunity to take up, debate, and amend the Financial Services and General Government appropriations bill when it was reported out of committee.

This is unfortunate, especially since Senator Durbin and I worked hard to write a bipartisan bill which had overwhelming support in the committee. The Senate has had time to consider all 12 Appropriations bills. Chairman Inouye and Vice Chairman COCHRAN both worked hard to complete and report all 12 bills out of committee by September. For the record, the Financial Services bill was reported out of committee on July 9.

Next year we must return to regular order so that all Senators can have an opportunity to debate these important bills.

I thank the Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee staff: Marianne Upton, Diana Hamilton, Melissa Petersen, and Richard Burkard with the majority; and Mary Dietrich and Rachel Jones with the minority.

Turning to Division A of the conference report, I would like to speak in support of a provision I authored. This provision will increase safety, save energy, and decrease vehicle emissions by creating a 1-year pilot project to allow trucks weighing up to 100,000 pounds to travel on Maine's interstates. This provision also requires an analysis by the U.S. Department of Transportation and the State of Maine of provision's impact on safety, road and bridge durability, energy use, and commerce.

By way of background, let me explain why this pilot project is needed. Under current law, trucks weighing 100,000 pounds are allowed to travel on the portion of Interstate 95 designated as the Maine Turnpike, which runs from Maine's border with New Hampshire to Augusta, our capital city. At Augusta, the Turnpike designation ends, but I-95 proceeds another 200 miles north to Houlton. At Augusta, however, heavy trucks must exit the modern four-lane, limited-access highway and are forced onto smaller, two-lane secondary roads that pass through cities, towns, and villages. The same problem occurs for Maine's other Interstates like I-295 out of Portland and I-395 in the Bangor-Brewer area.

Diverting trucks onto these secondary roads raises critical safety concerns. In fact, there have been several accidents, some of which have tragically resulted in death, which have occurred after these large trucks were diverted onto secondary roads and through smaller communities. For example, In May 2007, a 17-year-old high school student from Hampden, ME, lost her life when her car was struck by a heavy truck on Route 9. The truck driver could not see the car turning onto that two-lane road as he rounded a corner. Interstate 95 runs less than three-quarters of a mile away, but Federal law prevented the truck from using that modern, divided highway, a highway that was designed to provide ample views of the road ahead.

A year earlier, Lena Gray, an 80-year-old resident of Bangor, was struck and killed by a tractor-trailer as she was crossing a downtown street. Again, that accident would not have occurred had that truck been allowed to use I-95, which runs directly through Bangor.

While improving safety is the key objective, a uniform truck weight limit of 100,000 pounds on Maine's interstate highways also would reduce highway miles, as well as the travel time necessary to transport freight through Maine, resulting in economic and environmental benefits. Moreover, Maine's extensive network of local roads would be better preserved without the wear and tear of heavy truck traffic.

Interstate 95 north of Augusta, ME, where trucks are currently limited at 80,000 pounds, was originally designed and built for military freight movements to Loring Air Force Base at weights much heavier than 100,000 pounds. Raising the truck weight limit would keep heavy trucks on the interstates, which are designed to carry more weight than the rural State roads.

Current Maine law requires that vehicles carrying up to 100,000 pounds on state roads be six-axle combination vehicles. Current Federal law requires that vehicles carrying 80,000 pounds be five-axle. Contrary to erroneous assumptions, six-axle 100,000 pound vehicles are not longer, wider or taller than the five-axle 80,000 pound vehicles. The six-axle 100,000 pound vehicles, which include an additional set of brakes, allow for greater weight distribution thereby not increasing road wear and tear. Further, stopping distances and safety are in no way diminished, and preliminary data from studies conducted by the Maine State Police support this statement. That is why Maine's Commissioner of Public Safety, the Maine State Troopers Association, and the Maine Association of Police all support this pilot project.

A higher weight limit in Maine will not only preserve our rapidly deteriorating roads, but will provide economic relief to an already struggling trucking industry. Trucks weighing up to 100,000 pounds are permitted on interstate highways in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and New York as well as the Canadian Provinces of New Brunswick and Quebec. Maine truck drivers and the businesses they serve are at a competitive disadvantage.

Last year, I met with Kurt Babineau, a small business owner and second generation logger and trucker from Maine. Like so many of our truckers, Kurt has been struggling with the increasing costs of running his operation. All of the pulpwood his business produces is transported to Verso Paper in Jay, ME, a 165-mile roundtrip. This would be a considerably shorter trip if his trucks were permitted at 100,000 pounds to remain on Interstate 95. Instead, his trucks must travel a less direct route through cities and towns. Kurt estimated that permitting his trucks to travel on all of Interstate 95 would save him 118 gallons of fuel each week. At last year's diesel cost of approximately $4.50 a gallon, and including savings from his drivers spending less time on the trip, he could have saved more than $700 a week, and more than $33,000 and 5,600 gallons of fuel annually. These savings would not only be beneficial to Kurt's bottom line, but also to his employees, his customers, and to our nation as we look for ways to decrease the overall fuel consumption.

An increase of the Federal truck weight limit in Maine is widely supported by public officials throughout Maine, including the Governor, the Maine Association of Police, and the Maine Department of Public Safety, which includes the State Bureau of Highway Safety, the Maine State Police, and the Bureau of Emergency Communications. The Maine Legislature also has expressed its support for the change having passed resolutions over the past several years calling on Congress to raise the Federal truck weight limit to 100,000 pounds in Maine. I look forward to passage of this important provision, which has been long awaited in my State.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source