Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2004, Part V

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EXTENSION ACT OF 2004, PART V -- (House of Representatives - September 30, 2004)

Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 811 and ask for its immediate consideration.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reynolds), my good friend, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, this rule and the underlying bill are for an 8-month extension of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st century, TEA 21. It marks the sixth extension of that landmark legislation since it expired last year and reveals, once again, the rank and utter incompetence of the Republican leadership to get a transportation reauthorization bill. This extension, while absolutely necessary to keep the Nation's highway and transportation agencies running is, simply stated, another glaring failure of the Republican leadership in this session of Congress.

Mr. Speaker, let us pause for a moment to remind everyone of the facts. They are in charge of the White House. They are in charge of the Senate, and they are in charge of the House of Representatives. The transportation reauthorization bill is one of the most strongly supported, popular and bipartisan measures to be considered in the House. The programs authorized in this bill touch every American and affect their lives every single day. There are probably only a handful of Members who do not want to see a transportation bill reauthorized for another 6 years. Nevertheless, this President and the Republican leadership, which have presided over a historic loss of more than 2 million American jobs, are stonewalling a transportation bill which will create 47,000 new jobs for every $1 billion of investment.

The refusal of this leadership to work in good faith with the other body is costing our economy precious jobs, while the condition of our roads and bridges continue to deteriorate. Instead of providing real leadership, the majority party and the President have let the conferees twist in the wind while we continue to pass short-term extension after short-term extension of these important programs. The States, which we were elected to represent, are left to guess at when we will have a transportation bill, as they endeavor to undertake critically important public works projects. According to the American Association of State Highway Transportation officials, 33 States say that a short-term extension rather than enactment of a 6-year bill will mean $2.1 billion in project delays and the loss of over 90,000 jobs.

Now, I understand that the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) and everybody on the committee are doing the best they can given the Draconian allocations set by the Republican leadership. The members of that committee, the bipartisan cooperation of that committee deserves to be praised by all of us, and it should be an example to the rest of this body. I support these extensions because we cannot afford to let these programs expire. But it is important to know that the leadership of this House and the administration have not done all they can to ensure that the full reauthorization is completed and signed before the programs expire.

Mr. Speaker, as I said before, the President is the leader of his party. Where is the leadership? The transportation bill will provide every American with the roads and bridges that they need. It will provide economic stimulus across the country with various projects that are written into it. And, most importantly, this bill will create new jobs at a time when new jobs are desperately needed. But instead of looking out for the American public, the leadership and the President have held on to their ideology to the detriment of this country.

So, Mr. Speaker, I want to say again that while I support this extension, I am disappointed and discouraged by the way the leadership has so profoundly mismanaged this process, and I hope that we can do better next year.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank my colleague, the gentleman from New York, for his comments. I always enjoy listening to his interesting spin on things.

The fact of the matter is, the problem is not with the authorizers. The authorizers have done a great job. As I said, we need to praise, in a bipartisan way, the members of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. But the problem is with the leadership, and the problem is with the White House who is insisting on unbelievably low numbers for the reauthorization of this bill.

As a result of not having a 6-year bill, there are a number of States that have put projects on hold, and that means that these projects are not being built. They are not going forward. The jobs are not being created. We should have done better.

We are all going to support this extension. We have to. We have no choice. This is the right thing to do. I am just lamenting the fact that we should have had a 6-year bill, and I regret that the White House and the leadership were not able to get together and make this a priority, especially at a time when there is record job loss.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), a member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Let me be clear to everybody here, because the gentleman from New York keeps on talking about this in terms of a "yes" or "no" vote. We are all going to vote for it because there is no other choice. Nobody is opposing the extension here. What we are simply saying is they have mismanaged this process.

He talks about jobs that could be maintained. Well, we want to not only maintain jobs, we want to create them.

Let me repeat to him, according to the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials, 33 States say that a short-term extension rather than enactment of a 6-year bill will mean $2.1 billion in project delays and the loss of over 90,000 jobs. If we did our job right in this House, then this would not be the case. There would be more jobs coming.

I would remind the gentleman, again, I am pretty sure that one party, one party, controls the House and controls the Senate and controls the White House. Contrary to what the gentleman says, this is not about finger-pointing to point out that you guys cannot get your act together.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Davis).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time, and let me just conclude for our side here by saying that this debate is not about whether or not we are going to support this extension. We are all going to support it. That is not the issue.

What we are expressing here is a frustration that we do not have a 6-year bill. And contrary to what the gentleman from New York says, most transportation planners that I have talked to, and I am sure he has talked to, if he has listened to them, would tell him that a 6-year bill is better than an 8-month extension for this reason: that many transportation programs require long-term planning. It is not a quick one-time investment. With an 8-month extension there is not the certainty of what happens after 8 months.

My point earlier was simply that this is another missed opportunity by this leadership. The Republicans control the House, they control the Senate, and they control the White House. Surely, surely they could have worked out a deal. Surely they could have helped accomplish a 6-year extension. That is what the frustration is on this side.

Our Governors and our mayors and our town managers and our city planners are all looking for a long-term guarantee of funding, and they are not going to get that. They are going to get an 8-month extension. And, yes, that is better than nothing. We need to keep this funding going. But the fact is they cannot plan long term; and as a result of that, we are not going to create as many jobs. The future for some of the economic development that we all hoped for that will come from some of these projects will have to be put on hold, and I think that is a shame.

So I want to commend the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, the chairman, the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), and the ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), and all the Members who have worked hard in a bipartisan way. I only wish that their spirit of cooperation would have translated to the leadership of this House and the other body and the White House. We should be doing so much better than this. We should be passing a 6-year extension right now.

So I urge my colleagues to vote for the rule, and I urge them to vote for the extension; and, hopefully, we will, sooner rather than later, get a 6-year bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT