Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users

SAFE, ACCOUNTABLE, FLEXIBLE, EFFICIENT TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT: A LEGACY FOR USERS

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise to discuss the conference report that accompanied the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act reauthorization bill. The Senate adopted this measure earlier today and I voted in support of it.

I would like to begin by thanking the principal Senate authors of this important legislation: Senator INHOFE and Senator JEFFORDS of the Environment and Public Works Committee; Senator SHELBY and Senator SARBANES of the Banking Committee; Senator GRASSLEY and Senator BAUCUS of the Finance Committee; and Senator STEVENS and Senator INOUYE of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee. I commend them and their staffs for their hard work over these past 3 years in crafting this legislation.

I would also like to thank my colleagues who served on the conference committee during these past 2 months. Reconciling legislative differences with the other body over a bill of this large, complex and important nature is no easy task; I appreciate all of their hard work.

The conference report that passed the Senate funds our Nation's transportation infrastructure at $286.4 billion between fiscal year 2005 and fiscal year 2009. This includes all of our Interstate highways, the National Highway System, secondary roadways, intercity passenger rail, local transit systems and transportation safety programs. Taken together, these elements form one of the most essential factors that determine the well-being of our country and our country's national economy: ensuring the safe and efficient passage of people and goods.

The conference report provided $233.8 billion for our Nation's roadways. Included in this amount was $25 billion for the maintenance and expansion of our Interstate highway system, $30.5 billion for the maintenance and expansion of our larger National Highway System, $21.6 billion for the replacement of defunct or obsolete bridges, $32.5 billion for discretionary projects under the Surface Transportation Program and $5 billion for highway safety programs. Out of these funds the conference report provided my home State of Connecticut with nearly $2 billion between fiscal year 2006 and fiscal year 2009--a 19 percent increase over the original authorization bill's amount. Included in these resources were on average $51 million a year for Interstate highway maintenance, $48 million a year for roads included in the National Highway System, $91 million a year for bridge replacement, $61 million a year for large and small-scale road improvement projects under the Surface Transportation Program and $7 million a year for highway safety programs. Beyond these resources the bill provided over $160 million for several dozen highway initiatives across Connecticut. All of these initiatives, from the reconstruction of I-95, municipal streets and bridges to multi-use recreational trails, stand to improve the quality of life in the communities and regions where they are taking place.

The conference report also provided $52.6 billion for our Nation's transit systems. Out of these funds the report provided Connecticut--a State heavily- dependent on mass transit services--with nearly $485 million between fiscal year 2006 and fiscal year 2009--a 33 percent increase over the original authorization bill's amount. In addition to these resources the report included nearly $150 million for local transit agencies across Connecticut to improve their infrastructure and services, thereby working to alleviate congestion that continues to plague my State's roadways.

Overall I believe that the resources provided in this conference report will help improve our Nation's transportation infrastructure over the next 4 years. They will allow for critical maintenance and capital improvement projects to go forward on our roadways; they will allow for dangerous overpasses to be replaced; they will allow for transit systems to meet more efficiently the needs of their riders; and they will allow for a greater degree of safety on our roads and rails. Nevertheless, I would be remiss if I did not take a moment to discuss some of the shortcomings I see in this conference report--shortcomings that, in my view, threaten to undermine the very goals this legislation tried to accomplish.

First, I do not believe that the level of investment provided in this conference report is fully adequate to meet the growing needs of our transportation infrastructure. When the Senate originally debated this legislation, I was pleased to support a bipartisan measure that provided $295 billion between fiscal year 2004 and fiscal year 2009. This funding level was considerably higher than the House level of $283 billion and the Bush administration's original recommendation of $256 billion.

Therefore, when the conference report was completed earlier this week, I was disappointed to learn that the conference committee provided $286.4 billion--a figure only marginally higher than the House figure and significantly lower than the Senate figure. I have been told by the Connecticut Department of Transportation that this level of investment is barely adequate to keep pace with expected inflation over next 4 years and wholly inadequate to meet the growing crises facing our transportation systems both in Connecticut and across the country.

Second, I remain concerned over how the levels of guaranteed funding for highways and transit were determined in this conference report. Earlier this year, I strongly opposed a unilateral move by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee to reduce transit's share in the Senate bill from the previously-negotiated ratio of 18.82 percent to 18.18 percent. Unfortunately, this new ratio prevailed in the Senate version of the bill. In conference it was raised to 18.57 percent. While this conference agreement is higher than the Senate version's ratio and higher than the ratio in the original authorization bill, it still underfunds transit activities by $700 million compared to the original agreed-upon ratio in the Senate.

Highway and transit interests should not be working against each other. They should be working together. The best transportation systems in the world are those that feature a sound, safe, and efficient balance between various modes of transportation. Disrupting that balance by favoring one mode over another ultimately causes road congestion, unreliable transit service, and higher transportation costs--three problems that many parts of this country, including Connecticut, are experiencing today. If we are to overcome these problems and support a balanced, safe, and efficient transportation network in this country, then we must adequately and equally invest in all modes, whether they are highways, transit, airports, or seaways. We must recognize that each mode is an important and integral part of a larger transportation network.

From reviewing the funding allocations provided for both transit and highways in this bill, it concerns me that inadequate resources are going to areas of the country, such as Connecticut, where the transportation needs are the greatest. I find this rationale inconsistent with the way our national government usually addresses matters of national significance that affect particular regions of our country. When a drought plagues a certain part of this country, we always stand ready to provide drought relief to the affected States. When a hurricane slams into our coastline, we always stand ready to provide emergency disaster relief to the affected States. When farmers are experiencing financial difficulty, we always stand ready to provide them with vital subsidies. And when forest fires burn mercilessly over hundreds of square miles, we always stand ready to provide emergency assistance to the affected States. Why then, when key components of our national transportation system are plagued by aging and obsolete infrastructure, do we not seem to stand ready to provide adequate assistance to the most affected States?

A transportation system in crisis is more than a transportation problem; it's an economic problem. Without a balanced, safe, and efficient transportation system, goods cannot be delivered to their destinations in a timely manner, services cannot be rendered efficiently, and people cannot get to their jobs conveniently. Over time, the environment worsens, the quality of life declines, and the region suffers as a whole.

Today, the transportation system serving Connecticut and the surrounding region is in need of assistance. In Connecticut alone, a rapidly aging infrastructure routinely causes significant disruptions to our transportation network--disruptions that have had a negative impact on the region and country as a whole.

The busiest commuter rail line in the country is located in Connecticut. It runs over 70 miles between New Haven and New York City--carrying over 33 million riders annually along our southwest coast. Last year, a combination of cold weather and rapidly aging rail cars--many of which are a decade or more beyond their operational lifetimes--caused one-third of the line's fleet to be taken out of service for emergency maintenance. In fact, about 37 percent of the fleet was taken out of service for most of last February--230 cars out of the 800-car fleet. Needless to say, this occurrence put an enormous strain on thousands of commuters who rely on the service daily to get to and from work, travel to and from school, and to see their families.

The nation's seventh busiest highway is also located in Connecticut. Our segment of Interstate 95 is a major artery for commercial vehicles and other interstate traffic. In March of 2004, an accident caused an overpass in Bridgeport to collapse. While there were thankfully no fatalities, the accident did force the closure of Interstate 95 for 4 days until a temporary overpass could be built. Needless to say, this closure created enormous burdens on the already beleaguered highway and transit systems in Connecticut, New York, and New England. It also created an adverse economic effect that was felt far beyond our region as people and goods were unable to reach their important destinations on time.

These are the types of incidents that speak to an acute transportation need in Connecticut and in our region of the country. These are the types of incidents that should be considered closely when vital transportation resources are being allocated in a reauthorization bill. It is my hope that Congress in future years will take these considerations more into account when drafting transportation authorization measures. The problems facing my State and others will not go away on their own.

In closing I thank again the authors, managers and conferees of this legislation. I look forward to working with them and all of my colleagues on future initiatives that seek to ensure the long-term well-being of our Nation's transportation system.

http://thomas.loc.gov/