THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO
Next Hit Forward Next Document New CR Search
Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help
Contents Display
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I am pleased to join today with my Colleague from Ohio, Mr. Voinovich, to introduce the Truth in Budgeting and Social Security Protection Act of 2002.
[Page: S10688] GPO's PDF
Our government's finances have taken a dire turn in the last year-and-a-half. While in January of last year the Congressional Budget Office projected that, in the fiscal year just ended, fiscal year 2002, the government would run a unified budget surplus of $313 billion, now it projects a unified budget deficit of $157 billion.
And not counting Social Security surpluses, the picture is even worse. While in January of last year CBO projected that for fiscal year 2002, the government would run a surplus of $142 billion, without using Social Security surpluses, now it projects a deficit of $314 billion, not counting Social Security.
We must stop running deficits because they cause the government to use the surpluses of the Social Security Trust Fund for other government purposes, rather than to pay down the debt and help our Nation prepare for the coming retirement of the Baby Boom generation.
And we must stop running deficits because every dollar that we add to the Federal debt is another dollar that we are forcing our children to pay back in higher taxes or fewer government benefits. When the government in this generation chooses to spend on current consumption and to accumulate debt for our children's generation to pay, it does nothing less than rob our children of their own choices. We make our choices to spend on our wants, but we saddle them with debts that they must pay from their tax dollars and their hard work. And the government should not do that.
That is why I am joining with my Colleague from Ohio to introduce this bill to improve the budget process today. We need to strengthen the budget process. We need to do more.
Our bill would: extend the discretionary spending caps and the pay-as-you-go rules for 5 years, strengthen the enforcement of those budget rules, help protect Social Security surpluses, institute biennial budgeting, improve accounting for long-term costs of legislation, improve accounting for federal insurance programs, highlight the full expenses, including interest costs, of spending or tax cuts, and create a new commission to study the budget process.
Together, these budget process proposals would go a long way toward increasing the responsibility of the Federal budget. I hope that between now and the beginning of the next Congress, my Colleagues and observers of the budget process will review these proposals, perhaps build on them, and then join with us in a major effort to strengthen the budget process next year.
We must stop using Social Security surpluses to fund other government programs. We must stop piling up debt for our children to pay off. We must enact major reforms of the budget process.
I hope that this effort will contribute to those ends.
By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself, Mr. CRAPO, and Mr. CRAIG):
S. 3132. A bill to improve the economy and the quality of life for all citizens by authorizing funds for Federal-aid highways, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself, Mr. CRAPO, and Mr. CRAIG):
S. 3133. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make funding available to carry out the Maximum Economic Growth for America Through Highway Funding Act; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce two bills, the Maximum Economic Growth for America Through Highway Funding Act'', or ``MEGA FUND ACT''--Parts one and two.
The MEGA FUND ACT is intended to do exactly what its name suggest, increase Federal investment in our Nation's highway system. That is an important objective. Highway investments create jobs, increase the productivity of our economy, and improve the quality of life for all Americans.
In 1998 Congress passed one of the most successful and bipartisan bills in recent memory, the ``Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century'', better known as ``TEA-21.'' I am honored to have been an author of that piece of legislation.
The MEGA FUND ACT builds on the success of the highway elements of TEA-21, keeping nearly all of its structure in place and increasing funding levels.
There are several major aspects of this legislation.
First, the MEGA FUND ACT significantly increases highway program levels. The principal feature of the bill is its increased funding for the program, something that will help all States and all citizens. Under TEA-21, as amended, the total obligation authority for FY 2003 is $28.485 billion.
Under the 6 years of the MEGA FUND ACT, the comparable program level would grow to $34.839 billion in FY 2004 and to $41.839 billion by FY 2009.
These funding increases will be enabled by enactment of legislation that I have already introduced with Senator CRAPO, S. 2678, the Mega Trust Act and S. 3097, MEGA INNOVATE ACT.
While these program levels represent a substantial increase, the needs of our highway system are even greater. So, the program levels in the bill represent only a down payment on the investment in highways that is needed to improve our economy through commerce and job creation, increase personal mobility and make our roads safer.
Second, the MEGA FUND ACT continues the basic program structure and formulas from TEA-21. The current TEA-21 minimum guarantee formula is extended.
Also, the bill would continue to focus funding on the core programs administered by the States: Interstate Maintenance, National Highway System, Surface Transportation Program, Bridge, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement, and the Minimum Guarantee. These key programs would constitute approximately the same proportion of the overall program as under TEA-21.
Third, a new category is added to aid states in overcoming economic and demographic barriers. The bill would create a new program, at $2 billion annually, to assist States in dealing with certain economic and demographic hardships.
This would be a new type of program, not subject to the minimum guarantee. It is not keyed to specific project types but to types of problems facing States. States with very high growth rates, high population density, low population density, or low per capita incomes, for example, face real challenges.
This different approach lets States facing those problems receive funds and pick the projects. Every one of the 50 States would receive significant funding under this program every year.
The MEGA FUND ACT continues firewalls and improves RABA. One of the great contributions of TEA-21 is that it provides the highway program protection under the budget procedures of Congress.
These ``firewall'' provisions enable our citizens to be confident that highway taxes will be invested in highways, not saved or diverted.
TEA-21 also established Revenue Aligned Budget Authority, or RABA. The principle of RABA is that, if funds available for the highway program exceed expectations, then additional money can be put to work in the highway program. This bill would continue those important provisions with improvements.
One key improvement is the elimination of so-called ``negative RABA.'' Under the bill, there are only automatic upward adjustments in obligation levels under RABA. These adjustments would still take place when the Highway Account balance is financially stronger than initially estimated.
Another key reform would focus RABA calculations on the actual balance in the Highway Account, rather than on annual revenues.
This important reform will help ensure that monies in the Highway Account of the Highway Trust Fund are invested and not allowed to build up to a large balance. Today's RABA did not preclude a build up of funds in the
[Page: S10689] GPO's PDF
The MEGA FUND ACT increased the stability of distributions to states under the allocation programs. The bill includes proposed revisions to several so-called ``allocation'' programs that will increase funding for all States.
Today, large portions of the program funds that are not apportioned to States are distributed on a discretionary basis. This bill would leave portions of the program subject to discretion, but move the allocation programs, collectively, in a general direction that would provide States greater certainty that they will be participating in allocation program funds.
Specifically, the bill makes modest changes to the Intelligent Transportation System, ITS, program and to the Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot, TCSP, program, to ensure that some of those funds find their way into every State.
Another modest change will ensure that each State with a border receives at least some funding under the borders and corridors programs, and that States with significant public lands receive at least some public lands discretionary funding.
Let me say a few things about what is not addressed in this bill. The MEGA FUND ACT sets forth an outline for the highway program. It does not address the transit program that is within the jurisdiction of the Banking Committee, or the highway safety programs within the jurisdiction of the Commerce Committee, or the revenue for the highway program that is within the jurisdiction of the Finance Committee.
My proposals for those issues are in previous bills that I have introduced--MEGA RED TRANS, MEGA SAFE, MEGA STREAM, MEGA TRUST, MEGA INNOVATE and today, MEGA FUND, Part II. Those are important matters that also must be addressed as part of the final overall legislation that will extend and build upon TEA-21.
As for MEGA FUND Part II, this bill although short and simple, actually represents the most important step in any reauthorization bill. MEGA FUND, Part II allows the funding program set forth in MEGA FUND Part I to be spend from the Highway Trust Fund.
Without this important step, Congress can write formulas until Christmas, but no money can actually be sent to the states and spent. The ability to spend this money requires a change to the Internal Revenue Code that makes those Highway Trust Funds available for payment. MEGA FUND PART II takes care of that.
In summary, the MEGA FUND ACT stays close to the successful program structure of TEA-21 and maintains its apportionment formulas. It would significantly increase funding for the program as a whole, continue budgetary firewalls and strengthen RABA, and provide some extra funds to all States through the economic and demographic barriers program and through some innovations in other programs not subject to the minimum guarantee.
I ask unanimous consent that a section-by-section analysis of both bills be printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the additional material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
S. 3132
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Maximum Economic Growth for America Through Highway Funding Act'' or the ``MEGA Fund Act''.
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) PROGRAMS SUBJECT TO MINIMUM GUARANTEE.--The following sums are authorized to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account):
(1) INTERSTATE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM.--For the Interstate maintenance program under section 119 of title 23, United States Code, $4,864,000,000 for fiscal year 2004, $5,020,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, $5,176,000,000 for fiscal year 2006, $5,333,000,000 for fiscal year 2007, $5,645,000,000 for fiscal year 2008, and $5,958,000,000 for fiscal year 2009.
(2) NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM.--For the National Highway System under section 103(b) of title 23, United States Code, $5,836,000,000 for fiscal year 2004, $6,024,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, $6,212,000,000 for fiscal year 2006, $6,399,000,000 for fiscal year 2007, $6,774,000,000 for fiscal year 2008, and $7,150,000,000 for fiscal year 2009.
(3) BRIDGE PROGRAM.--For the bridge program under section 144 of title 23, United States Code, $4,173,000,000 for fiscal year 2004, $4,307,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, $4,442,000,000 for fiscal year 2006, $4,576,000,000 for fiscal year 2007, $4,844,000,000 for fiscal year 2008, and $5,112,000,000 for fiscal year 2009.
(4) SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM.--For the surface transportation program under section 133 of title 23, United States Code, $6,809,000,000 for fiscal year 2004, $7,028,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, $7,247,000,000 for fiscal year 2006, $7,466,000,000 for fiscal year 2007, $7,903,000,000 for fiscal year 2008, and $8,341,000,000 for fiscal year 2009.
(5) CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.--For the congestion mitigation and air quality improvement program under section 149 of title 23, United States Code, $1,654,000,000 for fiscal year 2004, $1,707,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, $1,760,000,000 for fiscal year 2006, $1,813,000,000 for fiscal year 2007, $1,919,000,000 for fiscal year 2008, and $2,026,000,000 for fiscal year 2009.
(6) APPALACHIAN DEVELOPMENT HIGHWAY SYSTEM PROGRAM.--For the Appalachian development highway system program under section 14501 of title 40, United States Code, $450,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
(7) RECREATIONAL TRAILS PROGRAM.--For the recreational trails program under section 206 of title 23, United States Code, $75,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
(8) HIGH PRIORITY PROJECTS PROGRAM.--For the high priority projects program under section 117 of title 23, United States Code, $1,000,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
(b) ASSISTANCE IN OVERCOMING ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC BARRIERS.--For the program to provide assistance in overcoming economic and demographic barriers under section 139 of title 23, United States Code, there is authorized to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) $2,000,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
(c) ADDITIONAL PROGRAMS.--The following sums are authorized to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account):
(1) FEDERAL LANDS HIGHWAYS PROGRAM.--
(A) INDIAN RESERVATION ROADS.--For Indian reservation roads under section 204 of title 23, United States Code, $300,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
(B) PUBLIC LANDS HIGHWAYS.--For public lands highways under section 204 of title 23, United States Code, $350,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
(C) PARK ROADS AND PARKWAYS.--For park roads and parkways under section 204 of title 23, United States Code, $300,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
(D) REFUGE ROADS.--For refuge roads under section 204 of title 23, United States Code, $35,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
(2) NATIONAL CORRIDOR PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.--For the national corridor planning and development program under section 1118 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (23 U.S.C. 101 note; 112 Stat. 161) $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
(3) COORDINATED BORDER INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM.--For the coordinated border infrastructure program under section 1119 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (23 U.S.C. 101 note; 112 Stat. 163) $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
(4) CONSTRUCTION OF FERRY BOATS AND FERRY TERMINAL FACILITIES.--For construction of ferry boats and ferry terminal facilities under section 1064 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (23 U.S.C. 129 note; 105 Stat. 2005) $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
(5) NATIONAL SCENIC BYWAYS PROGRAM.--For the national scenic byways program under section 162 of title 23, United States Code, $30,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
(6) HIGHWAY USE TAX EVASION PROJECTS.--For highway use tax evasion projects under section 143 of title 23, United States Code, $40,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
(7) COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO HIGHWAY PROGRAM.--For the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico highway program under section 1214(r) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 209) $130,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
(d) TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNITY AND SYSTEM PRESERVATION PILOT PROGRAM.--Section 1221(e)(1) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (23 U.S.C. 101 note; 112 Stat. 223) is amended--
(1) by striking ``1999 and'' and inserting ``1999,''; and
(2) by inserting before the period at the end the following: ``, and $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009''.
(e) NATIONAL HISTORIC COVERED BRIDGE PRESERVATION.--Section 1224(d) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 837) is amended by striking ``2003'' and inserting ``2009''.
(f) SAFETY INCENTIVE GRANTS FOR USE OF SEAT BELTS.--Section 157(g)(1) of title 23, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``2002, and'' and inserting ``2002,''; and
(2) by inserting before the period at the end the following: ``, and $115,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009''.
(g) RESEARCH PROGRAMS.--The following sums are authorized to be appropriated out
[Page: S10690] GPO's PDF
(1) SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH.--For carrying out sections 502, 506, 507, and 508 of title 23, United States Code, $103,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
(2) TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM.--For carrying out section 503 of title 23, United States Code, $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.
| <<< | >>> |
THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO
Next Hit Forward Next Document New CR Search
Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help
Contents Display