At press time debate continues to take place on the Senate floor regarding the safety provisions for Mexican motor carriers included in the $60 billion Senate version of the FY 2002 transportation spending bill. While the Thursday cloture vote to suspend debate on the safety provisions eliminated a filibuster threat, opponents of the provisions are using all procedural options available to stretch out debate on the bill. The extended debate on the transportation bill is frustrating Senate Democratic leaders' efforts to move four spending bills before next week's August recess.

President Bush, formerly the Governor of Texas, has called for full compliance with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) where Mexico-based trucks are involved, and he has threatened to veto the bill. The current approach to such trucks - adopted in the early 1990s in response to safety concerns about their free travel throughout the U.S. - is generally to disallow such movements beyond a zone 20 miles from the U.S.-Mexico border. Federal checks have found a higher percentage of the Mexico-based trucks have safety problems than their U.S. counterparts, and have found some trucks traveling throughout the United States in violation of the 20-mile limit.

Bush has set a goal of Jan. 1 to allow Mexican trucks to drive throughout the U.S. He and GOP allies in the Senate say the pending Senate bill, as currently written, will keep that deadline from being met and violate NAFTA. Supporters of tighter safety standards say the measure would pass muster under the trade pact.

Feelings ran strong on the controversial legislation after the Senate Minority Leader accused majority Democrats in the chamber of an "anti-Hispanic" attitude, according to the Washington Post.

"It bothers me that there's an anti-Mexican, anti-Hispanic, anti-NAFTA attitude among Democrats that says, 'We don't really want to allow Mexican trucks to come into this country,'" said Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott (R-MS).

Senate Majority Leader Thomas Daschle (D-SD) denied that is the motivation among his fellow party members, and said he was "disappointed with remarks of that kind." He challenged Lott to document his allegations.

Though the Democratic leadership in the Senate mustered enough support votes to break an attempted filibuster by Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Phil Gramm (R-TX), the two backers of freer Mexican truck access suggested they are not finished with parliamentary maneuvering.

With proposed changes by McCain and Gramm blocked, the Senate bill now calls for inspections of Mexican trucks and drivers, audits of Mexican trucking firms and more staff and equipment at 27 U.S. border stations that check incoming trucks' safety.

GOP leaders have noted the comments of one Mexican official that if access to Mexico- based trucks continues to be restricted, Mexico might retaliate by curbing U.S. imports into Mexico of high-fructose corn syrup, a food and beverage sweetener.

Amendments Approved

During debate on the spending bill this week the Senate approved a number of amendments, including:

• by Sens. Harry Reid (D-NV), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) and Paul Sarbanes (D- MD), requiring a study of the hazards and risks associate with the transportation of hazardous materials, the infrastructure improvements needed to prevent accidents, and the preparedness of federal, state and local officials in responding to accidents. The amendment stems from the freight rail accident which occurred in Baltimore;
• by Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL), to ensure that funding earmarked for Intelligent Transportation System projects comply with the spirit of the goals and purposes set forth in TEA-21. While calling the ITS projects earmarked in the FY 2002 Senate transportation appropriations bill "less onerous" than the FY 2001 bill, Graham expressed "grave concerns" about earmarking for a developing program;
• by Sen. Max Cleland (D-GA), directing the state of Georgia to expedite funding by giving priority consideration to 5 intersections listed in State Farm's report on the most dangerous intersections in the U.S.

Currently, 2.5 cents of the ethanol tax is being deposited in the General Fund for deficit reduction. Legislation is expected to be introduced in the Senate and House to transfer the 2.5 cents from the General Fund to the Highway Trust Fund, which if enacted, is estimated to equal $400 million in additional revenue into the Highway Account each year.

Sen. Baucus said his bill, titled the Highway Trust Fund Recovery Act (HTFRA) of 2001, may be introduced by next week. The bill may eventually be wrapped into a comprehensive energy tax bill, which will be considered in September. To date, five Senators have said they will co-sponsor the bill, including Sens. Tom Harkin (D-IA), Robert Smith (R- NH); George Voinovich (R-OH); Trent Lott (R-MS); and John Warner (R-VA).

This week Sen. Baucus sent out a "Dear Colleague" letter soliciting additional co- sponsors for the proposal. "I ask you to join me as a sponsor of a bill that will help to put trust back in the Highway Trust Fund," Baucus wrote. "By directing 2.5 cents from the sale of gasohol to the Highway Trust Fund, we can begin to alleviate a growing problem - loss of Trust Fund revenues."

Rep. Ron Portman (R-OH) is reportedly readying a similar version of the Baucus bill in the House of Representatives. He is expected to send out a "Dear Colleague" letter next week.

Impact on Tax Revenues Eyed

Concern about the potential impact of the ethanol on the Highway Trust Fund is mounting, as states move to ban the additive MTBE because of its pollution of groundwater. To date eleven states have moved to restrict or ban the use of MTBE. Elimination of MTBE as a fuel oxygenate would leave ethanol as the only viable replacement in reformulated gasoline.

The Clean Air Act mandates the use of reformulated gasoline in clean air non-attainment areas. Until recently MTBE constituted 85 percent of the market for reformulated gasoline. Elimination of the additive is expected to double the demand for ethanol, with California alone requiring 580 million gallons annually. Because of the reduced tax paid for ethanol fuels analysts indicate that this alone would translate into a loss of approximately $458 million annually to the Highway Trust Fund.

Appearing before the Subcommittee on Wednesday, Warrington -- Amtrak's President and CEO -- contended that the railroad is making solid financial progress. Noting that Amtrak has increased both its ridership and its revenue for the past four years, he told subcommittee members that "Amtrak is trying to work smarter and better. We=ve improved our services - by introducing Acela high-speed service in the Northeast, and new or expanded service in other parts of the country." Acela is the brand name for Amtrak's new trains in the Boston-Washington corridor.

Warrington also expressed optimism that Amtrak will attain its congressionally mandated goal of operational self-sufficiency by the close of 2002. He noted that the Amtrak is looking at streamlining and restructuring its entire operation, including possible reduction in personnel.

A 1997 federal law requires Amtrak to be operationally self-sufficient by December 2, 2002. Failure to meet the goal could lead to Amtrak's liquidation.

Department of Transportation Inspector General Kenneth Mead voiced concerns that Amtrak would not meet the December 2002 deadline. Mead said growth in Amtrak's expenses continues to outpace its increases in revenue. Most notable among the railroad's expenses, Mead said, is interest payments on Amtrak's expanding debt. In 1994, interest payments totaled $24 million while in 2002, interest payments are expected to reach $200 million.

Also appearing before the Subcommittee was JayEtta Hecker, Director of Physical Infrastructure Issues at the General Accounting Office. According to Hecker, "the outlook for [Amtrak] achieving operational self-sufficiency is dim. Amtrak has moved just $83 million closer to operational self-sufficiency in the last six years. By December 2002 - just 17 months from now - Amtrak must make another $281 million in financial improvements."

In addition to Amtrak's difficulty in reaching its sufficiency goals, Hecker said, Amtrak's capital needs are not being fully funded. She contended that the level of federal financial assistance that would be required to maintain and expand the nation's intercity passenger rail network exceeds the amounts that have been provided in recent years. Amtrak's capital and investment plans call for an infusion of $30 billion in federal money over the next 20 years.

Hecker pointed out that H.R. 2329, the High-Speed Rail Investment Act of 2001, would help develop high-speed rail corridors, as called for in Amtrak's investment plan. If enacted, H.R. 2329 would provide $12 billion over a ten year period by issuing bonds to help fund high- speed rail projects.

David D. King, North Carolina's Deputy Secretary for Transportation, expressed his support for H.R. 2329. In written testimony, King stated that the bond legislation would provide "a first step toward meeting the test of providing a stable, long-term, dedicated funding resource." He added that "H.R. 2329 maintains the integrity of TEA-21 by protecting the highway trust fund." King stressed Amtrak's importance in the national transportation network.

Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), the acting chairman of the Senate Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee, said that this week's hearing was the first in a series on the nation's infrastructure needs. Monday's hearing focused on the federal role in transportation infrastructure and featured the mayors of New Orleans, Atlanta, Las Vegas and Washington, D.C.

Responding to a question from Ranking Member James Inhofe (R-OK) on the streamlining provisions of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), Mayor Bill Campbell said there has been a "chasm between the intent of the act and reality." Campbell said that while cities have continued to fight for a stronger voice in transportation funding decisions, in some states most of the funding is absorbed by the state transportation agency.

Campbell added that TEA-21 promised more local control, which has not been realized because of difficulties in getting access to transportation funding. He said further clarifying amendments were needed.

Reid said that the subcommittee would look into the underserved needs of municipalities. "We need to start focusing attention on our nation's cities," he said. Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) maintained that an effort must be undertaken to "get a grasp" on the totality of the nation's infrastructure investment needs.

"Work zones are tangible evidence that America takes care of its infrastructure," Carlson told the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. But increasing road work expands the window of risk, even more for drivers and passengers than for workers, he said. One key approach "is to take steps - through public information campaigns and tough, well-publicized enforcement - to change driver behavior."

Carlson outlined the steps states are taking to hold down work-zone fatalities in the wake of increased highway work under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, which has necessitated hundreds of work zones in virtually every state. In addition to improving the geometric design of work zones - protecting motorists and workers alike - and investing in state-of-the-art safety equipment, states are embarking on new research into the hardware and also into changing motorists' attitudes about work zones.

For example, Carlson noted, most drivers surveyed assume the greatest risk in work zones is to workers - and are stunned to learn that about four out of five fatalities in work zones involve drivers or passengers, not workers. States are building public affairs campaigns out of "carrot and stick" approaches that sometimes pull on drivers' heartstrings, but in other cases instill fear of police action such as heightened enforcement of speeding. Many states also strongly increase fines for moving violations committed in work zones, he said.

"High-quality programs, of course, cost money. Funds are needed not only for breakaway signs and life-saving barriers around work zones - the hardware -- but also to convince the 'hard heads' behind the wheel that it's their lives on the line," Carlson said.

Some members of the committee asked those testifying whether uniform federal law would improve work zone design or contracting practices. Carlson said one size does not fit all, particularly in the contracting area, where the use of "unit" or "lump-sum" pricing is a decision best left to states to make on a case-by-case basis.

This is the third time this year that OPEC has cut back on production, according to the July 26 Washington Post, as a result of declining demand from world markets. The production quota is now set at 23.3 million barrels a day, the lowest level since April 1999, and some 3.5 million barrels less per day since January.

Planners say the first toll increase ever proposed for the 16-mile road, which connects Fairfax with Loudoun County, would provide an incentive for people to sign up for the car- mounted transponder system, known as "Smart Tag." About 53 percent of drivers on the toll road use the newer technology, and VDOT is aiming for 80 percent.

Some elected officials quickly branded the proposal unfair, noting that many drivers on the toll road are only occasional users or simply prefer to make the transaction in cash.

Drivers currently pay 50 cents at a main toll booth, plus another 25 or 35 cents at exit or entrance ramps. Currently the tolls are generating $38 million annually, with a $7 million surplus beyond what it takes to pay off bonded debt and maintenance on the road.

Fairfax County Supervisor Stuart Mendelsohn told the Post, "They ought to be doing a reduction for those who use (Smart Tag), not increasing it for those who don't. That would cause an absolute war."

However, Thomas Farley, who heads the Virginia DOT's Northern Virginia office, said reducing the toll for Smart Tag users would not be an option because revenues might drop below what's needed to cover the road's debt. The proposal is not without precedent, he said.

"The issue here isn't the toll or to make more money. It's whether we can make better use of technology and help move traffic along the corridor," Farley said. "I think there would be wide support for that kind of traffic-reducing proposal."

He noted that a 1990 decision by the Commonwealth Transportation Board requires surplus funds to be used for highway and transit projects along the corridor -- not for paying off bonds early. In the past 10 years, surplus funds have been used to add HOV and travel lanes to the road. The board would have to approve the differential toll proposal.

Druhan was widely known on Capitol Hill and within the rail and motor-carrier industry when he came to AASHTO in 1979. His first career of 20 years was with the General Accounting Office, where he was responsible for reviewing various foreign federal aid programs world wide. Moving to Capitol Hill in 1966, Druhan worked for seven years with the Special Subcommittee on Investigations and then became Staff Director of the Transportation and Commerce Subcommittee, the committee solely responsible for rail legislation, a position he held until 1976. During that time, the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976 and the Rail Transportation Improvement Act of 1976 were enacted.

At AASHTO, Druhan was the mainstay of AASHTO's freight transportation committees, providing expertise on rail, motor-carrier and water-transportation issues. He was active in AASHTO's efforts to devise uniform motor-carrier regulations across the states, and to examine the feasibility of a weight-distance tax.