<DOC>
[1997 Senate Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:45559.wais]
S. Hrg. 105-33
TESTIMONY OF RODNEY E. SLATER
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
NOMINATED TO BE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION
__________
JANUARY 31, 1997
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
40-510 CC WASHINGTON : 1997
_______________________________________________________________________
For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office
Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC
20402
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS
JOHN H. CHAFEE, Rhode Island, Chairman
JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia MAX BAUCUS, Montana
ROBERT SMITH, New Hampshire DANIEL PATRICK MOYNIHAN, New York
DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Idaho FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma HARRY REID, Nevada
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming BOB GRAHAM, Florida
CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut
TIM HUTCHINSON, Arkansas BARBARA BOXER, California
WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado RON WYDEN, Oregon
JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
Steven J. Shimberg, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
J. Thomas Sliter, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
OPENING STATEMENTS
Baucus, Hon. Max, U.S. Senator from the State of Montana......... 3
Chafee, Hon. John H., U.S. Senator from the State of Rhode Island 3
Graham, Hon. Bob, U.S. Senator from the State of Florida......... 14
Hutchinson, Hon. Tim, U.S. Senator from the State of Arkansas.... 1
Kempthorne, Hon. Dirk, U.S. Senator from the State of Idaho...... 6
Lautenberg, Hon. Frank R., U.S. Senator from the State of New
Jersey......................................................... 11
Lieberman, Hon. Joseph I., U.S. Senator from the State of
Connecticut.................................................... 12
Moynihan, Hon. Daniel Patrick, U.S. Senator from the State of New
York........................................................... 13
Sessions, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator from the State of Alabama...... 7
Smith, Hon. Robert, U.S. Senator from the State of New Hampshire. 8
Letter from Leon Kenison, New Hampshire Department of
Transportation............................................. 10
Warner, Hon. John W., U.S. Senator from the Commonwealth of
Virginia....................................................... 5
Wyden, Hon. Ron, U.S. Senator from the State of Oregon........... 6
WITNESS
Slater, Hon. Rodney E., Secretary-Designate, Department of
Transportation................................................. 14
Prepared statement........................................... 38
Responses to additional questions from:
Senator Baucus........................................... 57
Senator Chafee........................................... 47
Senator Inhofe........................................... 52
Senator Kempthorne....................................... 51
Senator Lieberman........................................ 58
Senator Sessions......................................... 54
(iii)
TESTIMONY OF RODNEY E. SLATER
----------
FRIDAY, JANUARY 31, 1997
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m. in room
406, Senate Dirksen Building, Hon. John H. Chafee (chairman of
the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Chafee, Warner, Smith, Kempthorne,
Hutchinson, Sessions, Baucus, Moynihan, Lautenberg, Graham,
Lieberman, and Wyden.
Senator Chafee. Will the committee please come to order?
This is an informational hearing to receive testimony from
Mr. Rodney Slater, who has been nominated by the President to
be Secretary of the Department of Transportation.
We're delighted that a Member of this committee, Senator
Hutchinson, is here to introduce Mr. Slater to the committee
and I am going to withhold on my opening statement until
Senator Hutchinson completes his introduction.
Senator we welcome you here and proceed.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TIM HUTCHINSON, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE
STATE OF ARKANSAS
Senator Hutchinson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'll say this morning again how glad I am to be able to
serve with you on this committee after serving on the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure in the House.
I'm extremely pleased to have the opportunity to introduce
somebody I admire and respect, and somebody who has been a good
friend over the years. I'm glad I can call him a friend.
Rodney Slater is the President's nominee for Secretary of
the Department of Transportation. I'm sure you may know that
Senator Bumpers, Senator Warner, Congressman Hutchinson, my
brother, and Congressman Marion Berry, and I introduced Rodney
on Wednesday before the Senate Commerce Committee, where Rodney
was presented as the nominee of the President. I am pleased to
note that the hearing on Wednesday went smoothly and I'm
confident that today's hearing will strike a similar tone.
As special as Wednesday was, today is even more of a
pleasure for me to be able to introduce Rodney to the committee
on which I am privileged to serve.
I've known Rodney since the 1980's when I was first elected
to the Arkansas State Legislature and Rodney was the executive
assistant for then-Governor Clinton. From the very beginning of
our relationship, I've had the deepest respect for Rodney on
both a personal and professional level.
Professionally, I think there is no question that Rodney is
qualified to become the Secretary of Transportation. Before
coming to Washington, Rodney served for 6 years as commissioner
and later as chairman of the Arkansas State Highway Commission.
During this time, Rodney, without hesitation, tackled the great
challenge of improving the infrastructure of the highway system
in a poor, rural State that has many infrastructural needs.
The last 4 years, he has served as Administrator of the
Federal Highway Administration where he's faced the challenge
of implementing ISTEA. The experience with national and local
transportation needs, as well as his expertise in the
intricacies of ISTEA, give me the utmost confidence in Rodney
Slater.
I look forward to working with a Secretary Transportation
with such valuable and worthwhile experience. I'm especially
glad for his background in surface transportation, though I
know he will be fair and even-handed in dealing with all modes
of transportation.
On a personal note, I cannot overemphasize my esteem for
Rodney and the courage he's shown in overcoming the
difficulties associated with growing up in a region the
country, the delta of Arkansas, that is one of the most
impoverished areas of the Nation. In overcoming those
obstacles, he has become, I think, a tremendous role model to
the young people of America.
Another one of the great things about Rodney, which I noted
on Wednesday, is commitment to his family and their commitment
to him. Nobody could question that commitment after Wednesday
when so many of his family came out for the Commerce Committee
hearing.
A Republican said, ``No way I could vote against Rodney
Slater after you canonized him.'' Well, I couldn't canonize
him, but I think he is a great role model.
Another example of Rodney's love for his family came
yesterday when, despite all his obligations Rodney found time
to walk his young daughter, Bridgette, to school.
This type of commitment to family and profession encourages
me. I want to reiterate my comments from Wednesday, that I have
no hesitancy at all in giving my total support for Rodney
Slater as Secretary of the Department of Transportation. I'm
glad to introduce him to the committee today.
Senator Chafee. Thank you very much, Senator Hutchinson.
That's a very, very favorable endorsement of Mr. Slater.
We, as you know, on this committee have gotten to know Mr.
Slater over the past 4 years in his said capacity as
Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration.
We'll excuse you, Senator, and welcome you to the dais.
Again, we want to say how glad we are that you are a Member of
this committee.
Now, again, I welcome you, Mr. Slater. I don't believe you
have your family here today, do you?
Mr. Slater. They aren't here at present, but I think that
my wife and daughter may try to arrive later this morning.
Senator Chafee. Well, if they do show up, if you'd let us
know, I know the Members of the committee would be very glad to
welcome the members of your family.
Mr. Slater. Thank you.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN H. CHAFEE, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND
Senator Chafee. The purpose of today's hearing is to
receive testimony from Rodney Slater, the President's nominee
to be Secretary of the Department of Transportation. This
committee does not have responsibility for reporting out this
nomination. However, we have jurisdiction over many key
transportation issues, including the reauthorization of the
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, which is
among the priorities of the committee this year.
Mr. Slater has a distinguished record of service, as
Senator Hutchison outlined. As Federal Highway Administrator,
you've worked tirelessly to meet the Nation's complex and
almost endless transportation needs. I am confident that you
will continue that excellent work as Secretary of
Transportation.
Four years ago when you appeared before this committee as
the President's nominee for the Federal Highway Administration,
Congress has just passed ISTEA the previous year or so. I guess
it was just a year earlier in 1991.
During that hearing, we focused on the critical role the
Federal Highway Administration would play in carrying out the
new law. To that end, in your testimony, you pledged that the
Federal Highway Administration would carry out five key themes
identified by then Secretary Pena.
They were, No. 1, strengthening the role of transportation
in supporting the economy; No. 2, supporting transportation
safety; No. 3, building linkages between transportation and the
environment and environmental policy; No. 4, advancing American
technology and expertise; and No. 5, fostering intermodalism.
These were and continue to be laudable goals that must be
preserved as we move forward in enacting the second ISTEA. It
is a crucial time for the Nation's transportation system.
Regrettably, not everyone has such a global view as you do of
transportation's role. Some Members want to go backwards, in my
judgment, and return the program to solely a highway program.
Others simply want to give the program back to the States.
I think it is important that you protect, not only the key
Federal role in ISTEA, but also the broad perspective needed to
guide the Nation's transportation system into the next century.
What was once simply a highway program is now a program not
only for building roads and bridges, but also for enhancing our
mobility, our safety and the environment in which we live,
work, and play.
So, Mr. Slater, we welcome you here and Senator Baucus, do
you have a statement?
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MAX BAUCUS, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE
STATE OF MONTANA
Senator Baucus. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Slater, I join the chairman of our committee and all of
us here in welcoming you. We look forward to working with you
in a very constructive, industrious, and fruitful tenure as
Secretary of Transportation. You will be working with all the
committees in the Congress and certainly with this one, on
transportation issues.
Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased that we are holding this
informational hearing. The more hearings we have in which we
speak with the Secretary and his staff, the more likely we will
reach an accommodation that is in the country's best interests.
We should have a good number of meetings, whether they're
formal or informal.
Mr. Chairman, as you may know, Rodney Slater is only the
second Federal Highway Administrator to be nominated as
Secretary of Transportation. The first was John Volpe from
Massachusetts. We all know Mr. Slater's individual
accomplishments as Highway Administrator. He is most deserving
to the Secretary of Transportation.
Mr. Chairman and Mr. Secretary-to-be, one of the priorities
of this committee and the Congress will be the reauthorization
of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act,
otherwise known as ISTEA, which expires on September 30, 1997.
There will be plenty of time to debate the merits of that
legislation, but at this point, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make
a few brief comments.
First, we all know the funding formulas will be
contentious, will be difficult. I recognize that ISTEA's
formulas must be debated and where appropriate, they must be
changed, but I ask my colleagues to keep in mind that we are
one Nation.
We are not 50 separate nations, we the United States of
America. We all come from States with diverse transportation
needs--that is true--but our goal should be to craft a
reauthorization bill that is worthy of this country as we move
into the next century.
In addition to formulas, there are several important policy
decisions that must be taken. First and foremost will be the
overall level of funding. With the help of my colleague,
Senator Warner from Virginia, we've been able to gather a
letter with 57 signatures to the chairman of the Budget
Committee, Senator Dominici. Mr. Secretary, the letter urges
him to make room in the budget resolution for an increase in
transportation spending. Let's remember, these funds come
directly from the users of the transportation system and should
be available to meet their needs.
We must also discuss the impact of transportation on the
environment and the use of Highway Trust Fund dollars for
Amtrak and other modes of transportation--big issues.
Furthermore, we will examine the relationship between the
States and local officials when it comes to transportation
planning, and the balance between urban and rural interests in
developing and applying new transportation technologies.
We've a lot of ground to cover. I'm encouraged that Senator
Warner is already scheduling hearings so that we can begin our
work.
All of us want a well-maintained, efficient and safe
transportation system for our constituents and for our country.
We will find that balance, but only if we work together and
stay focused on the big picture.
ISTEA was a landmark bill, due in large part to the vision
of the Senator from New York, Senator Moynihan. Now we have the
opportunity to extend that vision into the next century.
I look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and with
you, Mr. Secretary-designate, with Senator Warner and my
colleagues to achieve that goal.
Senator Chafee. Thank you, Senator, and you are quite right
in giving great credit to the senior Senator from New York,
Senator Moynihan. He was the lead player on that in 1991. I was
pleased to be able to give him a hand, but he was the one that
had the overall vision.
Senator Warner.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN W. WARNER, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
Senator Warner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to say that I had the privilege of introducing
the nominee before the Commerce Committee, one of the events in
the life of a Senator one does not forget. Thank you for that.
I'd note the presence of his wife and family who have
arrived, I believe.
Senator Chafee. Yes, Mr. Slater. Why don't you introduce
your family to us?
Mr. Slater. Mr. Chairman, it's my pleasure and honor to
introduce my wonderful wife, Cassandra Wilkins, and our
beautiful daughter, Bridgette Josette Wilkins Slater.
Senator Chafee. If Bridgette can stick this out, she's a
real champ.
[Laughter.]
Senator Baucus. That's a wonderful name. What's her full
name again?
Mr. Slater. Bridgette Josette Wilkins Slater. She's named
after her grandmother and great grandmother.
Senator Chafee. That's nice. Well, we welcome you both
here, Mrs. Slater, and your lovely daughter.
Senator Warner. I listened very carefully as the
distinguished Member from the State of Montana set forth the
issues.
I would like to say, on a personal basis, how pleased I am
with our two new Members, Senators Hutchison and Sessions, and
I look forward to working with them.
Senator Chafee. Then we've got another Member who isn't
here, Senator Allard.
Senator Warner. Yes.
Senator Chafee. Well, with that laudable example of
brevity, next in order of appearance is Senator Hutchinson, who
has already had some words but you're entitled to some more,
but don't feel compelled.
[Laughter.]
Senator Hutchinson. With that admonition, I'll resist the
temptation to speak and I hope I will have an opportunity to
ask some questions.
Senator Chafee. You certainly will, that's the purpose of
it.
Senator Kempthorne.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DIRK KEMPTHORNE, U.S. SENATOR FROM
THE STATE OF IDAHO
Senator Kempthorne. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I,
too, will make my opening statement as part of the record.
I would like to say though that I greet Rodney Slater's
nomination to the Secretary of Transportation with great
enthusiasm. I'm a great admirer of yours, Mr. Slater. I've
watched you in 4 years. You have brought great honor and
distinction to the performance; you were a practitioner of
practical government in the State of Arkansas; you've now
brought it to the Federal level, to which I think all of the
States are grateful to you. I think you'll make an outstanding
Secretary of Transportation.
I also would like to acknowledge Cassandra. The team that
you have, because when we had some terrible flooding in Idaho
on a Saturday that I needed to reach you, I called you home,
spoke to Cassandra, who promptly got the message to you, so
that's the support that you get from your family.
Bridgette Josette, the beautiful young lady there, it's
good that your family is here because with all the duties you
have as the Secretary of Transportation, and all that we
require of you, we also want you to continue your role as
father and husband. That's critical.
Mr. Slater. Thank you.
Senator Kempthorne. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Senator Kempthorne follows:]
Statement of Hon. Dirk Kempthorne, U.S. Senator From the State of Idaho
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, Mr. Slater, and welcome.
I have very much enjoyed our relationship the past four years in
your capacity as Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration.
There have been two particular situations where you and your staff have
done outstanding work on behalf of the Northwest and Idaho in
particular. These incidents involved two serious flooding events that
caused considerable damage to Federal aid highways in my state which
necessitated a rapid and efficient Federal response in terms of Federal
Highways personnel and emergency financial assistance. The response of
your agency and your personal involvement in these disasters was
terrific. It is very apparent to me that your prior experience in
highway administration at the state level in Arkansas has served you
well in Washington, DC. The highway users of this country have
certainly benefited from your common sense approach to solving problems
and developing policy. I wish that every appointee that came before the
Senate for confirmation was as well suited for their position as you
are. I am confident that the type of professional which has
distinguished your tenure as Administrator of the Federal Highways
Administration will continue in your role as Secretary of the
Department of Transport.
Senator Chafee. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Wyden.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON WYDEN, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE
STATE OF OREGON
Senator Wyden. Mr. Chairman, I have the drift with respect
to brevity and let me say this issue is of such importance to
my State, I just wanted to make a couple of very quick
comments.
Most specifically, Mr. Chairman and colleagues, this issue
of transportation is always framed as a question of economics
versus environmental protection. The notion is, of course, that
if you're going to have a booming economy, you've got to take
the pollution, the traffic, the sprawl, all of the negative
kind of consequences.
What we have shown in Oregon is that it doesn't have to be
that way. We have shown that you can do both, that you can have
``big league'' quality of life, ``big league'' transportation
systems, and also preserve your environment.
The key to all this, and what I'm especially interested in
exploring with our future Secretary, and I say that with great
anticipation, is making sure the States have the flexibility to
use the dollars in the most cost-effective way. Often in
Washington, DC, we put the States in these kinds of
straightjackets. The States don't have the flexibility to show
that they can, in fact, have a significant economic growth and
protect the natural treasures as well as their communities.
ISTEA reauthorization will be extraordinarily important
bill. We all know that we're on the balanced budget path, but
we've got to figure out a way to make a handful of key
investments while still staying on that path. Transportation,
in my view, is one of those key investments.
Mr. Chairman and colleagues, I very much look forward to
working on a bipartisan basis with respect to this issue that
is of critical importance to my State.
Let me also join Senator Kempthorne in saying I remember
what Mr. Slater did in terms of responsiveness during the
horrible floods we had in the West, and I think we'll get that
same kind of approach when he's confirmed.
I yield, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Chafee. Thank you.
Senator Sessions.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF SESSIONS, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE
STATE OF ALABAMA
Senator Sessions. Mr. Chairman, I'm delighted to be here
today. Mr. Slater, you have a great reputation among the
transportation people in Alabama. They feel like you've been
responsive to them. I know you've been to Alabama probably more
than 10 times in your capacity and leadership here.
I enjoyed our meeting yesterday. We can communicate. I
don't know if it's the accent or maybe it's just the way you're
direct and honest and answer questions. I think we'll have an
outstanding relationship and I look forward to supporting and
working with you.
Just a couple of concerns for the State. We are one of the
top three in the country, as being a donor State. We have a
substantially heavier contribution to the Trust Fund than we
receive in benefits. We have some serious needs in terms of
completing our interstate system and some other highway systems
that we'll be talking to you about.
We all want to work together for the best policy of this
Nation, but I think it is important that States like Mr.
Inhofe's State which is also in that top donor State category.
So we will be talking about that.
I also had the opportunity to mention to you our concern
about keeping the interstates from being seriously compromised
because of construction during a hurricane and natural
disasters. We sometimes had 4-hour delays, and people sat with
the hurricane bearing down on them because construction had
narrowed the road to one lane. Somehow, we need, at least in
the hurricane season, to perhaps think of ways to correct this.
I know the State primarily works on that.
Also, I would be concerned about I think a comment you made
about being in a post-interstate era. I think I'd like to learn
more about that.
I am delighted to see you today and to have the opportunity
to talk with you and tell you how much our people in Alabama
have appreciated working with you.
Senator Chafee. Thank you very much, Senator.
Senator Smith.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT SMITH, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Senator Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will also submit
my statement for the record.
Let me say, Mr. Slater, I apologize to you for having to
change our meeting the other day. I think we are meeting on
Tuesday. It was something you'd understand. I had a parent-
teacher conference, and it was a positive meeting, but I didn't
want to miss it.
I too want to say that I look forward to supporting you at
the time of the vote and look forward to conversing with you
here as this hearing goes on.
I just want to say one thing, Mr. Chairman. You know, it's
interesting. It doesn't very often happen that someone from
your State who works in a particular area with a Federal
official would send in a letter and ask specifically that I
support that nominee. This is the case here where the State of
New Hampshire Transportation Department Commissioner, Leon
Kenison, has written a letter and I just want to quote one
paragraph and yield.
In that Kenison letter, he says:
Mr. Slater has gained the respect and admiration of the
transportation community. His accessibility and responsiveness
are uncommon traits in those of national leadership, and it is
these characteristics that have made it a pleasure to engage
with the Federal agency that reflects Mr. Slater's leadership.
I'm certain Mr. Slater has the ability to lead the
Transportation Department as effectively as he has the Federal
Highway Administration. It is without reservation that I extend
my support for Mr. Slater's nomination.
I know Mr. Kenison very well and he doesn't do those
things for just anybody, so I think that's a great tribute.
Mr. Slater. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Senator Smith follows:]
Statement of Hon. Robert Smith, U.S. Senator From the State of New
Hampshire
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing today on the
nomination of Rodney Slater to be the next Secretary of Transportation.
I first want to welcome Administrator Slater before our committee this
morning and lend my support for his nomination.
Mr. Slater is no stranger to this committee; and if confirmed, I'm
certain we will be calling on him again for his advice and counsel as
we move forward with ISTEA reauthorization. I have no doubt that Mr.
Slater is eminently qualified for the position and has earned the
respect of his colleagues, both at the Federal and State level of
government. In fact, I would like to paraphrase from a letter I
received from Mr. Leon Kenison, Commissioner of the New Hampshire
Department of Transportation, and ask for it to be entered into the
record. In the letter, Commissioner Kenison writes:
Mr. Slater has gained the respect and admiration of the
transportation community. [His] accessibility and
responsiveness are uncommon traits in those of national
leadership * * * and it is these characteristics that have made
it a pleasure to engage with the federal agency that reflects
Mr. Slater's leadership. I'm certain Mr. Slater has the ability
to lead the Transportation Department as effectively as he has
the Federal Highway Administration. It is without reservation
that [I extend my support for Mr. Slater's nomination.]
These words of support are particularly noteworthy coming from the
head of a State agency. I believe that Administrator Slater's
experience at the State level of government has been instrumental in
his understanding of the cooperative relationship that must exist
between all levels of government. If there's anything that I would like
to impress upon you as Transportation Secretary is to not forget that
our States are the primary implementors of much of our federal highway
policies and should be given the maximum flexibility in carrying them
out.
There are several issues of importance to New Hampshire, such as
providing adequate funding for small States; the Bridge Rehabilitation
program; reducing bureaucracy and Federal mandates; and continued
funding for recreational trails and scenic byways. While there will be
differences among the various States on the issue of funding, I believe
the appropriate role for the Administration will be to advise and
counsel the Congress in as unbiased a manner as possible on what is
best for the nation as a whole.
With that, I will conclude by congratulating Mr. Slater on his
nomination, and I look forward to working with him in the future on the
various transportation issues before our committee.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH033.010
Senator Chafee. Thank you, Senator Smith.
Senator Lautenberg.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, U.S. SENATOR
FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Senator Lautenberg. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman.
I will be brief, and ask that my full statement be included
in the record.
Rodney Slater and I have gotten to know each other during
his tenure as FHWA Administrator. It was always a pleasure to
have an opportunity to discuss problems with him, get the
responses that were positive; we couldn't always agree, even
though he knows that New Jersey needs more money than anybody
else in the whole wide world for transportation, but we always
did have an amiable but serious discussion. So you come here
very well equipped, I think, to assume the job.
I wonder whether your family thinks your last name has been
changed to designate, Secretary-designate, but I see now,
hearing Senator Kempthorne and others describe assets not
typically revealed over telephone conversations, but your
family, I think, you could probably get unanimous consent right
and move on and take the job.
We are facing some serious problems, the renewal of ISTEA--
the author sits here with us now--that's going to be a critical
issue. Mr. Slater and I have had a chance to discuss not simply
the task of monitoring the department, but making sure that all
the parts are working.
I hope that he will be able to be an advocate for
appropriate spending for transportation in our budget. The
share that transportation plays in creating economic
development is significant. Transportation generates 20 percent
of our GNP and every billion dollars invested in our
transportation system yields more than 25,000 construction-
related jobs.
So we would ask that you be an advocate, that you remind
those in the White House that investments in transportation
help keep America competitive, create the jobs, help revitalize
cities, and that we need desperately that investment.
I would ask, Mr. Secretary-designate, one other thing. That
is the focus on safety, which you and I discussed in a private
meeting before, be enhanced. We have not had a particularly
good year in 1996--aviation safety, increases in drunk driving,
highway accidents, some of them of enormous proportion, and we
have to continue to provide the resources, but provide the
seriousness which goes with the enforcement of safety rules.
I, for one, and I know that I speak for a few of us here,
don't want to see an expansion of triple trucks on our narrow
roads in our populated areas. Safety factors--and I'm not
asking you for a commitment here and now, but among the things
you have to be thinking about, safety has to be one of the most
important.
So we wish you well. There is no doubt in my mind that
confirmation is coming soon and that we will have a chance to
get together and get to work.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. My whole statement, I
hope, will be included.
[The prepared statement of Senator Lautenberg follows:]
Statement of Hon. Frank R. Lautenberg, U.S. Senator From the State of
New Jersey
Good morning, and welcome Administrator Slater, I'm very glad to be
here to lend my support for your nomination to be the next Secretary of
Transportation.
Your qualifications for this job are very strong. As the current
Federal Highway Administrator, you have overseen a $20 billion U.S.
Highway System and a nationwide work force of 3,500. In that capacity,
you've dramatically transformed FHA policies and programs to better
serve the people and industries who rely on our highway system. And
you've also been a strong advocate for the advancement of women and
minorities.
If confirmed, you will play a critical role in ensuring that our
nation makes much-needed investments in our transportation
infrastructure. And I know you share my commitment to that goal. As you
well understand, transportation generates 20 percent of our GNP, and
every $1 billion invested in our transportation system yields more than
25,000 construction-related jobs.
Investment in transportation is also necessary to keep us
internationally competitive. Americans spend more than 1.6 million
hours a day stuck in traffic, at a cost to U.S. businesses of about 40
billion per year. That's a burden our economy simply cannot afford.
By reducing congestion, improving air quality and enhancing safety,
effective transportation systems also improve our overall quality of
life.
This year we are facing renewed debate on the importance of
transportation as we discuss the authorization of ISTEA. ISTEA is bold
and innovative legislation that is helping to manage traffic growth,
ensure access to jobs, and sustain our environment for future
generations. It has improved planning and flexibility, emphasized local
decisionmaking, and encouraged new technology.
Now we need to extend ISTEA, to meet the transportation and
economic challenges of the 21st century. We need to build on the
legislation's innovative intermodal system. We should continue to
promote state and local flexibility. We should use technology, or so-
called Intelligent Transportation Systems, to increase our capacity and
efficiency. And we must maintain ISTEA's commitment to promoting
safety.
As we develop so-called ``ISTEA Two'', we need to remember that she
choices we make will directly affect the lives of millions of ordinary
Americans. Our decisions will affect where and how we live. Where we
work. How we'll get there. And how long it will take.
In many cases, our choices also will be a matter of life and death
for thousands of Americans. And we shouldn't forget that. We will be
deciding the safety of our roads, our rails, and our air travel.
Unfortunately, over the past two years, safe often has taken a back
seat to other considerations. We have lost our national speed limit. We
have lost our motorcycle helmet and seatbelt laws. And, meanwhile, the
problem of drunk driving has worsened. In my view, it's long past time
that we made safe top priority. Administrator Slater, I strongly urge
you to take on this challenge in your new position.
We also need your help to ensure that transportation is adequately
funded in the years ahead. In the coming months, Congress and the
Administration will be working together to balance the budget. As
ranking member of the Budget Committee, I'll continue to fight to
ensure that our budget reflects the importance of transportation
funding, especially when it comes to ISTEA reauthorization. I look
forward to working closely with you in this effort.
Administrator Slater, you have many formidable challenges before
you, and I am fully confident that you are up to the task. I know you
will be a Transportation Secretary who will work to maintain our
infrastructure, to preserve ISTEA, to enhance safety, and to ensure
adequate funding for our transportation needs. I look forward to
working closely with you to ensure that all Americans can travel safely
and efficiently as we move into the 21st Century.
Senator Chafee. Thank you.
Senator Lieberman.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, U.S. SENATOR
FROM THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
Senator Lieberman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Slater, good morning. You're on a roll and I'm not
going to stop it.
You're extraordinarily well-qualified for this position,
both by your recent experience in the Federal Government and in
the State government as well. I must say, I was particularly
struck and impressed by Senator Kempthorne's endorsement of
practical government in Arkansas this morning. This, I found,
to be good news. The truth is, you had some great practical
experience under a pretty good Governor in that State.
Mr. Slater. Yes.
Senator Lieberman. Everybody has mentioned ISTEA because it
will be the focus of our efforts here in this session of
Congress. ISTEA was a revolutionary law brought to us by
Senator Moynihan's leadership. It shows you can be both an
intellect and a revolutionary. Of course some of the great
revolutionaries of history have been intellects. This was a
revolutionary law, which I think we can be pleased and proud to
say, 5 years later, has worked, so that the effort that we'll
focus on is building on the success of ISTEA with your help and
your leadership.
It strikes me also that one of the extraordinary internal
results of the ISTEA effort occurred in this committee; in that
year Senators coming from all over the country and from all
sorts of political and ideological persuasions, were almost
totally unified in support of ISTEA. A real consensus was built
around a bold new idea. That doesn't always happen here.
It's my hope here at the outset that with the continuing
leadership of Senator Moynihan, with the leadership of Senator
Chafee and Senator Baucus, that we can emerge with the same
kind of unity and keep this successful program moving forward.
I thank you and I look forward to working with you.
Senator Chafee. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Moynihan, your ears should be burning. Everybody
had kind things to say about what you did in 1991 on the ISTEA
legislation. I remember it very clearly, as do all the Members
of the committee who were present, so we welcome you.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL PATRICK MOYNIHAN, U.S. SENATOR
FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Senator Moynihan. Mr. Chairman, think it's more properly
said what we did as a committee. Senator Lieberman made the
point--an important one--as you have repeatedly made welcoming
our two new Senators, that much more often than not we have
been a bipartisan committee; very rarely have we had partisan
votes. We haven't always had unanimous votes. I hope we can
continue in that mode.
We have in Mr. Slater someone who has faithfully pursued
the ISTEA principles, the intermodalism and the efficiency. He
practices the idea that in transportation there is no such
thing as a ``freeway.''--one pays for everything and tries to
get the most from what one pays.
I'm looking forward to Mr. Slater's comments on the
financing of infrastructure. In the ISTEA legislation, we
created a commission to promote investment in America's
infrastructure. Mr. Flanagan was the chairman and came up with
an important idea. I believe you mean to offer us some thoughts
on this matter and I look forward to them very much.
Senator Chafee. Thank you, Senator.
Finally, last but not least, Senator Graham.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BOB GRAHAM, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE
STATE OF FLORIDA
Senator Graham. Mr. Chairman, I had an opportunity to spend
some time with Mr. Slater recently. I was impressed with his
preparation and qualities to assume this important position.
As has been said, this is an important year with the
reauthorization of the Nation's basic surface transportation
law. We are fortunate to have Mr. Slater providing us with the
Administration's leadership on that important issue.
I look forward to his statement and with more enthusiasm,
look forward to working with him.
Senator Chafee. All right. Now, Mr. Slater, you'll have an
opportunity to make a statement. Let me say, after the ringing
endorsements you've gotten from this group so far, all you can
do is go downhill, I think.
[Laughter.]
Senator Chafee. I notice your statement is 17 pages, so I
would ask that you summarize it because what we're going to do
here is we've got 12 Senators and as soon as you're through,
we're going to give everybody a chance to ask questions,
following the early bird rule which I had announced sometime
ago, that's the way the committee is going to handle things.
I'm going to restrict each of the questioners to 5 minutes,
but before we do that, we want you, and if you would, summarize
your statement, I'd appreciate it, Mr. Slater. Go to it.
STATEMENT OF HON. RODNEY E. SLATER, SECRETARY-DESIGNATE,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Mr. Slater. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Baucus, and
Members of the committee.
Thank you for inviting me to be here with you today to talk
about the future of transportation in the Nation. Let me say,
as an aside, that I very much appreciate the kind words of
introduction by my State Senator, Senator Hutchinson, and also
2 days ago by Senator Warner as he spoke on my behalf before
the Senate Commerce Committee.
This committee plays a vital role in keeping our
transportation network operating smoothly. It is an honor to
appear before you today as Federal Highway Administrator. I
underscore that because I have had this honor on many occasions
in the past, but now I also come before you as the President's
nominee for Secretary of Transportation, and I am honored in
that regard as well.
I recall fondly and very specifically, May 19, 1993 when I
came before this committee 4 years ago for confirmation as the
head of the Federal Highway Administration. While it is true
that you do not have the responsibility for confirming the
President's nomination of me as Secretary of Transportation, I
would say this and would say it without equivocation, that
without your support 4 years ago, I would not be here with the
opportunity to assume even higher responsibility. For that, I
thank you.
I am today, humbled by the trust that the President has
again placed in me and I thank you for your trust 4 years ago
serving as my confirming Senate committee to the position of
Federal Highway Administrator. I know too that there are many
people and organizations, across the country who have placed
trust in me as well as Federal Highway Administrator and who
now speak words in support of my nomination as Secretary of the
Department of Transportation.
I am determined to continue to pay back this investment in
trust placed in me by this committee, first and foremost, the
Congress as a whole, the transportation community, the
President of the United States and, I might add, my loyal
family.
In this brief statement, I would like to talk to you about
some of our accomplishments over the last 4 years and my vision
and the values that will guide me as I work with you in
preparing the Nation's Intermodal Transportation System for the
challenges of the 21st Century.
I have submitted, as you noted, Mr. Chairman, a written
statement that outlines these accomplishments and this vision
in greater detail, so my remarks here will merely summarize
them.
I view transportation as central to the life of this great
Nation. President Clinton, in his second inaugural address,
illustrated the role of transportation, though not speaking to
it directly, but he spoke of the significance of the evolution
as it relates to the history of the Nation and there you find a
thread dealing with transportation.
He said, ``We began the 19th Century with a choice, to
spread our Nation from coast to coast. We began the 20th
Century with a choice, to harness the industrial revolution to
our values of free enterprise, conservation, and human
decency.'' In the 21st Century, transportation will remain as
central as it was in the 19th Century, allowing us to spread
our Nation from coast to coast; and in the 20th Century,
allowing us to harness the industrial revolution to our values
of free enterprise, conservation, and human decency.
The President, in speaking of the 21st Century and the role
that transportation will play noted it in this way, again not
speaking specifically of transportation but the thread is
there. He said, ``We have, in this century, the opportunity to
unleash the limitless potential of all our people.''
I've said time and time again that transportation is about
more than concrete, asphalt, and steel, it's about people.
Their access to opportunity, their pursuit of happiness.
Our intermodal transportation network, like the United
States as a whole, is far more than the sum total of its parts.
I might note, Senator Baucus, that you spoke to that issue very
well in your introductory remarks. It affects every aspect of
our lives as Americans, all Americans, day in and day out.
What I want to do is close my remarks with a focus on ISTEA
because I think it speaks to the very essence of the challenge
before us as we really try to prepare for the transportation
challenges of the 21st Century.
Let me mention that it will not only be one of my
objectives to make safety a priority, safety will be our
highest priority, Senator Lautenberg, and I know that is an
interest of all of you Members of this great committee.
Also, the role of transportation and its relation to our
economy and to our quality of life will be second only to a
focus on safety. As has been noted earlier, transportation does
represent some 17 to 20 percent of the gross domestic product
of our country. It is vital to our economy.
Finally, there will be again and again, a demonstration of
a commonsense approach to government in solving the problems of
the American people. We have tried to respond with care and
dispatch to natural disasters; we have changed rules and
regulations to make it easier for States to do the work they do
best; we have brought innovative financing to the fore to make
it possible to leverage resources of the private sector; we
have tried to evolve as you have challenged us to evolve with
this very revolutionary, as you have noted, piece of
legislation.
So let me move then to a brief discussion about it and the
important role it will play as the centerpiece of any
transportation philosophy that moves us to the post-interstate
era.
At the Department as with this committee, we have very,
very important work ahead of us in vital areas, but perhaps
nothing we do in 1997 will affect the American people more than
the reauthorization of the Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act of 1991. So let me offer a few comments in that
regard.
First, I commend this committee for its role in shaping the
post-interstate era through the passage of ISTEA. It took
courage and it took vision to really bring together the will,
the focus and the vision of a then-Democratic Congress, but
also in a bipartisan way with Republican Members, to work with
a Republican President to shake up the system, if you will, and
to start afresh and to turn from proven paths.
I was not here at the creation of ISTEA, I was serving at
the State level but watching very carefully the challenge that
would be put before us.
One of the accomplishments I'm most proud of in these past
4 years is the honor and the privilege of having had the
occasion to lead an agency with skills and with understanding,
and yes, with the capacity to change in changing times, to help
build new relationships to establish a new balance, a new
balance that ISTEA called for.
The poet, Robert Frost, has written, ``Two roads diverged
in a wood and I, I took the road less traveled by and that has
made all the difference.'' By taking the path of ISTEA, the
path that in 1991 was less traveled by, this committee and its
counterpart in the House, the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee, have indeed made all the difference.
We, in the Federal Highway Administration, and all of the
members of the DOT family, along with all of our partners in
the public and private sectors, have enjoyed the opportunity
that we have had to make your vision a reality.
ISTEA is about choice, about choice. Senator Wyden said,
``Give the States the opportunity to make decisions, to
demonstrate that we can invest in infrastructure and still
improve and enhance the environment.'' Well, ISTEA is about
choice, about local decisionmaking, ISTEA is about protecting
the environment, ISTEA is about all forms of surface
transportation and it's not, as you have well noted, a highway
bill. It deals with renewed emphasis on bicycling and walking,
about enhancing the vision to include national scenic byways.
Chairman Chafee, I was most pleased that you joined us a
few weeks ago in the Indian Treaty Room as we paid tribute,
Senator Sessions, to the Selma to Montgomery route that is now
an all-American road and speaks to the very essence of what
being an American is all about.
ISTEA is also about harnessing technology and serving a new
century with technology. Senator Lautenberg, as the father of
ITS, you know exactly what we mean here. ITS technology is
Intelligent Transportation Systems, high speed rail and I do
believe that we, in casting a wide net for the future, Senator,
can deal with the issue of magnetic levitation. We talked about
that yesterday.
In 1997, we approach reauthorization with diverse
transportation communities coming together in one voice, and
the voice says, ``don't discard that which is working well,''
and I'm here today to say, we do not intend to do that.
Let me close my remarks by saying this, we have a unique
opportunity as we approach a new millennium to chart a course
that can lead us--well, as the golden spike led us, as the
Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk led us. We are only limited by
our dreams and our will to follow through on those dreams.
If confirmed by the Senate as the Secretary of
Transportation, I will be serving in a new role, yes, but I
want to assure all of you that I will take a very strong and
active role in working with you on behalf of the President to
enact a reauthorization legislation that really speaks to the
future demands of transportation as we approach the 21st
Century.
I'd like to say, Senator Warner, it is my hope that this
new vision can meet the goals you outlined last September in
making your comments about the importance of this piece of
legislation. I want us to complete the process by September 30,
1997. I am confident that we can do that working together.
It is an honor to sit before you, it is an honor to really
work toward enhancing a piece of legislation that has clearly
demonstrated that the Federal Government has a role to play in
balancing regional interests so that each State benefits in
taking the lead in technological advances and safety, in
ensuring that transportation achieves national goals as well as
responding to State and local interests in doing what Thomas
Jefferson called upon us to do, ``To establish a union of
sentiment that holds this great Nation together.'' I am pleased
that we will have the opportunity to do just that as we work
toward the reauthorization of a most important piece of
legislation.
Thank you.
Senator Chafee. Thank you very much for a very fine
statement, Mr. Slater.
Now, we're going to have 5 minutes of questions from each
Senator and I'm going to be pretty strict. The lights will go
on and when the red comes, that means one's time is up. If
everybody can adhere to that, then everybody will get a chance.
We've got a wonderful turnout of Senators here today and I want
to make sure everybody gets an opportunity.
If the lights will start, Mr. Slater, I just put great
store in what you said about ISTEA, that it is an intermodal
surface transportation act; it's not a highway bill. I hope
that you and the Administration are going to come forward with
a renewal and reauthorization of ISTEA. I would greatly hope
that legislation incorporates what you have said concerning the
words of ISTEA. Is that going to be the way you're going to
operate?
Mr. Slater. Mr. Chairman, you have that commitment, yes,
sir.
Senator Chafee. Because it isn't just pouring concrete, it
isn't just widening, adding more and more lanes. Senator
Moynihan and I, and others, in 1991 worked on this and there
are wonderful things that can be done.
It also involves choice. As you know, in ISTEA, there is a
part dealing with enhancements and the local communities have
done outstanding things in connection with the enhancement
legislation.
Senator Roth has asked me to address the question of
Amtrak. Are you going to be dealing with Amtrak in the ISTEA
legislation?
Mr. Slater. Yes, sir, we will, Mr. Chairman. It is our
belief that a nationwide passenger rail system is essential to
meeting the transportation demands of the 21st Century. We do
have to deal with the very difficult, thorny, yet important
issue of funding for Amtrak. Hopefully, we will, at some point,
be able to achieve our goal of ensuring that Amtrak is self-
sustaining.
Senator Chafee. You touched on the safety issues. When we
did the National Highway System legislation, I was pummeled on
the floor, I don't think I prevailed on any of the safety
measures and they were in the Act, as you recall. They were in
the ISTEA legislation, the motorcycle helmet legislation, for
example.
However, the seatbelt did survive. I think at that point, I
was batting about .091, so that pulled up my average somewhat.
Now, I notice that DOT had a goal of 75 percent of
occupants with safety belts. First of all, could you just
briefly touch on the efficacy, as you see it, of seatbelts, and
second, what can we do, particularly in connection to increase
their usage, particularly in connection with light trucks?
Mr. Slater. Yes. Let me just say, Senator, your point is
well taken about the general issue of safety as relates to the
NHS bill. While the bill was a major achievement, being able to
identify really 4 percent of the road system in the country
that would carry over 40 to 45 percent of all the traffic in
the country, 75 percent of the truck traffic, 80 percent of the
tourist traffic, that was quite an undertaking and it resulted
from considerable cooperation between the Federal, State, and
local governments with some participation by the private
sector. So it was a good thing.
We did unveil our proposal for the NHS at Union Station so
as to underscore its importance not only as a highway system,
but as the tie that binds all of the modes of transportation.
As you know, we followed up rather expeditiously with the
various intermodal connections.
Your point is well taken that the bill did include a lot of
safety provisions that we, in the Administration, found very,
very troubling. We joined you and other Members of the
committee in making our positions clear in that regard.
I think, as the writer would say, we came from battle with
our heads bloodied but unbowed because we made a commitment to
renew our focus on safety.
There was the success of securing the provision as relates
to safety belts, its continued use. Right now, the national
average for the use is about 68 percent. We do have a
commitment to go up into the 1970's. I'd like to say, Mr.
Chairman, that we're also looking at a major initiative that
would have a goal of 90 percent usage.
Senator Chafee. One final question because it's going to
turn red in a minute. Quickly, the Administration will send up
legislation. When do you foresee that?
Mr. Slater. We hope to have it ready around the end of
February, but when we unveil our budget in the next few days,
you'll see a general outline as relates to some of the
financing provisions.
Senator Chafee. Good. Thank you very much.
Senator Baucus.
Senator Moynihan. Mr. Chairman, could I suggest the
committee might informally agree that the Chairman gets an
extra 5 minutes?
Senator Baucus. That's a good idea.
Senator Chafee. That's wonderful except I want to get
reelected chairman.
[Laughter.]
Senator Chafee. Senator Baucus.
Senator Baucus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Slater, I wonder if you could comment on your efforts
and the prospects of increasing the budget levels for
transportation compared to what's going to be in the
President's budget?
Mr. Slater. Yes. Well, as I noted earlier, second only to
safety as the highest priority, will be the issue of focusing
on the importance of transportation to the economy and trying
to get the greatest infrastructure investment commitment
possible.
I am pleased that we were able to raise the level of
investment in infrastructure about 20 percent across the board
during the last 4 years and we did that with the aid and the
assistance of the Congress. Prior to 1993, the average had been
$21.1 billion. From 1993 to 1997, it's $25.5 billion.
It is our hope that we will be able to maintain that level
even though there is the stronger commitment, not only now by
the President to cut the deficit in half, as was the commitment
the first 4 years, but to actually balance the budget by the
year 2002.
The President has made it clear that as we cut, we should
also invest in those things that enhance the economy, enhance
our quality of life, and that build for the future.
Transportation and infrastructure is clearly one of those.
Senator Baucus. The numbers just on highway, excluding
transit?
Mr. Slater. Excluding transit, the figure has been about
$20 billion, about 20 percent more than the previous 4 years.
Senator Baucus. You wouldn't be adverse to this committee
passing legislation that would increase that amount, would you?
Mr. Slater. Let me just say that clearly this committee has
played a very important role in that regard in the past. I'm a
team player when it comes to the President's team and I know
that the President has the dual challenge of trying to balance
the budget and keep focus on those priorities that he has first
and foremost, but he works with the Congress as we've seen in
the past budgets over the years.
Just the other day, Senator, you were instrumental in
getting the signatures of practically all interested Members of
the Senate on a letter addressing the funding issue.
Senator Baucus. We want to work with the Administration
too, but as you know, there are 57 signatures on that letter
and I think that's a pretty good indication of where the Senate
is on this issue.
Mr. Slater. It's a very good indication.
Senator Baucus. On funding formulas, clearly we're one
country and we're clearly a country with different needs and
purposes. When the Administration sends its proposal to the
Congress, I'd just like to remind the Secretary that it has to
be certainly cognizant of the west insofar as that's the part
of the country with lots of Federal land. In my State of
Montana, it's about 30 percent. I think Nevada--and Senator
Reid can speak to this better than I--it's like 90 some
percent. Utah, I think it's around 60 percent. It's Federal
land we're talking about here.
Mr. Slater. I understand.
Senator Baucus. Therefore there is a need for any highway
bill to recognize that.
Second, these are parts of the country where we don't have
any ability to raise revenue for ourselves. My State of Montana
has the second highest State gasoline tax. We're trying to do
our best but we can't have toll roads because there are no
people to pay for a toll, not enough frequency.
I very much remind you to be sure that any bill recognizes
not only the northeast, the west and south, but also those
particular points of view.
Mr. Slater. Sure.
Senator Baucus. I might also add that the current
intelligent transportation system budget of $250 million is
very inadequate with respect to rural intelligent
transportation technology. With all due deference to my very
good friend from New Jersey, there's a category as an
expenditure and a grant, and they call it rural technology in
New Jersey.
I might point out that I'm sure there are rural corners in
New Jersey, even though the population density of New Jersey is
over 1,000 people per square mile, whereas in Montana, it's
about 6 people per square. There's rural and there's rural and
the real rural is west of the 100th meridian where it doesn't
rain. It's not east of the 100th meridian where it does rain.
Rainfall here is about 50 inches a year in Washington, DC.
In Montana, the average precipitation is about 15 inches.
That's everything, snow, rain. That's the main reason why
there's vast differences among towns, because there is no
water.
Mr. Slater. Sure.
Senator Baucus. So, I'd like you to look at that.
The other issues which I don't have time to mention, but
which I will submit to you in writing, include the Department's
view on essential transportation service.
Mr. Slater. Very supportive of that, sir.
Senator Baucus. I know and appreciate that. Second, on
weather systems, FAA is reducing human personnel in weather and
it's causing huge problems, and beyond that, trust fund issues
and NAFTA, trucking as well as control tower at Gallatin Field.
Thank you.
Senator Chafee. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Hutchison.
Mr. Slater. Mr. Chairman, may I speak briefly to one point
that Senator Baucus raised?
Senator Chafee. Very briefly.
Mr. Slater. Very briefly. Dealing with the issue of the
West, we have most of our dynamic growth in the country
occurring in the Southeast and the West and clearly, if
transportation is going to speak to the overall health and
well-being of the economy of the Nation, those points that you
raise have to be taken into account when we decide how the
formula is to operate. Your points are well taken.
You also challenged me at the first hearing I had before
the committee, to get out of Washington, to visit all parts of
the country. I did that, I've been to Montana a number of times
and I was pleased that Senator Sessions also mentioned that
I've been to Alabama.
Senator Baucus. I want to compliment the about-to-be
Secretary. It's true, he's traveled all over this country and
has been to my State several times. I very much appreciate
that.
Mr. Slater. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Chafee. Well, we've got a little dispute here, so
Senator Hutchison, if you can retreat a bit.
Senator Warner.
Senator Warner. I yield to Senator Hutchison.
Senator Hutchison. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Slater, I appreciated your comment and we're so proud
of you in Arkansas. I'm delighted at the great leadership
you're giving in this area. I especially appreciated your
comments that there is few, if any, pieces of legislation that
this Congress, this Senate will deal with that's going to touch
more lives, more Americans than the reauthorization of the
ISTEA bill. Every American is impacted by transportation, so
it's critically important.
I appreciated Senator Baucus and his remarks that this is a
United States and this committee has been noted, both on the
House side and our parallel committee, with bipartisanship and
working together.
In order to produce a bill that will have that kind of
bipartisan spirit and unit, we're going to have to have
fairness. We're such a diverse committee and we're such a
diverse country--the West, Arkansas where mass transit is
almost unknown, and the Northeast. For us to maintain that kind
of consensus and unanimity, there's going to have to be a
prevailing spirit of fairness among the various regions
represented.
The funding level has been referred to and I want to add my
voice to what Senator Baucus and others have said on the
importance of having sufficient funding for ISTEA, that this is
an investment, that there are few parts of the budget that we
can get a greater return for all Americans than having adequate
funding for ISTEA, increased funding for ISTEA.
The formula goes right to the fairness and I'm anxious to
see what the Administration will propose. States like Arkansas
that are rural, where people travel a long ways to get to
work--there's no State you're more familiar with. Arkansas is
experiencing great growth and it's not just a highway bill, but
in Arkansas, highways are critical to facilitate the growth
that we're experiencing.
With the passage of NAFTA, the increased trade that NAFTA
represents, what we do on surface transportation in Arkansas is
going to be critical to the future economic growth and
prosperity, the opportunities that are afforded the people of
my State. So I'm going to be very interested and very concerned
about what we do on that formula.
Arkansas is a donor State, we travel a long ways, we buy a
lot of gas, we pay a lot of gas taxes, and we don't get it
back, I'm afraid, oftentimes.
Let me pose three questions as I conclude and give you an
opportunity to respond. Can we expect an Administration
proposal reflecting changes in the funding formula from the
1991 passage of ISTEA? What would you suggest to ensure that
rural States like Arkansas will be on equal footing with
larger, more populous States? What are your plans to ensure
that Amtrak services are provided for rural communities and it
not just be a northeast corridor kind of service?
Mr. Slater. Let me start with the last question first and
work backwards. Clearly, I believe that Amtrak should be a
national system. We have to work with State and local
governments to ensure the funding for that, but the Federal
Government should be a partner in that process as well. We
should all work to get Amtrak to a point where it is self-
sufficient. I think the staff there is doing an excellent job
under the leadership of Tom Downs and I believe we can get
there.
Senator Hutchison. Mr. Slater, they're wanting to shut
down.
Mr. Slater. I understand. We've got to move on it quickly
and I am hopeful that I will soon have the opportunity to join
firsthand in many of the activities underway at the Department
as Secretary and I will commit to do that upon confirmation if
I'm so honored to be confirmed.
As relates to the issue of fairness in the formulas, that
really speaks to the first question as well, clearly we would
like to ensure that there is a sense of fairness in the
process. If there isn't, then the process breaks down.
This is a United States. Jefferson talked about a union of
sentiment; that's exactly what we have to find. You were able
to find it as a committee during ISTEA and the deliberations
then. It's been evident in the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee as well, which is made up of diverse
interests.
We can get there but everyone has to come to the table
really being guided as Lincoln would say, ``by the better
angels of our nature'' if we hope to make it work for us. I
think we can do that. This is an issue that is too important
for us not to be successful. We must be successful.
Senator Chafee. Thank you very much.
Senator Hutchison. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr.
Warner.
Senator Chafee. Senator Warner.
Senator Warner. I think I'm going to have to say we're
moving around here with too many softball questions and
answers. I want to tighten this up.
Let's get down to the question of formula. Do you think
that formula should be revised in such a way as to reflect
current data as opposed to so much of the archaic data now
being used?
Mr. Slater. Yes.
Senator Warner. That's a clear answer. On the question of
the budget, we in Congress think more money should be put into
the highway section. Have you advocated that in your budget
discussions with your President and others?
Mr. Slater. We have.
Senator Warner. Now, on the issue of who is going to be
spokesman on the question of ISTEA and its many ramifications,
clearly other departments and agencies of the Federal
Government have a voice but I'm concerned that within the
Environmental Protection Agency, there seems to be a voice or
two saying they're going to be the dominant spokesman.
I think this committee and, indeed, the Senate as a whole
would want you, as Secretary of Transportation, to be the
principal spokesman for the President on ISTEA. Are you
prepared to say that's the way it's going to be?
Mr. Slater. ISTEA is a transportation bill. It is only
appropriate for the Secretary of Transportation to be a lead
voice in that regard.
Senator Warner. Thank you. That's a clear answer.
Now, on the issue of safety, all of us are very concerned
about the recent reports on drunk driving. We have to apply our
wisdom and see what we can do to help. Could you specifically
say how you'd deal with the drunk driving increases,
particularly among teenagers?
Mr. Slater. Exactly. Let me just say that while there were
some battles lost in the effort to secure the passage of the
National Highway System, we did retain the seatbelt law, but,
Mr. Chairman, we also added a provision that deals with zero
tolerance, a very tough provision. It deals specifically with
teenagers. We want to move forth aggressively to work with the
States, to fully implement that provision.
We also have discovered that, while we have made a lot of
advancements on the safety front with improvements to the
vehicle, improvements to the roadway, the transportation system
itself, the issue of behavior is one that needs significant
attention, whether that's a motor carrier operator, whether
that's a Metro driver, that's where we want to focus.
Senator Warner. Are you going to come up with a specific
set of recommendations on this on behalf of the President?
Mr. Slater. Yes, we will.
Senator Warner. Now, the Highway Trust Fund is designed on
the user-pay principle?
Mr. Slater. Yes.
Senator Warner. Yet, there is considerable effort to try
and bring in other beneficiaries, namely the Amtrak. How do you
wish to deal with that issue because I'm concerned if we stray
from user-pay principle, it will weaken the whole concept of
the trust fund. I lean to keeping it as pure as we can. Where
do you stand on that issue?
Mr. Slater. Well, I think we should keep it as pure as we
can, but I do raise for the committee's consideration the fact
that we were able to add transit as a recipient of trust fund
dollars some time ago and we have significantly improved our
transit system as a result of that.
We also have many individuals who may use their automobiles
for one purpose, resulting in the deposit of resources in the
trust fund through that activity--using their cars and the
like--but who may use Amtrak for other purposes. So I do think
we have to be sensitive to those factors as we answer this
question. I'm open to any advice the committee would have to
offer in that regard.
Senator Warner. That's a diplomatic answer but I lean
toward purity.
Mr. Slater. OK. I understand.
Senator Warner. Mr. Chairman, I asked my questions, direct
answers, and I'm under my time to accommodate you.
Senator Chafee. Thank you very much, Senator.
Senator Kempthorne.
Senator Kempthorne. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
Mr. Slater, I appreciate that you've stated that safety is
the highest priority.
Mr. Slater. Yes, sir.
Senator Kempthorne. So I want to talk about a safety issue
that is the highest priority today in your department. It is
critical, and that is airbags in automobiles. Why do I say
that, because we currently have a Federal standard that is
killing children.
In March 1996, a hearing was held before the Commerce
Committee in which the Administrator of the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration within the Department of
Transportation stated, ``We have investigated 15 crashes since
the late 1980's in which a child has been fatally injured by a
passenger side airbag.'' Ten months later, Mr. Slater, the same
committee, same topic, only it was 32 dead children, 10 months
later, based on a standard that the Department of
Transportation has predicted will kill more children than it
will save.
One of those kids was an Idaho child, 1 year old. The day
before last Thanksgiving when that little 1-year-old baby,
whose mother was in a minor fender bender, that baby was
decapitated. Seasoned police officers that responded to that
scene were traumatized by what they saw.
During that Commerce hearing, which they gave me the
courtesy of sitting in on and asking questions on January 9,
1997, I asked the Administrator, Dr. Martinez, if he would
issue a proposed rule change calling for the elimination of the
unbelted test standard for airbags.
As you know, we currently have a standard that is based
upon saving an adult male who has chosen to not wear his
seatbelt, even though in 49 States it's the law that you wear
your seatbelt. In order to save the father, we are running the
risk of losing the child.
The National Transportation Safety Board supports what I
have suggested, which is to eliminate that unbelted standard
and go to a belted standard that will still then save the life
of the adult, but not cause the death of the child.
Dr. Martinez stated that he believed at that time that he
did not have the authority to unilaterally change the unbelted
standard. I told him that I disagreed with him. I informed him
that Majority Counsel for the Commerce Committee believed that
Dr. Martinez did, indeed, have the authority to go forward with
that proposal. Dr. Martinez said, in response to my question,
and I quote from the transcript, ``Mr. Kempthorne, if I have
the legal authority to do that, I will do it.''
I have in my possession now an opinion from the law firm of
Myer, Brown & Platt, and in this opinion, it states, and I'll
just read a concluding remark, ``Nothing in the ISTEA or the
codified Vehicle Safety Act explicitly or implicitly constrains
NHTSA's authority to repeal the unbelted compliance test for
certification with MSVSS 208.''
I will have delivered to you today an opinion from the
Congressional Research Service, American Law Division, Counsel
of Jurisdiction supporting that opinion.
Mr. Slater, in light of the legal authority and opposition
to what NHTSA is contending, would you, as the Secretary of
Transportation, ensure that your department will go forward
with a proposed rule change so that we can seek public comment
as to whether that is the solution?
Mr. Slater. Let me answer the question this way, if I may,
Senator. First of all, I'd like to commend you and Members of
the Commerce Committee, in particular, for providing the
hearing and the opportunity to have this issue aired openly as
it should be.
I don't think any of us relish the thought of having in
place rules and regulations that create a situation like the
one that you've just mentioned. I know I personally don't. I've
got a 3\1/2\-year-old daughter that all of you can see and I
know there are other parents around the country who have the
same kinds of concerns. I also frankly feel for the families
that have lost loved ones because we don't have a clear answer
on this issue.
Let me make this assurance to you and commitment to you. I
will deal forthrightly with our legal counsel, legal staff, to
assess from our perspective the validity of the opinions that
you just stated and that we will move on this issue in a most
expeditious fashion.
I will meet with Mr. Martinez, who I believe now has done
really a good job as the head of NHTSA, but clearly this is a
matter on which there is disagreement, but I will meet with him
forthrightly and we will come to a conclusion in dealing with
this matter, I think, Senator, in a way that you will be
pleased with. I make that commitment.
Let me say I make that commitment also with the
understanding that I still have to be confirmed. I've been
nominated, I have to be confirmed before I am actually the
Secretary of Transportation, but I make that commitment here
today if I am so honored to be confirmed by the Senate.
Senator Moynihan. Mr. Chairman, may I make a brief
statement off the record?
Senator Chafee. Brief.
[Brief statement by Senator Moynihan off the record.]
Senator Kempthorne. I appreciate that, Mr. Slater.
Again, Mr. Chairman, I would just reiterate currently we
have a Federal standard that must be complied with which our
own Government predicts will kill children and it has happened
too many times. It has to stop.
Senator Chafee. It does seem bizarre that this thing can't
be straightened out. I concur with Senator Kempthorne, what he
said.
Senator Kempthorne. Mr. Chairman, may I just thank Senator
Moynihan and you for your comment. Senator Moynihan, just as
you have pointed out how things change, when this first was
being considered and standards devised, seatbelt usage was at
11 percent; today, it's at 68 percent.
Senator Moynihan. That's what we hoped for.
Senator Chafee. Senator Wyden.
Senator Wyden. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Slater, as you and I discussed, my State was showcased
recently in the national media, the Wall Street Journal and the
New York Times came to my hometown and basically said, we're
the model for showing that you can have growth and at the same
time, prevent some of the pollution and degradation kind of
problems you have elsewhere. The key to all of this is really
flexibility, flexibility under ISTEA.
My first question to you is, do you have any thoughts on
additional ways to promote flexibility under ISTEA,
particularly with respect to ways to promote flexibility so
that communities can invest in new options which we feel has
been one of the keys to the progress we've made?
Mr. Slater. Senator Wyden, there are clearly more ways that
we can be flexible in implementing the provisions of ISTEA. I
will say this, though, one thing we're trying to do is
encourage States and locales to fully exercise the flexibility
they have. We've had significant success and response in that
regard.
As we prepare reauthorization proposals, we are looking at
new ways that we can encourage that flexibility and local and
State decisionmaking processes even more. We'll be in a
position to speak more specifically about that with the
unveiling of our proposal later in February.
Senator Wyden. In the same kind of vein, we're very
interested in the New Starts Program. We want to have in the
metropolitan Portland area a transit system from south north.
We've generated a significant amount of local funds to do it.
The projections are we'd reduce air pollution by something like
721 tons per year.
Are you a strong supporter of the New Starts Program and
outline, if you would, your views on that?
Mr. Slater. Well, I'm a supporter of the program. I do
believe that it serves to enhance the environment, and look
forward to working with you and others to improve on its
implementation.
Senator Wyden. Jump with me from the urban area to the
rural area just for a second. Here we have a different set of
problems. We have communities that are seeing, as a result of
wrenching social changes particularly in the environmental
area, a situation where they don't have some of the funds for
road improvements with their tax base.
What is your position on the Federal Lands Highway Program,
one that really makes a difference in the small, rural
communities that are undergoing these wrenching changes?
Mr. Slater. I'm supportive of the program. I think it has a
significant application in the west because of the presence of
a lot of Federal lands, as noted earlier, which prevents States
from taxing the lands in ways that they're able to tax them in
other locations where they don't have the Federal character to
them.
I think we've had significant success with our Federal
Lands Program. I can tell you that one of my key objectives
upon becoming Federal Highway Administrator was to visit all of
our Federal Lands offices because I think there we have been on
the cutting edge when it comes to implementing projects that
really take advantage of enhancing the environment. We have a
quality staff and we're working in concert with the Department
of Interior and our State and local partners and I think we're
doing a good job. I'm very supportive of the program.
Senator Wyden. Last question. On the issue of growth
management, we touched on it a bit in the office. What I think
is especially exasperating about Federal policy is that we can
have communities in States, Senator Chafee's and mine, are
examples of States that have really gone out and done some
heavy lifting to put in place good road management kind of
plans and in effect, we get penalized under Federal policy.
You do it once at the local level in order to satisfy a
growth management plan and then you basically don't get any
credit for it when you have to comply with a Federal statute.
It seems to me we ought to be creating incentives at the
Federal level for good, local growth management, not Federal
zoning, not something at the Federal level, but incentives for
good growth management at the local level.
Do you have any ideas on how ISTEA, in particular, might be
used to create incentives for sensible growth management on the
local level?
Mr. Slater. Well, as I mentioned earlier, as relates to
goals, safety being the No. 1 priority, and then second,
dealing with issues of transportation in such a way as to
enhance the economy and our quality of life, you get into these
kinds of discussions.
Looking to the local governments to also speak to the
heritage and character and culture of the country, speaking to
its soul and its heart, we have some fine examples of how
resources have been used in that way.
Senator Wyden. My time is up, Mr. Chairman. Let me just say
to my colleagues, and Chairman Chafee has been especially
gracious to me, this is an opportunity to create an
extraordinary win-win situation, an opportunity to have better
growth management on the local level, and a chance to save our
businesses time and money because our businesses, in effect,
have to duplicate often at the Federal level what they go
through at the local level.
Mr. Chairman, I yield.
Senator Chafee. Thank you.
One of the things from ISTEA that has been very successful
was the scenic byways and we've used it in our State and
Senator Moynihan is very familiar with it, as are many others
here, probably a few in your State.
Senator Sessions.
Senator Sessions. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
I have just one matter that I would like to raise. I think
it's important. I had the unfortunate difficulty of having a
budget deficit when I became attorney general and we had to
terminate the employment of one-third of the people in our
office. We reorganized and people chipped in and actually
increased the legal productivity of that office.
Bureaucracies, as they grow, become more and more
inefficient. I know the President has talked about reinventing
government. Let me just ask you, would you make a commitment to
honoring the taxpayers of this country by constantly reviewing
your entire, overall bureaucratic team to make sure that our
people are productively employed in that regard?
Mr. Slater. Senator, we make that continued commitment. We
have actually worked hard to bring common sense strategies and
initiatives to government to ensure that we would meet the
President's and the Vice President's charge to create a
government that works better and costs less.
In that regard, we've actually cut the DOT employment force
by about 11,500 employees, in Federal Highway alone, more than
440 or so, and that's across the board. The Coast Guard has
engaged in significant restructuring. We have quality
legislation now that will allow us to do a lot of significant
restructuring as relates to acquisition, personnel reform in
the FAA. The same holds true for Maritime. So we are fully in
the course of doing exactly as you have encouraged us to do
even more and we'd make that commitment.
Senator Sessions. It takes leadership from the top or it
just won't happen. There is no doubt about that.
Mr. Slater. There will be that leadership, sir.
Senator Sessions. I know you are committed, as you
responded to the Chairman, to a broad range of transportation
possibilities, but are you committed to improving,
strengthening, and expanding the healthy interstate and
national highway system as well?
Mr. Slater. Senator, I am. Let me just say that one of the
most significant events that I engaged in in the past year was
to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the interstate system with
a cross-country road tour. Senator Moynihan, I mention this
because last evening, we talked a bit about Lieutenant Colonel
Eisenhower's road tour in 1919. Mine actually traced in reverse
much of his trip. I started at the Presidio where he ended and
traveled across the country ending in Washington at the
ellipse.
During the course of that trip, I traveled in the west,
Senator Baucus, and saw a lot of the wide, open spaces. I
actually met in Wyoming with the head DOTs of a number of the
western States and we talked about many of the issues you
raised dealing with formulas and the presence of Federal lands
and the like.
Let me say quickly what I did that I think speaks to the
essence of the point that Senator Sessions makes. Not only did
I see the system as it was, which I think Lieutenant Colonel
Eisenhower wanted to do, but you also, in seeing it as it is,
think about it as it can be. As I looked at what it is, I saw
clearly the most impressive public works project ever
undertaken in the history of humankind, but I also saw other
things, Senator Moynihan.
I did see where, in certain instances, we really have an
opportunity when we go back and reconstruct some of those
portions that are in a state of disrepair now, such as I-15 in
Salt Lake City, to do it in a way that will actually enhance
the environment in which the reconstruction will occur and at
the same time, preserve the country's investment in the system
that cost us about $130 billion.
I also met with a group called the I-69 Alliance in
Indianapolis, IN and they wanted to talk about the need for the
continuation of I-69 that starts at the Blue Water Bridge in
Port Huron, MI and extending it all the way to the lower Rio
Grande Valley in Texas.
We talked about that. We talked about all of the
interstates that come together there, but we also talked about
some new improvements that might be made. As you know, that
particular project is an NHS high-priority corridor under
ISTEA.
Then, finally, I want to say this. In tribute to President
Eisenhower, we met in his home city of Abilene, KS along with
all of the people, organizations that have been involved in the
creation of the interstate system and there we signed a solemn
pledge to work with the Congress to ensure that we maintain our
investment in that system.
We also renewed that commitment at the most recent AASHTO
meeting where we gathered again. We do want to preserve that
system, but we also want to build on it. That doesn't mean more
lane miles, it may mean better connections with the rail lines
or to transit facilities or to airports and the like, focusing
on intermodal connectors, that sort of thing.
We have sought to embrace the kind of vision that led Mr.
Eisenhower in 1919 to not only see what was, but what can be.
Senator Chafee. I'll turn to the class historian. I believe
that later Governor Volpe, then John Volpe, was head of the
Federal Highway Administration when the interstate highway
system under President Eisenhower was started. Is that right,
Senator Moynihan?
Senator Moynihan. Yes, sir.
Senator Chafee. I knew you'd have an answer.
Senator Smith.
Senator Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Slater, there's kind of a difference of opinion between
the House and the Senate on demonstration projects. How do you
feel about that?
Mr. Slater. Well, the Administration has taken the position
that we are opposed to demonstration projects. Clearly, those
resources come off the top and they don't move through the
distribution mechanism of the formula that really provides
States and locales, through the planning process, with the
freedom of deciding how those resources should be expended.
That is the position of the Administration.
Senator Smith. In the question the Chairman asked earlier,
or comments maybe rather than a question, regarding seatbelts,
New Hampshire is the only State out of the 50 States that does
not have a seatbelt law. However, in its defense, New Hampshire
has a compliance rate higher than many of the States who do.
Is it fair to punish a State such as New Hampshire who does
not have a mandatory law but has a compliance rate that is
higher than say another State, is it fair to punish that State
by holding up highway money or forcing the money to be spent on
safety issues rather than say a bridge or some other area where
the money could be used in perhaps a better way?
Mr. Slater. Senator, your point about New Hampshire's
compliance rate being better than some States that have the
mandatory law is correct, but clearly, we have been able to
improve across the board, across the Nation as a result of the
seatbelt law, enhancing the safety of the traveling public.
I believe, as evidenced by the letter that you read a few
minutes ago, that those in New Hampshire with whom we have the
privilege and pleasure to work with would agree that we have
tried to be fair in working with the State as we deal with the
fact that it doesn't have a law and that there are certain
Penalties that go along with that.
We have worked with the State as they have demonstrated to
us that they have effectively complied with the provisions of
the law and we've been able to work through it.
Senator Smith. Would it be your intention to continue along
that vein?
Mr. Slater. Yes, it would be. Clearly, as I say that, it is
a two-way street and we have to find common ground as we work
together, but we've had our ups and downs in the past, but
we've been able to work through it, and I'm sure we'll be able
to do that in the future.
Senator Smith. Not to belabor it, you've made an honest
answer and I appreciate it. I think in the past, we've had
situations where we were told--the State was told in order to
accept the dollars, you have to spend x number of dollars on
safety programs, which they didn't need to spend because the
safety programs are already being funded, yet that money could
have been used to repair a bridge or some highway or road. We
weren't able to do that and we are complying at a higher rate
than another State who may not have this problem.
You were reasonable in administering that and hopefully, we
can continue along that line.
A final question, you answered Senator Warner on the issue
of who would be the lead in terms of a conflict between the EPA
and the Transportation Department in the building of a road,
and you gave an honest answer, that you felt you should be the
lead.
However, there are times, as you know, where things don't
flow all that smoothly and not that the environment should not
be paramount sometimes, it should be, but there are times when
the EPA does hold up highway projects frankly, in my opinion,
without necessarily having good reason to do it.
Do you intend to be aggressive in that debate within the
Administration if that should occur in the future?
Mr. Slater. We've had a good working relationship with the
EPA over the last 4 years. They've got a group of dedicated and
talented employees there and clearly, the point we try to
stress with them is that we have responsibilities as well and
the only way to work through the very difficult situations is
for everyone to come to the table in a spirit of good faith,
working with our partners, and to resolve the issues. We've
been able to do a lot of that even in your State, Senator.
Let me close by saying that we have also established a sort
of joint transportation working group where we don't just come
together when there is a problem, but we also work together
sensitizing each other as to the legitimate interests that we
represent, and that has proven very successful as well.
Senator Chafee. Senator Lautenberg, before you start, I
just want to say, Mr. Slater, regrettably, I have a long-time
commitment in my office that I just could not change, so I'll
have to be leaving, but Senator Smith will be presiding.
We'll go down the list and then anybody who wants other
questions, Senator Smith will give that individual an
opportunity to a second round.
We will keep the record open. I would ask unanimous consent
that the record stay open until 5 p.m. today for written
questions. When you receive the written questions, Mr. Slater,
I would ask that you get them back promptly to the committee.
Mr. Slater. Yes, sir, we will. We commit to do that.
Senator Chafee. Again, I apologize for having to leave.
Senator Lautenberg is next, followed by Senator Moynihan and
Senator Graham.
Senator Lautenberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Slater, in the interest of time, I'll try to ask short
questions, so you can give short but specific answers and maybe
we can get to a couple of things I'm concerned about.
First among them is the shortage of qualified controllers
in the New York-New Jersey metropolitan region. We're down,
according to newspaper reports, about 25 percent, talking about
almost 100 controllers. That air space is clogged. It's got all
the airports in New York, it's got some in Long Island, it's
got some in Connecticut, it's got some in New Jersey, and I
don't want to suggest to the traveling public that there are
unusual risks, but there are certainly unusual delays. It
follows on that risks could easily be assumed to be somewhat
greater. They do a wonderful job out there.
Well, I've been out there with Secretary Pena and he
assured me at the time that he'd be working to resolve the
problems. Since then, we have seen some improvement, but more
has to be done.
Can you give the public in the area, can you give the
citizens in the area some commitment that resolving the air
traffic control staffing problem in the New York-New Jersey
area will be a high priority?
Mr. Slater. Senator, it will be a high priority. I would
add that I have had a general briefing by the FAA giving me an
update on their progress and you're going to continue to see
improvement in that area.
Senator Lautenberg. Can I expect to see a staffing plan in
the near future? When might we?
Mr. Slater. In the near future. We'll be in touch with you
and we'll give you an update as to where we are in that regard.
Senator Lautenberg. I'd appreciate it.
Since 1991, we, the United States, has frozen the operation
of LCVs, longer combination vehicles. With ISTEA
reauthorization, Lord willing, scheduled this year, I hear
renewed talk about the possibility of ending the freeze on
LCVs, either entirely or in specific regions or communities
throughout the Nation.
Well, there's strong public opposition, as you know, to
increasing those truck sizes. Last spring, majorities in both
the House and the Senate signed letters to Secretary Pena
opposing truck size increases. Can you see any reason to end
the LCV freeze?
Mr. Slater. No.
Senator Lautenberg. I assume, that means we'll be able to
get your help in maintaining it if that's required?
Mr. Slater. We plan to continue to follow the clear
direction given by Congress.
Senator Lautenberg. Last, you know the aviation ticket tax
was allowed to expire this last December. Therefore, there
won't even be adequate balance to the Aviation Trust Fund to
cover the appropriations for this year.
I'm concerned by reports out of IRS this week that the
Aviation Trust Fund may actually be between $1 billion and $2
billion poorer than originally estimated. That could mean that
the trust fund will go bankrupt within the next 8 weeks instead
of this summer.
Could you give us some clues as to what action you might
take to help alleviate this situation?
Mr. Slater. Yes. Senator Lautenberg, your question was the
first question that I received during my confirmation hearing
from Chairman McCain. I committed then to join him and I make
the same commitment here to join you, again, if I'm so honored
to be confirmed, in making the case to the proper individuals,
those who can make a difference here, and to the American
people, that we have to move on this issue and we have to do it
quickly.
Senator Moynihan. You mean the tax writing?
Mr. Slater. Yes, sir.
Senator Lautenberg. He was looking at you and he spoke to
me.
Mr. Slater. I understand too that based on the recent
report in the paper, that our situation is more dire than we
originally anticipated, which only underscores the importance
of moving on this issue in a most expeditious fashion and I
make a commitment, if I am so confirmed by the Senate, that I
will be a partner in that process.
I think it is essential to do so because there is no way we
can move forward as a department and the FAA as an agency, in
implementing the very significant and sweeping personnel
reform, acquisition reform, initiatives that you have given
them the authority to move on without these resources.
Senator Lautenberg. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Baucus. If I might briefly add on to that, Mr.
Secretary, I urge you to get this thing solved for the very
reasons that Senator Lautenberg indicated. There's analogy
here. It's called installment sales of deferred contracts that
farmers have used in determining their taxable income.
The IRS, for years, has said that in an installment sales
contract, they do not recognize income in the current year when
cash is paid in a subsequent year. The IRS, a few months ago,
particularly in the State of Washington, changed its mind and
began to tell taxpayers they could no longer do that.
All Members of Congress, looked at this as well as the
Secretary of Treasury, Bob Rubin. Everyone agrees that this new
IRS position is nuts and they, for a long time said--a long
time meaning a month or so--that they could not change it; it
would take an act of Congress. The taxable year for these
people, their returns have to be in by March 1. It's clear
Congress cannot act by March 1 to clear it up. We prevailed
strenuously on the Administration, and they, administratively
reversed themselves, finding a way to clear up this mess.
I urge you and the Administration to work as aggressively
and figure out a way to clear up this mess, working with the
Congress, so we don't have to go through the usual process of
waiting until we get a tax bill. Who knows when that might come
up. We can't wait that long. This thing has to be solved right
away.
Mr. Slater. You have the commitment from me to work with
all parties to come to that end.
Senator Baucus. Thank you.
Mr. Slater. Safety is in the balance and what better way to
demonstrate that it's truly your No. 1 priority.
Senator Smith [assuming Chair]. Senator Moynihan.
Senator Moynihan. Can I just for Senator Lautenberg,
please, my colleague on the Finance Committee says it's
caucused. This has to be a tax bill.
Senator Baucus. Exactly.
Senator Lautenberg. We might have to get an agreement to a
tax bill.
Senator Baucus. That's what I'm getting at.
Senator Moynihan. Two questions. First, if I could ask, in
the forthcoming ISTEA legislation which you will send us, can
we assume that you will maintain the reimbursement program
which every State gets something but 47 States contributed a
portion to the original interstate system and we agreed that
they would be reimbursed last in the ISTEA, a 15-year program.
Can we assume that you will continue it?
Mr. Slater. We are committed to following through on the
commitment that was made in ISTEA, yes, sir.
Senator Moynihan. Thank you.
Now, a big question and very good news. In the original
ISTEA, we proposed a commission to promote investment in
America's infrastructure, Dan Flanagan was chairman; Kay Bailey
was a member. We understand that you may be posing a Federal
Infrastructure Credit Act. There's a lot of potential here to
get resources into infrastructure which, for lack of financing
arrangements, we have never done.
Mr. Slater. We are looking very closely at that and I think
you'll be pleased, Senator. Let me just say that we very much
appreciate the charge given us in ISTEA to work on innovative
financing techniques, much like the one that you've just
referenced. I personally, for the record, would like to mention
that my deputy administrator, Jane Garvey, along with Louise
Stoll, who is the head of budget at DOT, along with Mort Downey
and other chief officials within the department, have done an
excellent job in this regard.
They've actually, and this is really the point I wish to
stress, they have actually engaged the thinking, the expertise
of the entire DOT staff, people who were used to doing things a
different way, very comfortable with that, but who have now
become very, very excited about the potential for this sort of
initiative.
I say that to say that we have changed as we have been
challenged to change and I'm very, very excited about the
potential here.
Senator Moynihan. Tom Downey understands this. He was
involved with the financing of the New York City subway system,
which worked.
Mr. Slater. Exactly.
Senator Moynihan. There's a lot of funds out there we can
access if we can find a credit system which the Federal
Government has been doing for a very long time beginning with
the Federal housing.
Thank you.
Senator Smith. Senator Graham.
Senator Graham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Again, I want to express my admiration for Mr. Slater and
the outstanding service that he's rendered in the first term
and look forward to an even greater service in this new
position in the second Clinton administration.
I have three questions I'd like to ask that cover different
areas. One has been alluded to and that is interface between
surface transportation and environmental concerns. This
committee, which has both sides of that equation in its very
title, is obviously concerned with this.
An issue that has come up several times in my State in
recent years is the issue of a major transportation project
that say started in 1985 and by the early 1990's, substantial
funds had been expended on design and construction and land
acquisition and at that point, request for a permit is made and
the project is denied, often denied for a factor which was
knowable in 1985. We have a current situation involving a major
enhancement of the highway that connects the mainland to the
Florida Keys.
I'm concerned that we can't get a process that brings all
of the stakeholders in these major public projects, of which
transportation would be a substantial member, to the table at
Chapter 1 of their conception, and if there is some fatal flaw
in the undertaking, it can be permeated and move on to some
other activity.
If it's not fatal, then the obstacles can be identified so
that they can be dealt with during the course of design and
initial planning, with some expectation that it will make it a
permittable project.
The question is, do you have some ideas possibly that might
be incorporated in our next surface transportation
reauthorization to try to facilitate the relationship between
environmental permitting and transportation planning, design,
and implementation?
Mr. Slater. Senator, you speak to an issue that is very,
very important in both the transportation planning process and
the actual implementation of the plan.
We have had 4 years of quality experience working with EPA,
working with the Department of Interior, working with our
partners at the State and local level trying to figure out how
you streamline the process, how you streamline the various
permits required by our department, required by the Corps of
Engineers, required by other Federal agencies, State and local
agencies as well.
Our reauthorization proposal will reflect our best thinking
in that regard. We have argued that issues of environmental
interest and concern should be brought into the process at the
earliest possible stage, even at the planning level, so that
those factors can be taken into account as you move forward
with the program.
Even though you spend a considerable amount of money in the
planning process and a considerable amount of time, you don't
spend anywhere near the kinds of resources you spend when you
actually start to act on a plan.
So it's our hope that we will make more of an investment
early on and avoid some of the experiences that you mention
here, sir.
Senator Graham. I'm pleased to hear that and look forward
to drawing on the experience that you've accumulated as we look
at this next legislation.
Given my time, I'm going to reduce my number of questions
down to two. The second question is of great concern in my
State about the potential for a strike at our major commercial
aviation carrier, American Airlines.
What is the central role of the Department of
Transportation being an intermediary to try to avoid what will
be a massive dislocation of our domestic public and a
dislocation of one of the major international hubs,
particularly serving the Caribbean and Latin America?
Mr. Slater. Because aviation, as well as all transportation
is really so critical to the health and well-being of our
economy and our quality of life, there is a unique provision
that allows for participation by the Department, by the
Administration in these kinds of situations.
We really prefer that the mediation and negotiation process
work because that's where it's best handled, but in those very
unique and difficult situations, there are provisions that
allow participation on the part of the Administration. We
generally do not insert ourselves proactively and it's always
generally in response to a particular request for involvement.
Senator Graham. I look forward to working with you. I share
your hope that this can be resolved, as it should be, by the
parties, but there is a party that's not at the negotiating
table and that's the public. If need be, I would look forward
to your willingness to accept a role in trying to resolve this
in the interest of the public.
Mr. Slater. Yes, sir.
Senator Smith. Thank you, Senator Graham.
That completes the first round and Mr. Slater, Senator
Kempthorne has asked for a couple of followup questions and
then we'll be finished.
Senator Kempthorne.
Senator Kempthorne. Mr. Slater, these will be painless and
really I've structured them so that a yes or no will be just
fine.
Mr. Slater. All right.
Senator Kempthorne. The Federal Lands Program--and I
appreciated your conversation with Senator Baucus where you
affirmed it's critical as to regions of our country that have
large amounts of highways that are located on Federal-owned
lands which are tax exempt. In Idaho, for example, we're at 65
percent federally-owned.
This program, properly operated, is used to maintain the
national highway system, so do you support the Federal Lands
Program?
Mr. Slater. I do.
Senator Kempthorne. And you'll work to strengthen it during
reauthorization?
Mr. Slater. I look forward to working with you in that
regard, sir.
Senator Kempthorne. An important recreational program
within ISTEA is the National Recreational Trails Act, which you
and I have talked about. This program is designed to provide
recreational opportunities and facilities for hiking, skiing,
snowmobiling, horseback riding, bicycling, and four-wheeling
for individuals with disabilities, just to name a few.
It's an immensely popular program for which funding has
fallen woefully short of the intended amount. As you know, this
program is designed to be funded by that portion of the Gas Tax
Trust Fund that is attributed solely to offroad vehicle use.
Although the National Recreation Trails Advisory
Committee's annual report of 1994 published by the U.S.
Department of Transportation estimated that the annual revenues
from offroad vehicles to be in the range of $63 million to $167
million, the Recreational Trails Act has never, never received
the $30 million annual appropriation called for in ISTEA
because of a legislative drafting error.
As you're aware, I've personally pursued this issue for a
number of years and through the cooperation of Federal Highways
and the Department of Transportation, and your help, we have
been able to secure $15 million in 1996 and 1997.
Will you work with me to develop a legislative solution to
this funding problem with the Recreational Trails Act and
provide the $30 million appropriation as provided for in the
original ISTEA Program?
Mr. Slater. Senator, I will if I'm so honored to be
confirmed as Secretary of Transportation.
Senator Kempthorne. Good. Then I look forward to working
with you because I'm confident that you will be confirmed.
You're what we need as Secretary of Transportation.
Mr. Slater. Thank you.
Senator Kempthorne. I also place a high priority on
research and development--Senator Baucus, again, brought this
up--to prepare ourselves for the challenges of the next
century.
We have several outstanding research facilities across the
country that are conducting just these types of research and
development programs. Two of those, the most innovative
facilities are in Idaho at the National Center for Advanced
Transportation Technology at the University of Idaho and the
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory in
Idaho Falls.
Will you place a high personal and departmental priority on
research and recommend appropriate funding levels for both
urban and rural needs when you are Secretary of Transportation?
Mr. Slater. Senator, you have that commitment.
Senator Kempthorne. Thank you. Again, when we spoke in the
office, you indicated that during the reauthorization process,
you would make a concerted effort to solicit and consider input
from local and State officials as you develop department
priorities for the new ISTEA. Can you be more specific now on
how you may accomplish that?
Mr. Slater. Senator, I'm very pleased that the Department,
under the leadership of Secretary Pena, actually engaged in, I
believe, 12 to 13 outreach meetings that were regional in
nature, where we did engage and interface with State and local
officials.
The Federal Highway Administration along with the Federal
Transit Administration and NHTSA on many occasions held more
than 100 listening sessions with officials across the country,
advocates and the like, those interested in transportation.
Then, over the course of 4 years, I have probably been the
most traveled Federal Highway Administrator in the history of
the agency, going to places across the length and breadth of
this country to look, listen and learn and to bring back those
insights and then respond. We're going to do more of that as we
prepare for the reauthorization process.
I will add that the entire FHWA has joined me in that
outreach effort and we've engaged in the most extensive
outreach effort in the 104-year history of the agency. It's a
fact about which I am very pleased and proud.
Senator Kempthorne. Great. Mr. Slater, again, I appreciate
all that you're doing. I hope, too, that you'll have some
regional meetings as we've discussed.
I happen to drive a four-wheel drive vehicle and I'm from
Idaho; I know what rugged terrain is, but there's sections of
295 and 395 that are challenging. So one of these days after
you're confirmed, maybe we'll go have lunch and I'll show you a
few stretches of rugged terrain that we can improve upon.
Mr. Slater. I'd like that. Thank you, sir.
Senator Kempthorne. Thank you.
Senator Smith. Thank you, Senator Kempthorne.
Mr. Slater, thank you very much for being here this morning
and your very candid responses. Thank you, Mrs. Slater for
being here, and your daughter.
The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:27 a.m., the committee was adjourned, to
reconvene at the call of the Chair.]
[Mr. Slater's prepared statement and responses to
additional questions follow:]
Prepared Statement of the Hon. Rodney E. Slater, Nominated by the
President to be the Secretary of Transportation
Mr. Chairman, Senator Baucus, Members of the Committee: I thank you
for inviting me here today to talk with you about the future of
transportation in the Nation. This committee plays such a vital role in
keeping our transportation network operating smoothly that it is an
honor for me to have this opportunity to speak to you, not just as
Federal Highway Administrator, as in the past, but as the President's
nominee for Secretary of Transportation.
I well recall that day, May 19, 1993, when I came before you for
confirmation to head what is now a 104-year old agency, the Federal
Highway Administration, that has not only performed well each task the
Congress has assigned to it, but that has evolved with the changing
times. How fortunate I am that President Clinton's trust and the trust
of this committee and the Senate gave me the opportunity to be a part
of such a tradition of excellence.
I was humbled on December 20, 1996, by the trust the President has
again placed in me by putting my name forward for a new service to the
American people. Today, sitting before you again, I thank you for your
trust in me four years ago, without which I would not be here. I know,
too, of the many people and organizations within the transportation
community who have placed their trust in me as Federal Highway
Administrator and now as the nominee to become the Secretary of
Transportation. I can tell you that I am determined to continue paying
back the investment of trust placed in me by this committee and the
Congress, by the transportation community, by the President, and let me
just add, by my family.
I would like to talk with you about what we have accomplished
together these past four years, and I would like to discuss my vision
for preparing the Nation's intermodal transportation system for the
challenges of the 21st century. I will start with a summary that I will
elaborate on later in this statement.
I view transportation as vitally important to the life of this
Republic. President Clinton, in his Second Inaugural Address,
illustrated just how central transportation has been in the history of
making this Nation. He said:
We began the 19th century with a choice: to spread our nation
from coast to coast. We began the 20th century with a choice:
to harness the Industrial Revolution to our values of free
enterprise, conservation, and human decency.
In each case, transportation played a key role, whether through
pioneer settlers who populated this great continent, the linking of
coast to coast by the transcontinental railroad, or the transportation
revolutions of the 20th century that have supported not just the
strongest economy in the world, not just the strongest military, and
not just the strongest Nation, but the hope and dreams of every
American for freedom and opportunity.
Transportation will remain central in accomplishing what President
Clinton suggested must be our goal as we approach the 21st century,
namely ``to unleash the limitless potential of all our people, and yes,
to form a more perfect union.''
Our intermodal transportation network is far more than the sum of
its parts because it affects every aspect of the lives of the American
people in ways we see, as when we go to work, and ways we don't, as
when we make a purchase at a store without wondering how the item got
there. A transportation network that serves the greatest economy in the
world also helps get a mother to the hospital for the birth of a
fragile new life.
To this committee, I can say that we have very important work ahead
of us in a variety of areas, but perhaps nothing this committee does in
1997 will have more bearing on the American people than reauthorization
of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991. So let
me begin there.
First, I commend this committee for its role in shaping the post-
Interstate era through the passage of ISTEA. When President George Bush
signed this bill into law on December 18, 1991--I know that some of the
Members of this committee were there on that cold, blustery day near
Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport--it was widely hailed as a
landmark tuning point and as the most important surface transportation
legislation since President Dwight D. Eisenhower launched the
Interstate System by signing the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956. In
the 6 years since passage of ISTEA, its promise has been fulfilled, and
those who thought it was a landmark were proven correct.
ISTEA was not about business as usual. It was about rocking the
boat. So it took courage for what was then a Democratic Congress and a
Republican President to shake up the system, to start afresh, to turn
from proven paths.
I was not in Washington to help create ISTEA, but one of the
accomplishments I am proudest of in these past four years is leading an
Agency with the skills, the understanding, and the reputation to work
with the State transportation departments, with the metropolitan
planning organizations, and with the many interests involved to help
build new relationships and establish the new balance that ISTEA called
for. As the poet Robert Frost has said:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference
By taking the path of ISTEA, the path that in 1991 was less
traveled by, this committee and its counterpart in the House of
Representatives, have indeed made all the difference.
The core of ISTEA can be found in the bold goals it established,
drafted by Senator Moynihan, beginning with this visionary statement:
It is the policy of the United States to develop a National
Intermodal Transportation System that is economically efficient
and environmentally sound, provides the foundation for the
nation to compete in the global economy, and will move people
and goods in an energy efficient manner.
The past six years have demonstrated that this is not a vision of
some distant future, but a vision we can attain, in fact are attaining,
through the transportation planning process revitalized by ISTEA and by
the market forces of competition that are making the transportation
industry more productive and efficient.
But ISTEA is about much more than that. It is about choice, with
State and local governments having unprecedented flexibility and
responsibility in deciding on the mix of projects best suited to meet
transportation needs. It is about protecting our environment not only
through the choices we make, but the way we implement those choices so
that our air, our water, our natural environment, and our communities
are enhanced by the needed transportation service we provide. It is
about all forms of surface transportation, with renewed emphasis on
bicycling and walking, and about expanding the vision to include the
national scenic byways and recreational trails that are so important to
the soul of the American people. And ISTEA is also about harnessing
technology to serve a new century, through intelligent transportation
systems, high-speed rail, and magnetic levitation.
In 1997, we see the fruits of our collective labors. We approach
reauthorization with a diverse transportation community virtually
united in supporting the core concepts embodied in ISTEA. There is room
for improvement, but when I see the strong support coming from a wide
variety of interests for improving, not discarding, ISTEA, I know we
are on the right path.
And I know, too, that we have a unique opportunity, as we approach
a new millennium, to, again in the words of the President, ``unleash
the limitless potential of all our people'' and to serve the eternal
cause of forming a more perfect union.
If confirmed by the Senate as Secretary of Transportation, I will
be serving in a new role in 1997, but I want to assure you that I plan
to take a very strong and active leading role in working with you, the
President and this Administration to enact reauthorization of ISTEA, to
ensure the new legislation builds on the foundation created by ISTEA,
and to achieve passage promptly as Subcommittee Chairman Warner
indicated in the goals he outlined last September. We all want to avoid
the financial disruptions that occurred at critical points in the past
while the State transportation departments awaited passage of vitally
needed legislation, we must complete reauthorization by September 30,
1997, and I am confident that if we work together we can do so.
Although I was not in Washington while ISTEA was taking shape in
the Halls of Congress, I was here for another important milestone,
enactment of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1991. For
me, this was one of the most important accomplishments of my tenure as
Federal Highway Administrator. Perhaps like all good things, it did not
come easy, and as you know, it included some provisions, particularly
regarding safety, that I know Senator Chafee and other members of this
committee wish it did not. I strongly agree.
While the debate over the legislation was at time contentious,
there was no debate over the National Highway System itself. There was
a broad-based, bipartisan understanding within both Houses of Congress
that the National Highway System is the key to creating the intermodal
transportation system envision by ISTEA. The National Highway System
will provide the links that bind all the transportation modes into a
single, seamless network pulling together to support economic
development.
In the course of this statement, I will discuss my vision of a
United States Department of Transportation that not only meets the
transportation needs of today and the 21st century, but that helps
every American achieve his or her personal goals and that supports the
freedoms we so rightly cherish. Let me, first, highlight the key
priorities that will guide me, if the Senate sees fit to confirm my
nomination.
First, I will continue to make safety and security the highest
priority of the Department. Because I believe that nothing is more
important, I will strive to raise our current high levels of safety to
even greater heights, especially in the face of rapid growth in the use
of our transportation network.
Second, I will work with this committee and with Congress to
continue strategic investment in our transportation infrastructure,
which is vital to not only our economy, but also our quality of life.
These strategic investments include ISTEA reauthorization, the
reauthorization of several other transportation programs, and enactment
of FAA financial reform to complete the work of the Administration and
Congress to provide the FAA with the tools and resources it needs. I
will also work with Congress and our transportation partners to
aggressively implement the legislation enacted to give the Department
the tools to reform the FAA acquisition and personnel procedures, to
reform our nation's maritime programs, and to enhance the safety of our
network of oil and gas pipelines.
And third, I will continue to bring common sense government to the
Department of Transportation in order to provide the people we serve
with a Department that works better and costs less. I will build on
what we have accomplished to encourage more innovative and flexible
funding to leverage federal dollars for infrastructure investment,
technology use to improve the performance of our transportation system,
and transportation policies that are sensitive to environmental
concerns.
what transportation means to america
These past four years, I have had the privilege of serving under a
President and a Secretary, Federico Pena, who understand the central
importance of transportation and who accomplished much in a relatively
short time. I share with the President and with Secretary Pena a basic
vision about the role of government and about the role of the
Department of Transportation that can be summed up any number of ways,
but the President said it best early in his first term: Putting People
First.
As mentioned in my introduction, I have a very expansive vision of
what transportation means to our society and to our people. I look to
history for my guide in seeing how transportation has pulled us
together as a Nation, how transportation has sustained our dreams, and
how transportation has given us the freedom to enjoy the right,
promised by the Declaration of Independence, to ``Life, Liberty, and
the pursuit of Happiness.''
In the 20th century, perhaps no President had a clearer vision, and
more historic results from his vision, than President Dwight D.
Eisenhower. In a 1955 message to Congress, he provided an eloquent
explanation of why the Interstate System was so important. In doing so
he echoed the sentiments of Presidents throughout history:
Our unity as a nation is sustained by free communication of
thought and by easy transportation of people and goods. The
ceaseless flow of information throughout the Republic is
matched by individual and commercial movement over a vast
system of interconnected highways crisscrossing the country and
joining at our national borders with friendly neighbors to the
north and south.
To those who think I make too much of transportation, who think
that after all it is really just concrete, asphalt, and steel, I refer
you to a stretch of road that runs from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama.
It's part of U.S. 80, and it carries the same daily traffic--the cars,
the trucks, the motorcycles, the RV's, the buses--as any other part of
the route or any other stretch of road in America.
But this stretch of highway is different, because it made a
difference in the lives of every American. On March 25, 1965, Dr.
Martin Luther King, Jr., led a band of marchers across the Edmund
Pettus Bridge in Selma to Montgomery, to protest voting restrictions
that disenfranchised most African Americans. Four days later in
Montgomery, standing on the Capitol grounds, he told his assembled
supporters that they had marched for ``the realization of the American
dream.'' On August 6, 1965, President Lyndon Johnson signed the
legislation that empowered African Americans and all Americans to cast
their ballot for the American dream of which Dr. King spoke.
Last September, the Selma-to-Montgomery section of U.S. 80 was
designated an All-American Road under our National Scenic Byways
Program, not because it is beautiful, for many would argue that it is
not; not because it is scenic, for others would argue that it is not--
but because this road, these lanes, symbolize the most beautiful idea
of all: the American Dream.
So let me assure you that I think the Federal Government has a
strong role to play in transportation by providing a balance among the
diverse interests of the States, leadership in advancing technology for
a new century, and guidance in ensuring that vital national interests
are met.
If confirmed, I look forward to working to achieve the new role the
President has outlined: that of a government that empowers each
American to fulfill his or her own personal destiny.
accomplishments: department of transportation
I would like to talk to you today about what we have accomplished
in the past four years and what I hope to accomplish in the next four
years.
Let me say I look forward to Secretary Pena remaining in
Washington, so that the American people will continue to have the
benefit of his skills, his vision, and his wisdom. He forged a team at
the Department of Transportation that is committed to creating the
Intermodal transportation system this country will need in the 21st
century to support economic growth, to enhance our competitiveness in
international marketplaces, and to expand the mobility of the American
people.
Recently, in saying farewell to the Department's employees, he
described some of the Department's accomplishments he is proudest of,
and I will share just a few of them with you. He spoke of:
<bullet> LHundreds of thousands of private sector jobs created by
strategic infrastructure investment.
<bullet> LNew aviation safety and security regulations that make
the skies safer for our families.
<bullet> LA reinvigorated, stronger transit program.
<bullet> LA revitalized American shipbuilding industry.
<bullet> LInnovative livable communities program.
<bullet> LSuccess at drug interdiction.
<bullet> LA pivotal role in dealing humanely and professionally
with the massive Cuban and Haitian migration.
<bullet> LThe work we've done to increase the safety of the cars
that Americans drive and our efforts to help them drive safely.
<bullet> LThe progress we have made in intelligent transportation
systems, high speed rail, and new technologies such as the global
positioning system.
<bullet> LSuccess in increasing railroad safety, in helping make
rail-highway crossing safety a focus of national attention, and
building a stronger Amtrak as a vital element of our transportation
network.
<bullet> LEfforts to reach out to minorities and to women to ensure
equal opportunity for our partners around the country.
<bullet> LThe building of a new, more diverse leadership within the
Department.
<bullet> LThe way DOT answered the Vice President's call to
reinvent the Department of Transportation and to streamline operations
so it can better serve its customers.
<bullet> LAnd the commitment, which I strongly share, to the
environment--to cleaning up and preventing oil spills, protecting
National Parks, partnering on clean-car technology, and designating
National Scenic Byways.
In short, Secretary Pena leaves behind a strong legacy of
accomplishment on which to build America's transportation future. The
existing links between the Departments of Energy and Transportation
will become even stronger as we work together, based on the bonds of
trust that have grown between us.
accomplishments: federal highway administration
I want to take a moment, too, to tell you how proud I am of what
the Federal Highway Administration has accomplished this past four
years. I know Secretary Pena would agree with me that in listing our
achievements, we are really complimenting the people who are at the
heart of what we do, namely our committed employees.
The Federal Highway Administration is a relatively small
organization (fewer every day through attrition--about 3,500 men and
women) with a $20 billion-a-year mission. We accomplish that mission
through cooperation with our traditional partners, the State
transportation departments and metropolitan planning organizations, and
with newer partners who are focused on the environment, bikeways,
pedestrian walkways, and other related aspects that add to the beauty
and livability of communities across the Nation.
Today, few things touch us in so many ways as the Interstate
System. Almost everything we own traveled on the Interstate System at
some point before arriving at our home. Our daily routines--going to
work, to school, to the store, to church--and the special moments in
our families lives--the birth of a baby, a daughters wedding, family
vacations--often take us onto this vision in concrete, asphalt, and
steel.
I now would like to take a moment to highlight some of the
achievements I am proudest of over the past four years.
I have already mentioned the challenge we faced in making the
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) work.
ISTEA juggled relationships and shifted power among the levels of
government. It included many new and complex requirements. It brought
new and old partners together in sometimes uneasy alliances. It set
ambitious goals that altered our transportation priorities.
As a result, making ISTEA work required partnering, brokering, and
a form of ``tender loving care'' to facilitate the coming together of
interests. I am proud that the Federal Highway Administration has the
personnel, the resources, and the flexibility to help State and local
officials build new relationships for exercising their new
responsibility. The sincere attempts by all parties to work within the
ISTEA framework strengthened old partnerships, created new ones, and
brought us all together in a way that has energized this country's
whole transportation community.
I also would highlight the most extensive outreach effort ever
undertaken in the agency's 104-year history. During my tenure, I led
this effort by visiting most of the States and Puerto Rico, as well as
working directly with the District of Columbia, meeting with thousands
of people who use, construct, maintain, and manage our transportation
system. For me, the road tours were perhaps my most important means of
outreach. I set out on the first one in April 1994, from Buffalo, New
York, to Laredo, Texas, with a goal of looking, listening, and
learning--then acting on what I saw.
In recent weeks, there has been much talk about initiatives to help
the District of Columbia. I am proud of the role the Federal Highway
Administration has played, cooperating with Congress and the President,
in helping the District improve its transportation network.
I also am proud of several other accomplishments:
<bullet> LWorking with Congress, we provided record levels of
infrastructure investment to help carry out the President's commitment
to ``Rebuild America.'' Investment increased 21 percent, from an annual
average of $21.1 billion in fiscal years 1990-1993 to an average of
$25.5 billion in fiscal years 1994-1997.
<bullet> LWe cooperated with Congress and our State and local
partners to identify routes for the National Highway System, which was
designated on November 28, 1995, when the President signed the National
Highway System Designation Act of 1995. We also have submitted a report
to Congress, called Pulling Together, identifying intermodal
connections, including rail, transit, seaport, and airport facilities,
to be added to the National Highway System.
<bullet> LWe created innovative financing techniques that leverage
federal dollars and stimulate greater investment in infrastructure. As
a result, more than $5 billion worth of projects have moved to
construction faster than would otherwise have been possible.
<bullet> LWe promoted innovative contracting techniques, such as
design-build, that are helping to transform the contracting process to
enhance quality--which is another way of saying service to our
customers, the American motorist.
<bullet> LWe worked with the States and the private sector to
develop intelligent transportation systems that will help America meet
the growing demands of its transportation network at a time when
efficiency, rather than expansion, is the key criterion.
<bullet> LWe recommitted the agency to the National Quality
Initiative, an historic initiative of longstanding partners who want to
promote excellence in all aspects of highway research, design,
planning, and construction.
<bullet> LWe launched a variety of life-saving initiatives,
including ``Sharing the Road--No Zone,'' the Red Light Running
Prevention Campaign, the Capital Beltway Safety Task Force, the
Railroad-Highway Grade Crossing Safety Action Plan, the National Work
Zone Safety Program, and the Safety Action Plan.
<bullet> LWe designated the first six All-American Roads and the
first 11 National Scenic Byways under the National Scenic Byways
Program created by ISTEA.
<bullet> LWe have worked with our partners to ensure that highway
transportation projects and programs enhance the communities and the
environment through which they pass. Our initiatives include a revised
Environmental Policy Statement in 1994, cooperation with the
Environmental Protection Agency to ensure that transportation continues
to contribute to increasing quality of our air, and initiatives to
create one-stop shopping for the environmental reviews that are so
important to the development of any project. We also enhanced
environmental sensitivity within the agency by conducting Environmental
Leadership Seminars for our top field staff.
<bullet> LInternationally, we have worked to facilitate trade with
Canada and Mexico, for example by taking the lead in harmonizing land
transportation standards, while helping other Nations, including South
Africa, improve their transportation networks to support economic
growth and freedom. Following my 1993 trip to Russia, we have supported
democratization of the former Soviet Union by initiating ongoing
technical assistance and technology transfer, including private sector
involvement.
<bullet> LWe launched a series of actions to improve motor carrier
safety in cooperation with our motor carrier partners, including the
first ever National Truck and Bus Safety Summit (1995), imposition of
drug and alcohol testing of commercial drivers, and completion of the
most thorough study ever of driver fatigue and drowsiness. We have seen
considerable progress where it counts the most--a decline in fatal
crashes involving large trucks, down from 2.7 per 100 million vehicle-
miles in 1993 to 2.5 in 1995.
<bullet> LWe participated actively in the Vice President's National
Performance Review, which helped us remove or modify numerous
regulations, while we streamlined our operations to match them better
not only to ISTEA's goals but to the needs of each State.
I'd like to mention just two other items that go directly to the
heart of what the Federal Highway Administration is all about. One of
my first experiences after taking office in 1993 was the Great
Midwestern Floods. It was an eye opener in two respects, the first
being the sheer amount of devastation the flooding caused. But
secondly, and more importantly, I learned how committed the people of
the Federal Highway Administration are to public service, to getting
involved, and to being part of the communities in which they live. Our
field staff pitched in and did everything possible to help reopen the
highway lifelines disrupted by the floods.
I've seen this same spirit time and again, notably in the aftermath
of the Northridge Earthquake that rocked the Los Angeles area in 1994
and destroyed several key Interstate links. The people of the Los
Angeles area, whose daily routines were scrambled by the earthquake,
benefited from close cooperation among the Federal Highway
Administration, the Federal Transit Administration, and the California
Department of Transportation, through provisions made for temporary
service that were needed until highway links were reopened, in record
time, paid for 100 percent with federal funds.
In these instances, and in so many others, I have heard from
Governors and top State transportation officials that our response to
disasters is not just timely and efficient but compassionate--
reflecting the highest ideals of government service and Federal-State
partnership. I want to give credit to those who've earned it: the
people who are the Federal Highway Administration.
The final item is the response to the Oklahoma City bombing, in
which we lost 11 members of the Federal Highway Administration family.
It's a day none of us will ever forget. But when the survivors were
told they could take time off to recover from the emotional shock, they
agreed unanimously that what they wanted to do was get back to work as
soon as possible. Our administrative staff worked miracles to find new
office space and to equip it so our Division Office in Oklahoma was
able to reopen within days after the tragedy. This commitment, not just
to our mission, but to those who had fallen, was, again, a tribute to
the people who are the Federal Highway Administration.
In short, I have been proud to lead a federal agency that has
shaped its vision to the times and accomplished each of its missions
with distinction. This is an agency well prepared to meet--and master--
the uncertainties, challenges, and opportunities of the 21st century.
We have accomplished much, but much remains to be done.
looking to the department's future
In looking to the future, we in the Department of Transportation
must set high goals, must call on all our resources and all our
reserves to build exponentially on the foundation created thus far.
In doing so, I can look to a former Secretary with whom I will
share a unique distinction. If confirmed, I will be only the second
Federal Highway Administrator to serve as Secretary of Transportation.
The first was John A. Volpe, who served as the first Federal Highway
Administrator from October 1956 to February 1957. In 1969, he was
appointed by President Nixon to be the second Secretary of
Transportation and served in that post until 1972. For his actions, for
his leadership, and for his vision, Secretary Volpe is regarded by
historians as one of the greatest Secretaries the Department of
Transportation has had.
One of Secretary Volpe's sayings bears repeating as we look to the
future:
I submit that as we live in times of change, we must be the
architects of that change or we will most certainly be its
victims.
As the President has said, when times change, so government must
change. And so, as I look to the next four years, I believe we in the
Department of Transportation must set high goals and must be architects
of change, but we must also build a new balance in our relations with
State and local governments. To do that I will be taking my lead from
the President:
<bullet> LI will be calling on the Department's employees to share
their vision of how we can intensify our efforts to accomplish more,
much more, to benefit the American people.
<bullet> LI will be calling on State and local officials to help us
build a new balance.
<bullet> LI will be calling on private organizations to help us.
<bullet> LAnd I will be seeking to work with you, the Congress.
Together, with the help of all these groups and individuals, we
will intensify our efforts to the highest degree to build the safest,
most efficient transportation network possible.
Certainly, in focusing our efforts, a priority for all of us must
be legislation that will provide the framework for our 21st century
transportation system.
I have already discussed reauthorization of ISTEA, which will be
the major transportation initiative to be undertaken by this Congress.
In reauthorization, we have the opportunity this year to advance the
vision of ISTEA, to strengthen the partnerships that it created, and to
put the traveling public first when making investment decisions. We
must have a transportation system that is designed around the trips we
need to make, not the traditional modes of transportation. We need to
think not only of our modal systems, but how they link together.
There are those who call for the Federal Government to abandon its
role in surface transportation. As you can tell from what I have said
thus far, I reject this idea. As ISTEA has demonstrated, the Federal
Government can play, indeed must play, an important role in helping
each State in a diverse union create the national network essential to
maintain what Thomas Jefferson referred to as a ``union of sentiment.''
Such calls are often based on disputes over formula distribution of
funds, mandates that a State believes are inappropriate, and a view--
which I certainly reject--that the Federal Highway Administration is
intrusive in State affairs and duplicative of State efforts. These
concerns are, legitimately, up for debate. But at a time when Europe,
our chief competitor in many markets, is pulling together, we should
not be pulling apart, program by program, into a loose confederation of
States that lacks the ability to deliver to the American people the
benefits that we can only realize as a Nation.
No State lives in isolation--its citizens never traveling outside
its borders, its businesses never working with businesses or customers
elsewhere. No State ever turns away a tourist from elsewhere. Thus, the
challenges before us are national in scope; and the solutions require
national involvement. Traffic congestion and bottlenecks in major trade
centers, such as Chicago and Los Angeles, not only impose delays on
local commuters and regional freight, they also interfere with speedy
cargo movements--movements that are essential to maintain our global
competitiveness.
Safety is another example of the key role the Federal Government
plays. Nothing is more important than safety, for any sudden loss of
life or serious injury in a traffic incident is a tragedy that could
have been avoided. The cost of such terrible events cannot be measured
in dollars alone.
During the 1990's, traffic fatalities are at the lowest levels in
30 years--although the number has increased in the past year or two. I
am talking about actual numbers, not fatality rates. In fact, if the
fatality rate today were what it was in 1980, we would be losing 65,000
men, women, and children each year, not 41,798, as in 1995. Hundreds of
thousands of people are alive today because of safety advances. We
attained these reduced levels despite a tripling or more of vehicle
miles of travel over that same period.
This safety record did not occur because of the efforts of each
State operating on its own. The States played an important role, but it
would be incorrect to assume they could have done it on their own. It
happened because of agency automotive safety standards that the States
could not have imposed; because of improved highway design standards
developed by the States but adopted by the Federal Highway
Administration for use on projects around the country; and because of
the initiatives of private safety groups that kept pressure on the
federal, State, and local governments to address highway safety issues
and that educated the public about them.
The Federal Government didn't do it all--and can't. We need the
partnership of State and local officials, the cooperation of the auto
and trucking industries, and the efforts of public spirited citizens to
continue bringing down the toll of tragedy. But the Federal Government
can continue to play a vital, catalytic role that we should not
weaken--but build on.
We must do more, we will do more to keep safety in the forefront. I
trust that reauthorization of ISTEA will give us an opportunity to take
new strides forward. But in safety, as in many other areas of surface
transportation, complete withdrawal by the Federal Government would be
a huge step backward.
The Department will be submitting the President's reauthorization
proposals to Congress next month. I will defer discussion of specific
elements of reauthorization until that time. But our goal is to work
with Congress to build on the success of ISTEA. I am pleased that over
the years, surface transportation legislation, for all the
controversies surrounding it, has been seen as bipartisan. I am
pleased, too, that the authorizing committees reflect this bipartisan
spirit. So let me assure you that I plan to reach out to Congress as it
builds the surface transportation legislation that will take America
into a new millennium.
There is much more to the Department of Transportation than
renewing the surface transportation assistance and safety programs
represented by ISTEA. I look forward to working on the many challenges
facing the aviation and maritime environments. I know we must develop a
more stable funding stream for the Federal Aviation Administration to
keep pace with aviation growth and to follow the path to longer-term
financial reform that was laid out by this committee last year. We must
complete a rigorous assessment of what it costs to manage and regulate
the aviation system, and how to pay for this system in as fair a way as
possible. Finding an adequate, dedicated, stable source of revenue to
meet the growth of aviation is one of our greatest challenges. I look
forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and the members of this
committee in meeting the challenge.
The United States also must continue to play a vital role in
pursuing more open, competitive aviation markets worldwide, with all
the benefits they can bring in terms of increased business, tourism,
and economic development. I can assure you that I will use the leverage
provided by access to the vast United States market to urge our
aviation' partners to adopt more open markets--and to ensure expanded
access to their markets for United States carriers.
Federal support for transit, like all transportation, is not an end
in itself. Ten million people count on transit every day to get to
jobs, schools, stores, and health care facilities. Another 25 million
use transit less frequently, but on a regular basis. Our urban
transportation networks are dependent on a strong transit component,
which benefits not only those who use it, but those who don't. But
transit is not simply an urban priority. In rural areas, millions of
Americans who cannot drive are dependent on transit services to help
them meet their basic needs.
The new demands of welfare reform require that workers be able to
get to their jobs. This is one of transit's principal roles--providing
basic mobility. It is also an opportunity, one we must make available
to the 37 million Americans below the poverty line who often cannot
afford an automobile.
We have also initiated a new program to assist states and local
agencies to define the impacts of mobility, to identify problem areas
such as transportation service disconnects, and to develop strategies
and solutions. Through the Research and Special Programs
Administration, the Department is providing leadership in new
technologies and options for meeting the transportation needs of the
elderly, as well as transportation tailored to promote rural economic
development and mobility in economic empowerment zones.
Always, in all we do, safety must be our highest priority, and we
have an unprecedented opportunity to increase safety belt and child
safety seat use substantially. Nearly all major safety organizations
agree on the need to upgrade and enforce safety belt use laws and to
support these laws with intensified public education efforts. The
tragic deaths of children resulting from air bag deployments have added
increased urgency to these needs. It is now time to change behavior--to
get all children and adults properly buckled up, whenever possible with
children in the back seat.
Last year, over 17,000 traffic fatalities, and many more injuries,
involved alcohol. These crashes, injuries and fatalities are not
accidents--they are predictable and preventable. We now have a unique
opportunity to reduce this toll. A broad partnership has already been
formed--called Partners in Progress--and it has agreed on national
goals to reduce dramatically alcohol related traffic fatalities. I will
work with the partnership to implement their strategies, and my
personal mission will be to accelerate the pace of reduction.
The Federal Government also has a responsibility to play an
effective role in bringing parties together to resolve problems. For
example, in the past, railroad labor and management often took opposite
sides on many issues--almost reflexively--and rarely talked to each
other. The advent of the Railroad Safety Advisory Committee, which has
brought all sides together, has proved a successful forum--and a
model--for reviewing pending rules and regulations and building
consensus.
Over the past decade, we have seen a revitalization of freight rail
in this country as market forces have promoted increases in
productivity and efficiency. As we look to the 21st century, however,
perhaps the most encouraging trend is that thanks to the container/
piggyback revolution, we are seeing closer cooperation among
traditional competitors--the truckers and the railroaders--than at
anytime since World War I. In the 21st century, our intermodal
transportation system will benefit by the efficiency that occurs when
the mode that can do the job best, gets the job.
As we move America to the next century, we must also recognize that
America's interests do not end at our shorelines or our borders. Our
interests--and our values--demand that we advance our economic, social,
and environmental well-being well beyond our geographic boundaries.
In aviation, government must ensure a free market environment
abroad as well as at home. We have already achieved the removal of
decades-long restrictions in many European markets and we are moving
forward with an initiative to reach open skies agreements with Asian
economies.
The maritime programs have at their center the strengthening of our
national and economic security. They accomplish this through genuine
partnership with other government agencies and absolute reliance on the
private sector to accomplish two goals: making our maritime
transportation system the most modern, competitive, and efficient in
the world and providing strategically critical sea-lift capacity to
support our national security needs.
In drug enforcement, alien interdiction, environmental protection,
navigation safety and national security missions, the United States
Coast Guard plays a key role in advancing our nation's interests. The
Coast Guard is widely recognized as one of the most competent and
responsive organizations in our government. The Coast Guard responds
rapidly and effectively to natural disasters, war, and the need for
marine environmental protection. Like any federal activity, it now
faces tight budgetary constraints, and I am told it is doing extremely
well in its streamlining efforts. We need to ensure it continues to get
the resources it needs to get the job done.
A new government for a new century will still need to remain
anchored in the traditions and values that made our country great.
These values are evident at the Department of Transportation. However,
we must not let these same traditions inhibit our ability to adapt. We
must commit to a better and more efficient government.
For the St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, the
Administration is seeking legislative authority to reconstitute it as a
performance-based organization (PBO) consistent with the Vice
President's reinvention initiative. The Corporation reflects two of the
most important characteristics of a PBO--a focus on customer service
and performance based outcomes. As a PBO, the Corporation will be able
to adopt additional private sector practices.
We must commit to better and more efficient management of our
assets--which are, in fact, the Nation's assets. Our government, and
the Department of Transportation, will be proportionately smaller in
the next century. And this smaller government will still have to give
the American people the tools they need to solve the problems
confronting our great Nation.
I look to the 21st century, and I see State and local
transportation agencies advancing toward state-of-the-art/state-of-the-
practice in all areas, including planning, design, finance, use of new
materials, systems management, and construction practices.
I see the Federal Government as a coordinator, working with State
and local transportation agencies and with the public to enhance
transportation.
I see increasing privatization of transportation systems and more
private investment in public transportation facilities.
I see growing acceptance of the need to manage existing
transportation systems in an efficient manner.
I see the Modal Administrations within the Department of
Transportation helping each mode of transportation do the work it does
best--and ensuring that these modes link up into a whole that is
greater than the sum of its parts.
I see increased intermodal shipments pulling modes more closely
together out of mutual interest, not government intervention.
I see the National Highway System tying the Nation's transportation
system into a seamless web of efficiency and safety that supports
productivity increases and enhances competitiveness in international
marketplaces.
I see safety consciousness continuing to reduce the number of
fatalities and injuries from transportation incidents.
I see transportation in the 21st century serving the same role as
the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950's--empowering minorities, women,
and immigrants to achieve the freedom that is only possible with full
mobility.
I see roads without potholes, bridges that can bear the traffic
crossing them, highways without congestion.
And I see an America poised to make the 21st century another
American century.
Can we achieve this vision? In response I remind you of something
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said on that day in Montgomery when he
addressed the 1965 Voting Rights Marchers. He said:
The road ahead is not altogether a smooth one. There are no
broad highways to lead us easily and inevitably to quick
solutions.
For the Department of Transportation, there are no broad highways
to easy, quick solutions. But I hope that I can help us reach not just
for the easy and the quick, but for the solutions that will make a
difference in the long run, for the solutions that appear, but are not
really, just beyond our reach.
Down through history, we have seen how a President and a Congress
can find common ground to build the transportation network this Nation
needs. The Interstate System offers us a model. The vision of the
Interstate System began to take place under the Democratic Presidents
Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman, but it was only achieved in
1956 when a Republican President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, and a
Democratic Congress worked together to enact the needed legislation. In
the Congress, the primary leaders were Senator Albert Gore, Sr., of
Tennessee, the Vice President's father; Representative George H.
Fallon, of Maryland; and Representative Hale Boggs of Louisiana. They,
along with Republican leaders such as Senator Prescott Bush of
Connecticut, the father of the President who signed ISTEA, found common
ground for the benefit of the American people.
President Clinton, in nominating me to succeed Secretary Pena, has
given me a new opportunity, subject to Senate confirmation, to serve
the American people and to help build the common ground on which we can
build a bridge to the 21st century. I look forward to working with the
transportation community to build a bridge to the 21st century that
will be, as the President said on January 20, ``wide enough and strong
enough for every American to cross over to a blessed land of new
promise.''
__________
Responses to Additional Questions From Senator Chafee
Question 1. Indeed, ISTEA made a historic change in our nation's
transportation policy. It expanded the surface transportation system by
making it more responsive to mobility, efficiency, safety, and
environmental concerns. If confirmed as Secretary of Transportation,
how will you ensure that the nation builds upon this expansive vision
in the next century?
Response. To begin with, I will be guided by this important
declaration from the original ISTEA:
It is the policy of the United States to develop a National
Intermodal Transportation System that is economically efficient
and environmentally sound, provides the foundation for the
nation to compete in the global economy, and will move people
and goods in an energy efficient manner.
We must all work together for passage of legislation that continues
and extends that vision. We need to direct transportation investments
to meet the nation's economic, social and environmental objectives. We
need flexibility in deciding on the mix of projects best suited to meet
our transportation needs. And we must focus on the safety implications
of every decision.
We must continue to look ahead, to anticipate the challenges and
the opportunities presented by an ever changing global economy, to meet
the needs of disadvantaged Americans, and to use the system more
efficiently to meet a range of concerns. We will continue working
closely with our traditional partners, the States, and the metropolitan
areas, and we will build new partnerships, particularly with the users
of our surface transportation services. We will continue expanding our
vision to recognize the concerns of our major trading partners and, in
particular, the opportunities of strengthening social and economic ties
with our neighbors, Canada and Mexico.
Let us commit to preserving and building on ISTEA. It is about
protecting our environment not only through the transportation choices
we make, but the way we implement those choices so that our air, water,
natural environment, and communities are enhanced, not harmed. We need
a renewed emphasis on bicycling and walking, along with highways,
transit, and rail. We need scenic byways and recreational trails; they
are important to the soul of the American people. And a reauthorized
ISTEA must harness technology to serve a new century, through
intelligent transportation systems, high-speed rail, and magnetic
levitation, and other new technologies.
Question 2. According to your testimony, President Clinton's
leadership has resulted in ``record level transportation infrastructure
investment.'' Unfortunately, as much as transportation benefits the
economy through the movement of people and goods, it is not without its
costs. Congestion, air pollution, injuries and fatalities are among the
negative consequences of mobility. If confirmed, how will you work to
offset some of the ``costs'' of moving people and goods?
Response. The ``costs'' of moving people and goods are essentially
related to safety and the environment. If confirmed, I pledge that
safety will be my very highest priority. This Department will also make
environmental considerations a critical part of our decision-making.
I will do all in my power to ensure that DOT's safety programs are
adequately funded. Increased authorizations are essential to address
vehicle issues such as air bag safety, to address emerging problems
such as aggressive drivers, and to support the crashworthiness and
crash avoidance activities that will produce benefits into the 21st
century.
Since the enactment of the NHS Act, which included the repeal of
speed limit and motorcycle helmet laws, DOT has taken strong action. In
November 1995, Secretary Pena announced DOT's 10-Point Action Plan to
Reduce Highway Injuries and Related Costs--a series of steps responding
to the evolving Federal-State partnership. I would like to highlight
several of the key initiatives under the Plan, which I am committed to
carrying out:
<bullet> Advisory on speed limit: Immediately following NHS
enactment, DOT sent letters to each Governor explaining the impact of
speed-related crashes. Included was State-specific historical data on
crashes.
<bullet> Proactive programs on speed, crash costs: Last year, DOT
issued ``Economic Cost of Motor Vehicle Crashes,'' and began a study
conducted by the National Academy of Sciences on guidance for State and
local governments on setting speed limits. FHWA and NHTSA jointly
developed a Speed Management Work Plan, initiatives both agencies will
implement to provide technical support to States and local governments
in their efforts to manage speeds on their roadways.
<bullet> Strengthened Safety Education for Policymakers: Last
June, DOT, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department
of Education, and the Consumer Product Safety Commission jointly
sponsored a ``Moving Kids Safely Conference'' in the Washington, D.C.
area. In addition, last fall 10 Regional ``Moving Kids Safely
Conferences'' were sponsored by DOT, which included policy maker
discussions.
<bullet> Performance-based systems: In recognition of the need for
States to assess problem areas and develop appropriate programs, DOT
has and will continue to aid the States in using traffic crash and cost
data as well as assisting in their implementation of Safety Management
Systems.
<bullet> Support zero tolerance laws: Pursuant to the NHS Act, DOT
issued a final zero tolerance rule. Since the President called on
Congress to make zero tolerance the law of the land, 13 States have
enacted such laws: Alabama, Alaska, Connecticut, Florida, Indiana,
Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma,
Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island.
One of our biggest challenges is to provide adequate resources to
improve safety. The status quo is not sufficient. We must strengthen
all our safety efforts, especially our campaigns against drunk driving
and for increased use of existing occupant protection systems.
Working within the framework of the State and community highway
safety program, there should be new incentives to prevent both drunk
and drugged driving, increase the use of safety belts and child safety
seats, and encourage the States to improve their highway safety data
systems. This will give new momentum to the program at the same time
that State and local attention is focused on high priority safety
needs.
I also would like to mention two recent Presidential initiatives:
``Teen Driver License Drug Test Requirements'' and ``Increased Use of
Safety Belts.''
On October 19, 1996, President Clinton directed the Office of
National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) and DOT to recommend measures to
meet two goals: (1) reduce the incidence of drug use by teens; and (2)
reduce driving under the influence of drugs in general. A task force,
led by DOT and ONDCP, which includes representatives from the
Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and Justice,
studied the issues involved in meeting these goals. DOT is currently
taking the lead in drafting a legislative proposal to implement these
recommended measures.
President Clinton, in his December 28, 1996, radio address, said
that increased seat belt use nationwide would save thousands of
American lives. The President directed DOT to ``work with the Congress,
the States and other concerned Americans to report back to me with a
plan to do just that''--increase seat belt use. This report will be
delivered to the President as soon as possible.
Following the Fox River Grove, Illinois, train-school bus crash,
Secretary Pena organized a task force to address rail-highway crossing
safety issues. Work on this effort is progressing to foster better
communications among the States, local governments, and railroads to
ensure that a tragedy like this one is not repeated.
Let me now turn to the environment. I intend to implement
initiatives to provide environmental leadership and create an even more
environmentally conscious Department. Foremost among my specific goals
for enhancing the environment is achieving a ``no net loss'' of
wetlands and increasing the number of areas meeting their mobile source
emissions requirements. I also intend to continue the Department's
commitment to increase and highlight the use of pedestrian and
bicycling modes and to meet their safety needs.
I would also like to briefly mention another program:
transportation enhancements. This well-received program originated in
ISTEA. It not only improves transportation services but creates more
livable communities.
ISTEA created the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement
Program (CMAQ). This program set aside $6 billion to assist areas in
dealing with congestion and transportation-related air pollution. CMAQ
has been a success and I will strongly support continuing this
important program. Additionally, I will continue to work with the EPA
to assist States and metropolitan areas in integrating air quality
considerations into their transportation planning activities.
Question 3. In your testimony, you pledged to continue to make
safety and security the highest priority of the Department.
(A) If confirmed as Secretary, how will you ensure that traffic
injury and fatality rates decline in the twenty-first century?
(B) What do you envision the second ISTEA's role will be in
ensuring safer travel in this country?
Response. (A) The highway safety problems challenging us today are
much more complex than in the past. The easy steps have been taken and
their benefits realized. To increase safety, we will need to coordinate
efforts with our growing number of partners at the state and community
levels, in industry and in other parts of the Federal government.
If, through our behavioral programs, we can increase safety belt
use from the current 68 percent level to 85 percent, a level already
achieved by some states, we would save an additional 4,200 lives and
prevent thousands of serious injuries every year. To accomplish this,
we must support and encourage efforts to upgrade and increase
enforcement of safety belt and child safety seat laws and to publicize
and encourage the public to participate in these safety efforts.
A recently formed, broad partnership, Partners in Progress, is
focused on a national goal of reducing alcohol-related traffic
fatalities by 11,000 by the year 2005. This effort includes
representatives from government, advocacy groups, law enforcement,
business, judicial and alcohol beverage groups. They are developing
comprehensive and collaborative strategies to make the goal a reality.
(B) The programs under the new ISTEA will play a vital role in
improving safety. The threat caused by alcohol and drug impaired
drivers, more aggressive and faster driving, increased running of red
lights, and a rising disregard of traffic signs all call for a
comprehensive multi-modal, multi-disciplinary approach. A similar
approach must be followed to increase the level of safety restraints,
which are the best protection for occupants in a crash. The ISTEA
reauthorization must highlight safety as a national priority and work
toward cost beneficial solutions.
Grants to states under the new ISTEA should advance national safety
priorities and provide incentives for effective alcohol safety and
occupant protection programs. Grants should also provide an incentive
to states to increase their data resources so that they can more easily
identify their specific safety problems, their program strengths and
weaknesses, and improve their decision making and planning processes.
We also need to revitalize our safety research and development
efforts. Our research, development, and demonstration program should
focus on air bag safety education and outreach; increased safety belt
and child safety seat use; support of partnerships with governors,
legislators, and the medical and safety communities; strategies to
deter speeding and aggressive driving; injury prevention strategies
with new partners in local communities; and a vision for the future of
crash trauma care. If confirmed, I will take steps to ensure that
needed research focuses on highway improvements to take advantage of
new technologies, new materials, and to address our aging
infrastructure.
Question 4. What are your views on truck size and weight
restrictions? Do you think that ISTEA should allow longer and heavier
trucks on the road?
Response. Any proposed changes to existing limits need to be
carefully considered. On June 14, 1994, in testimony on the House side,
I noted that the Federal Highway Administration had not conducted a
comprehensive study of truck size and weight in more than thirty years.
Accordingly, I directed that such a study be initiated. It is now an
expanded, Department-wide study.
In addition to the size and weight study, an important Highway Cost
Allocation study is underway. They will both provide needed information
to Congress on crucial issues.
Question 5. As you know, I strongly supported a provision in the
National Highway System Designation Act to add flexibility to road
design and enable the states to consider environmental, scenic,
historic and other community concerns in road design. I have heard from
many parts of the nation, including Rhode Island, that road design
issues--and how roads interact with communities--are critical to
community well-being. However, we must always keep passenger safety in
mind as well. What do you see as your role in encouraging the states to
adopt flexible yet safe highway design standards that respond to the
needs of people and communities?
Response. The NHS provided additional flexibility in the design
process that enables states to consider historic and environmental
resources in the decisionmaking process. We view this legislation and
our ongoing efforts, as an opportunity to fine-tune a design process
that will continue to make a meaningful contribution to community
sustainability and traffic service.
We have already taken a leadership role in the development of a
companion guide to the AASHTO Green Book, which will identify and
highlight flexibility design options for states. We are working
cooperatively with AASHTO and others to develop the companion guide and
a complementary training course for our field staffs, state and local
DOT staffs, and others, so as to improve the collective effort that is
critical for effective decisionmaking. I will continue to encourage
states to recognize the compatibility of safety and community design
concerns in planning and implementing transportation projects.
Question 6. The nation has changed a great deal since our
Interstate highway system was built forty years ago. The focus has
shifted from adding capacity to the highway system to ensuring that the
national transportation system functions efficiently. What specific
recommendations do you have to ensure that efficiency is the
cornerstone of the nation's transportation system?
Response. We are considering several proposals to improve the
efficiency of our transportation system.
<bullet> To expand on ISTEA's provisions which gave State and local
decision makers flexibility in the use of major program funds. This
will yield a more efficient program since investments can be made on
the basis of transportation needs rather than being restricted to a
particular modal project which may not be the best solution to an
area's transportation problems.
<bullet> Directing more funds to preserving systems of national
importance, such as the National Highway System (NHS). This is
important in attaining an efficient system because these routes are the
most heavily used roads in the nation and because the NHS provides the
connections among ports, freight railroads, airports, inland waterways,
Amtrak stations, and transit facilities that are necessary for an
interconnected national transportation system. Eligibility of the NHS
funds could be broadened to encompass improvements to these connecting
points.
<bullet> Our reauthorization proposal will include steps to ensure
that the ITS continues to improve transportation system performance
nationwide by focusing on the integration of Intelligent Transportation
Infrastructure components. We need to focus our research and technology
programs on closing the gap between state of the art and state of the
practice so that the most up-to-date technologies and procedures are
incorporated into the transportation systems. We believe that
technology application is one of the most cost-effective means of
delivering an efficient transportation system.
<bullet> We are focused on increasing private-sector involvement in
meeting infrastructure financing needs. In this way, the cost-
efficiency of projects will receive greater emphasis and a greater
variety of financing tools will become available.
<bullet> Finally, we are working on measures to streamline our
programs, reducing Federal oversight responsibilities while continuing
to ensure quality work, focusing on performance, and simplifying
Federal requirements. We believe these measures will contribute to a
better operating, more efficient program.
______
Responses to Additional Questions by Senator Dirk Kempthorne
Question 1. Aviation Trust Fund. How would you, as Secretary of
Transportation, bring the feuding airline groups to a consensus on an
agreement they can support, which is adequate to fund the Airport
Improvement Program and does not alienate AOPA and NBAA (National
Business Aircraft Association)?
Response. I believe that Congress has already taken the most
important first step in reaching consensus with respect to airport and
airway finance when it created the National Civil Aviation Review
Commission and directed that it make recommendations on long-term FAA
finance. This group, which will represent all segments of aviation, can
develop consensus recommendations and submit them in a report to the
Secretary of Transportation this September. If confirmed, I will
propose a finance proposal based on an analysis of overall
recommendations and submit it to Congress.
Question 2. FAA is generally acknowledged to operate the premier
Air Traffic Control System in the world, yet acquisition problems cause
difficulties for the system, and their employees are viewed by
outsiders to be ``government workers.'' ATC privatization and FAA
reform have been heralded as the cure all for many of these problems.
How would you solve this problem?
Response. In 1995, Congress exempted FAA from a number of
significant procurement and personnel laws. The FAA has developed. and
recently implemented its new acquisition and personnel reform systems.
I believe it is important to give the newly established systems
sufficient time to work before making additional changes.
The key goals of acquisition reform, embodied in the new
Acquisition Management System, are to reduce the time to acquire
systems and services, to field new technologies faster, to get the
right products to the field at the right time, and to do this at lower
cost to both government and industry. FAA's stated objective is ``20/50
in 3'': 20 percent reduction in cost, 50 percent reduction in time,
within 3 years (starting in FY 1996). If successful, the Acquisition
Management System will serve as a model for implementation by other
government agencies. Because of this potential, and because the system
is radically different from the rest of government, the efforts are
under scrutiny across government and the aviation community. The FAA
will conduct internal evaluations in May 1997 and May 1998 and a
formal, external evaluation will be provided to Congress in May 1999.
The key goals of personnel reform are to permit the agency to place
employees where they are needed most, and to permit the agency to
compete with the private sector when hiring highly skilled people with
unique technical backgrounds. Personnel reform was not intended to
address a perception of FAA employees as ``government workers.''
Although the personnel rules have changed, FAA employees continue to be
Federal Government employees.
Question 3. It now appears likely that TWA 800 was an accident
caused by some type of catastrophic mechanical failure and not
terrorism. Airport security was significantly increased as a result of
this accident while it was under investigation (although FAA will not
confirm that this is the reason for the increased security). In the
summer of 1995 we had a similar increase in security because of the
World Trade Center bomber trial (again FAA will not officially confirm
that this was the reason). Targets of terrorists, both foreign and
domestic, against U.S. interests have been incidents like the World
Trade Center bombing in New York City, the bombing of the Oklahoma City
Federal Building, the Atlanta Olympic bomb incident and the recent bomb
attacks on the women's clinic where family planning and abortions are
available. Why is FAA unwilling to return security to previous levels
once an investigation is complete, and why are most of FAA's mandatory
rules changes issued as emergency amendments which permit little or no
input from the people most affected by the rule or regulation change?
Response. The level of security in place at U.S. airports is
intended to provide all air transportation passengers and employees
with the highest level of safety and security practicable. Oftentimes,
there is never just one particular reason for increased security
levels. Rather, there are often multiple and ongoing events, or ongoing
situations, that combine to create a range of security threats. In
order to adequately secure an air transportation system as large and
complex as ours, a sufficient level of security must be available and
in place at all times.
Concerning public input, the FAA makes every effort to obtain
public comment when possible. However, as you know, single events or
on-going situations often warrant quick and comprehensive action. In
those cases, the government will do what is necessary to maintain
security. In the past, passengers have been eager to cooperate with the
government to maintain the level of safety and security to which they
are accustomed. If confirmed, I hope to work with Congress and all
affected parties to achieve the appropriate level of security to meet
the perceived threat at any particular time.
Question 4. Regulatory Oversight. FAA has a large commitment to
prepare regulations, advisory circulars, FAA orders, and standards for
all aspects of civil aviation including airways, airlines, air traffic,
security and airports. ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization)
also has the task of developing most of these same standards which
apply world wide. Why don't we eliminate this duplication of effort in
this area and utilize ICAO for uniform world wide standards? After all,
Airports Council International coordinates and sits on committees with
ICAO regarding airport issues. ATA (Air Transport Association) has
membership on these same committees. Wouldn't this be an appropriate
area to do more with less by consolidating work product? This would
make more money available for other AIP programs, such as capital
improvement projects at airports which would not be able to do these
types of projects without federal assistance.
Response. I understand that ICAO, through its Convention and
Annexes, promulgates International Standards and Recommended Practices
(SARPS). The SARPS are intended to ensure that, in the words of Article
37 of the Chicago Convention, ``Each contracting State undertakes to
collaborate in securing the highest practicable degree on uniformity in
regulations, standards, procedures, and organization in relation to
aircraft, personnel, airways and auxiliary services in all matters in
which such uniformity will facilitate and improve air navigation.''
In the Department's view, the SARPS are designed to promote
international uniformity of States' regulations and practices and are
not intended to take he place of each State's sovereign right and
responsibility to regulate its civil aviation environment. The SARPS
provide broad guidelines upon which each State is encouraged to develop
and implement its own civil aviation regulations. The Convention and 18
Annexes provide guidance through the SARPS but are neither complete nor
specific enough to replace the individual regulatory requirements of
ICAO's 186 Contracting States.
While States are encouraged to adhere to the SARPS, provision is
made for any State to file differences to those SARPS with which the
State is unable to comply. The SARPS therefore are not binding, and
ICAO has no practical means of enforcing compliance in any case. ICAO
does not perform the functions of a regulatory body.
______
Responses to Additional Questions From Senator Inhofe
Question 1. I understand that there has been some confusion among
the states about the implementation of my ``Quality Through
Competition'' Amendment to the National Highway System Designation Act
of 1995 (section 307, S.440, P.L. 104-59). For this reason, I sent a
letter to your office dated September 18, 1996, inquiring about the
implementation of the about the amendment, which has not received a
response. At this time I would like to know
(a) when I can expect a response to the 9/18/96 letter and
(b) what that response will be.
Response. I regret that we have not been able to provide a quicker
response. Your letter included several requests for detailed
information on States' statutes and implementation of the ``Quality
Through Competition'' provisions of the NHS Designation Act. We have
requested information from our Division Offices located in each State
to help respond to your request. We expect to respond formally in late
February or early March.
Around the time of your inquiry, we were developing guidance on the
duration of the ``opt-out'' period during which a State can pass
legislation that would relieve it from the requirements of section 307
of the NHS Designation Act. On October 10, 1996, we issued a guidance
to our field offices stating that the Section 307 provisions would be
effective November 28, 1996, unless replaced by an alternative State
process adopted before that date. The only exception is for States that
did not convene and adjourn a full, regular legislative session during
the 1-year period ending November 28, 1996. The more general provisions
relating to the applicability of 23 U.S.C. 112(b)(2) as a whole, which
is set forth in 23 U.S.C. 112(b)(2)(B), would continue to apply.
We continue to work closely with AASHTO, the States and the
American Consulting Engineering Council (ACEC) to develop additional
guidance to fully implement the ``Quality Through Competition''
provisions. We recently convened a national workshop with ACEC and
State representatives to discuss the issues and develop implementation
recommendation. We expect a Joint AASHTO/ACEC Committee will use the
workshop results to help develop procedures for implementing the
``Quality Through Competition'' provisions.
Question 2. I understand that many pipeline-related accidents are
caused by third-party damage to pipelines, telecommunications lines,
and other types of underground systems. During the consideration of the
Pipeline Safety bill last year, this issue was raised as evidence of
the need to develop federal legislation for improving the effectiveness
of one-call, or ``call-before-you-dig,'' programs throughout the United
States. It is my understanding that the Department of Transportation is
currently developing one-call legislation. As Transportation Secretary,
what approach would you take towards improving the current One Call
System?
Response. The Department has recognized that educating the public
about safety issues is essential if we are to reduce third party damage
to underground structures such as pipelines. The Department is
currently considering legislation that would provide leadership on this
important safety and environmental issue. In addition, the Department
is currently taking the lead in developing a public education campaign.
a newly formed team of representative from the oil and gas industry,
excavators, insurers, telecommunication, states, public nonprofit
groups like One Call Systems International, and one-call centers of
various states, has initiated work on a campaign to educate the public
on prevention of damage to underground structures.
______
Responses to Additional Questions
Question 1. EPA has proposed that national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) for ozone and particulate matter be changed to
tighter standards. This new standard will result in hundreds of
counties and cities being placed in nonattainment or noncompliance
status. Have you considered the implications of this proposal on our
national transportation policy?
Response. The Department is interested in the implications of the
standards on transportation. We are reviewing the EPA proposals, and
the expected inputs. Among transportation concerns are the potential
impact on transportation planning, especially in the areas newly
classified as nonattainment; the effects of EPA imposition of highway
funding sanctions if areas are unable to meet planning requirements;
and the likely need for further control on mobile source emissions,
especially to reduce particulate emissions from transportation.
ISTEA and the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 were both
intended to improve air quality. As an example, Congestion Mitigation
and Air Quality Improvement program apportionment--are tied to the
existing CAAA classification scheme for non-attainment areas and depend
on the severity of the pollution problem and the population affected.
Any change to the non-attainment area classification, boundaries, or
population affected could have an impact on the amount of CMAQ
apportionments allocated to each non-attainment area.
The Department is closely analyzing information as it becomes
available. Since establishment of the new standards is separate from
implementing them under the Clean Air Act, how they will be implemented
has not yet been determined. DOT is working with EPA to consider and
put in place the most effective implementation strategies based on what
we know today regarding the effectiveness of transportation programs to
improve air quality.
DOT and EPA will need to enhance their already close working
relationship as new non-attainment areas are slated for designation,
based on the proposed standards in June 1999.
The Department is participating on EPA's Federal Advisory Committee
Act Subcommittee for Ozone, PM and Regional Haze Implementation
Programs and several working groups under that Subcommittee. We are
also working with EPA to explore some of the transportation-specific
implementation issues, including possible development of a
transportation working group.
Question 2. Your remarks have focused on the importance of our
transportation system on moving American products efficiently--
particularly as we implement NAFTA and GATT. I agree fully.
I also would like to hear your thoughts, however, on the
responsibility of our system to move people.
The Department's own analysis confirms that the performance of our
highways continues to decline and traffic congestion is increasing. The
1995 Conditions and Performance Report says:
More travelers, in more areas, during more hours are facing
high levels of congestion and delay than at any point in the
history of the country.
The result is lost time and lost productivity for American
workers.
How can we begin to make progress on this growing problem?
Response. The highway system, and particularly the National Highway
System, is the backbone of our Nation's surface transportation system,
providing vital intercity and regional transportation to move products,
but also providing for personal mobility within and around major
metropolitan areas. Urban highway travel demand has grown by over 3.3
percent per year, on average, since 1970. Part of this growth has been
due to longer trips within urban areas, part by the increasing travel
in lower density suburban areas, part due to ``trip chaining'' of
working parents and others who must deal with medical, shopping,
recreational, and other trips in addition to a daily work trip, and
part by city residents who must commute longer to jobs now dispersed
across a larger landscape.
Many of our metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) are
developing aggressive strategies to help curb the growth of urban
highways and congestion. These strategies include the deployment of
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), providing timely information
to travelers on alternate routes with less congestion, the use of
higher levels of transit service, better coordination with land use
planning and zoning decisions to reduce the reliance on single occupant
vehicles, parking cash out programs, offering commuters a choice of
parking support or vouchers for transit or other means of commuting,
and other innovative strategies that work well in combination. The MPOs
in our larger metropolitan areas are programming large investments in
transit over the next several years, in anticipation of transit growth
in highly congested areas.
Progress will come through these, and other, public and private
efforts to:
(1) offer greater options to travelers;
(2) provide better and more timely information to travelers; and
(3) monitor changing conditions on our major NHS urban routes and
help States and local decision makers design more effective strategies
for dealing with congestion on these routes of greatest national and
regional significance.
Congestion can only be successfully addressed by a combination of
demand reduction and supply enhancement, either through more efficient
use of our existing system, or targeted efforts to add additional
capacity. We are doing both.
______
Responses to Additional Questions From Senator Sessions
Question 1. Alabama is currently a ``donor'' state under 1991 ISTEA
formulas. During today's hearing you emphasized a need for fairness in
the allocation of ISTEA funds. What are your plans to help make ISTEA
allocations fairer for donor states such as Alabama?
Response. The donor-donee issue is a difficult one. There are no
easy answers that will satisfy every State, especially if the issue is
looked at solely in the terms of donors and donees. We can well
understand the position of donor States, who pay more into the Highway
Trust Fund than they receive. They might naturally argue that all, or
at least a larger portions of their State's contribution to the Highway
Trust Fund ought to be returned to the source State.
We can also appreciate the position of the donee States, who, while
they may receive more in Federal highway funds than they pay into the
Highway Trust Fund, might provide projects necessary in meeting
national transportation objectives, such as connectivity.
Rather than approach this issue as simply ``donor-donee,'' and
focus on who gets how much of the Federal-aid highway pie, it may be
better first to focus on what policies and formulas will give our
nation and its citizens the best possible transportation system. As
part of its reauthorization effort, DOT is working to make surface
transportation formulas as equitable and efficient as possible. This
includes addressing the ``donor-donee'' questions as well as a wide
range of other formula issues. But this will be a starting point for
the debate. The Department will assist in every way it can to help
arrive at an equitable solution.
Question 2. During today's hearing, you mentioned the need to
constantly appraise the efficiency level of Department of
Transportation resources, particularly the use of human resources. What
steps do you intend to take to ensure the Department of Transportation
operates in the most efficient, cost-effective way possible? What plans
do you have to continue the streamlining of the Department and what
areas have the greatest need for improvement?
Response. Bringing further efficiency to the operation of the
Department and its delivery of services will be one of my highest
priorities. Many successes have already been achieved in downsizing
staff, following the lead of the National Performance Review. I cited
the very significant progress made by the United States Coast Guard in
its streamlining efforts, already leading to a reduction in civilian
and military positions of over 3,500 positions. This process is not
complete in the Coast Guard or elsewhere in the Department, and I
promise to keep these streamlining efforts on track. The President's FY
1998 Budget represents the next step in this process.
Question 3. Understanding the need to promote and maintain commerce
with an improved country-wide infrastructure, what are your plans for
improving infrastructure in the Southeast region of the United States?
Response. It is the goal of the Department to provide support
towards the improvement of America's transportation system. The
successful advancement of this mission entails improvements to
transportation efficiency, access, safety, and resulting advancements
in commerce and economic development. Just as the goals the Department
seeks to support are national in scope, so too is the program
administered. The categories of funding the Department distributes to
the States, as well as the formulas by which it distributes those
funds, are identical for each State. The Department does try to provide
as much flexibility as it can to the States in program implementation.
Also, there are limited sources of funds for distribution on a
discretionary basis to States, such as Alabama, with special
transportation needs. Strong economies and transportation networks are
needed in every region of the U.S., and we will work to ensure that
they are in place in the Southeast and every other region.
Question 4. During today's hearing, you mentioned a goal for AMTRAK
of complete self-sufficiency. What plans are currently in place and
what plans do you have to help achieve this goal?
Response. In 1995, the Department of Transportation and Amtrak's
Board of Directors adopted as a goal the elimination of Amtrak's
dependence on Federal operating subsidies, while improving service and
preserving a National system. The Department's strategy is to
restructure Amtrak into a bottom line-oriented corporation with a
customer focus, provide adequate capital investment to modernize
equipment and facilities, and provide sufficient operating assistance
to carry Amtrak through the transition period.
In line with that strategic goal, Amtrak has developed a detailed
strategic plan. Amtrak and the Federal Railroad Administration are
prepared to provide briefings. In addition, the Administration's
legislative proposal for the reauthorization of Amtrak will contain
several measures so that Amtrak can function more like a private
business and, thus facilitate the accomplishment of this goal.
Question 5. According to figures available for the 1992-95 period,
Alabama contributes 2.128 percent of the total funds deposited into the
highway trust fund, yet is allocated only 1.509 percent of those funds.
I understand certain states have large areas of federal land which need
to be traversed and smaller population bases from which to draw highway
taxes, however, current levels appear unduly burdensome for the state
of Alabama. What specific changes will you propose in ISTEA
reauthorization language which will help to correct the current
situation?
Response. The issue of donor/donee is both contentious and
difficult to resolve. As mentioned in our answer to your question
number one, we are working to make surface transportation formulas as
equitable and efficient as possible. As a part of that effort, we wish
to eliminate factors which are either outdated or no longer bear a
direct relationship to the affected program category, and consider
instead more current factors related to need. Additionally, we wish to
move States from the previous apportionment formulas to revised
formulas in a fashion that does not abruptly alter annual apportionment
levels.
In some cases, these efforts may result in proposing a return of
some assured level of Federal funds to the source States; in other
cases, it may mean addressing donee State concerns through other means.
The details are still being developed. The Department, however, will
work throughout the reauthorization process to provide assistance in
shaping a solution on the distribution of funds.
Question 6. In your written testimony presented to the Committee,
you spoke of a ``post-interstate era''. Recognizing the need to
maintain and expand upon our current interstate highway system, do your
comments reflect a shift in priorities regarding the allocation of
ISTEA resources? If so, please elaborate on what the priorities might
be and how these new priorities would be funded.
Response. Although Interstate construction funding is no longer
being made available to the States, the Interstate system is very much
a part of the overall Federal-aid highway program. The term ``post-
Interstate era'' really refers to completion of the construction phase
of the Interstate. The goal is to maintain condition and performance of
the nation's highway system by focusing on the four major
infrastructure programs in Title 23--National Highway System,
Interstate Maintenance, Surface Transportation Program, and Bridge.
The Department's priorities for reauthorization in this post-
Interstate era are to build on the central elements of ISTEA and to
maintain strong federal leadership to ensure the mobility of people and
goods that is essential to a healthy, internationally competitive
economy. Highway capital investment needs to keep pace with demands
from other parts of the economy that depend on efficient highway
transportation. The federal role involves fostering partnerships and
providing sufficient flexibility to allow decision makers to make the
best investment choices. Increased flexibility will further empower
State and local officials to target limited Federal funds to projects
that best meet the unique needs of their communities.
Question 7. I understand ISTEA collects funds based on a ``pay as
you go system'' realized through a federal gas tax. In theory, this
system places the cost of expanding and maintaining the interstate
system on those who use the system. Currently, the funds collected by
this system are being used for projects well outside scope of the
interstate system such as urban rail and freight projects. Why should
freight/rail projects be funded by resources collected through a gas
tax and not through some other means which would better place the costs
of these projects directly on to the beneficiaries?
Response. Reauthorization of ISTEA must be considered in the larger
context of surface transportation. Reauthorization should build on the
central elements of ISTEA. A part of this is allowing the State's
planning and needs identification process the flexibility to identify
those transportation improvements that represent the best investment
choice. Increased flexibility will further empower State and local
officials to target limited federal funds to projects that best meet
the unique needs of their communities; Improvements to other modes
often represent the best use of transportation funds within a
particular context. Any project decision, however, will be made at the
state and local level.
Proceeds from Federal motor fuel taxes can play a role in a truly
intermodal context, supplying the best overall transportation solution,
promoting efficiency, and answering the mobility needs of our nation.
Question 8. Will you please provide the breakdown, in terms of
dollars and percent of the total funds allocated by ISTEA for use in
subway, passenger rail and freight projects?
Response. Subway--Although ISTEA does not have a specific break-out
of funding authorizations for subways, the transit New Starts and Fixed
Guideway Modernization programs are frequently used for subway
construction or maintenance of existing subways, and together account
for $9.938 billion (6.3 percent of the $157 billion total ISTEA
authorizations).
In addition to these amounts, ISTEA authorized $16.096 billion in
transit Formula Grants, $324 million for Interstate Transfer-Transit,
and $29.255 billion for the Surface Transportation Program and the
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality program, all of which could
conceivably be used for rail transit systems. These amount to 29.1
percent of ISTEA authorizations.
Passenger Rail--ISTEA authorized a total of $157 billion through
fiscal years 1992-97. Of this total, $809 million (0.5 percent) was
authorized for intercity passenger rail projects.
Freight Rail--ISTEA does not authorize a program for freight rail
projects.
Question 9. Please list the top 5 non-interstate highway priorities
currently funded in part or in full by ISTEA allocations including the
dollar amount and percent relative to the total amount of funds
collected through the gas tax.
Response. The Federal Highway Administration's strategic goals are
as follows:
Mobility: Continually improve the public's access to activities,
goods and services through preservation, improvement and expansion of
the highway transportation system and enhancement of its operations,
efficiency, and intermodal connections.
Productivity: Continuously improve the economic efficiency of the
nation's transportation system to enhance America's position in the
global economy.
Safety: Continually decrease the number and severity of highway
accidents.
Human and natural environment: Protect and enhance the natural
environment and communities affected by highway transportation.
National security: Improve the Nation's ability to respond to
emergencies and natural disasters and enhance national defense
mobility.
All of our programs that distribute funding to the States address
these goals. These programs include National Highway System, Interstate
Maintenance, Surface Transportation, Highway Safety, Bridge Replacement
and Rehabilitation, and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality programs.
Funds distributed to the States under the equity provisions of ISTEA--
Minimum Allocation, Donor State Bonus, Hold Harmless, and the 90-
Percent of Payments Adjustment--also support these goals.
One category of funding, demonstration projects, is less efficient
at ensuring that funding is directed at meeting National, or even
State, goals. Demonstration project funding directs funds to specific
projects without the opportunity for State Departments of
Transportation to weigh the value of the demonstration projects
relative to other needs.
All of the programs described above are funded from the Highway
Account of the Federal Highway Trust Fund. The Trust Fund receives
revenues from motor-fuel taxes and other highway-user taxes.
Responses to Additional Questions From Senator Baucus
Question 1. FAA action to terminate MT weather observers: Mr.
Slater, the Federal Aviation Administration has recently announced its
intention to terminate the need for manned weather observers at several
Montana airports--these weather observers will be replaced by what are
called Automated Surface Observing Systems (ASOS). In other words,
there will no longer be humans observing the weather conditions for
incoming flights, but only an automated system. These terminations are
being undertaken by the FAA to reduce costs.
According to a GAO report in 1995, the automated systems were never
intended to be used alone, without human backup. In fact, the GAO
states that the automated systems cannot detect freezing rain or
windshear conditions, thunderstorms, or tornadoes--conditions that
require human verification.
Question 1a. As GAO recommended, shouldn't human observers
supplement these automated systems? Also, did the FAA give adequate
notice and seek public input from Montana communities regarding
implementation of ASOS?
I understand the need to be conscious of costs. However, have we
reached the point where budgets are driving our decisions? What about
the safety of the flying public? Can you assure me that the automated
systems have been adequately field tested and can quickly observe
changing weather patterns?
We know too well the consequences that weather can have on the
safety of air travel. I feel strongly that we should take every step
possible to ensure that such tragedies are avoided. I am not convinced
that eliminating human weather observers is the right thing to do.
I requested in a January 22 letter to the Department that the FAA
Administrator should come to Montana to listen to the concerns of
Montana pilots, airport managers and others. Will you see that such a
visit is planned?
Response. As I understand it, the GAO report recommended a
collaboration with users to rectify the problems associated with ASOS.
In November 1994, the FAA and the National Weather Service (NWS) met
with executives from 14 national aviation associations concerning
surface aviation observation services. These aviation associations
represent aviation interests across the country. They reached an
agreement that the Federal Government would work with industry to
define service standards for surface observations. Over an 18-month
period, government and industry met in 10 workshops, resulting in
agreement on a four-level service standard for ASOS sites. Airports
were rated as A, B, C, or D depending on the occurrence of significant
weather, traffic counts, distance to the nearest suitable alternate
airport, and critical airport characteristics.
The service standards were published in the Federal Register on
June 25, 1996, and public comments were invited. Additionally, the NWS
published Weather Service Modernization Criteria in the Federal
Register on May 2, 1996. Both notices contained listings of sites and
their respective service levels.
ASOS enhancements have been developed to detect freezing rain and
thunderstorms. The freezing rain sensors are being deployed and should
be complete by mid-1997. Thunderstorm detection sensors are in the
process of being tested, with deployment expected soon after completion
of the test. Windshear has never been observable by humans, and manual
or automated surface observation tools are not used to detect
windshear. Specific detection equipment and pilot training are the
tools used to protect aircraft from windshear. Tornadoes are best
detected by radar. Deployment of Next Generation Radar (NEXRAD), which
is the best available tool for that task, is nearly complete.
The FAA believes ASOS has proven to be reliable. A 6-month
meteorological and engineering evaluation of ASOS's performance at 22
locations across the country was sponsored by FAA, NWS and aviation
industry representatives ASOS was available more than 99 percent of the
time. The evaluation concluded that ASOS was ``representative'' of
weather conditions more than 99 percent of the time. ASOS takes
reliable, accurate observations that compare closely to those taken by
human observers. The demonstration found that the ASOS is more
responsive than humans in some cases. On average, the ASOS matched or
slightly exceeded human response.
I do think continuing to work with the affected parties can often
lead to a good resolution of problems, and I would expect the FAA to
control such an approach in this case. I believe that the appropriate
level of FAA official should focus on the specifics of new
installations in Montana and elsewhere, and agree that should be a
priority of the new FAA management team.
Question 2. Control Tower at Gallatin Field in Bozeman: Last year,
the FAA announced the termination of the Flight Service Station at
Gallatin Field in Bozeman, Montana. This, coupled with the proposed
termination of weather observers at the airport as well, there is
tremendous concern for airport safety in Bozeman.
The Gallatin Airport Authority has stated it has the resources
available to construct, equip and maintain a control tower at Gallatin.
Question 2a. Gallatin Field is listed as one of the nation's 50
fastest growing airports in the nation and it is eligible for the FAA's
contract tower program. What assurances can you give me that Gallatin
Field will be a priority for the FAA's contract tower program?
Response. I am told that the FAA has received an October 1996
request from the Gallatin Field Airport Authority for inclusion in the
FAA Contract Tower (FCT) Program. FAA acknowledged the request on
October 30, 1996, and an on-site traffic survey is planned for this
spring to validate traffic levels at the airport. Once this is done, a
benefit/cost analysis will be conducted to determine whether Gallatin
Field qualifies as a potential candidate for inclusion in the FCT
Program. If it does meet criteria, Gallatin Field will be placed on the
candidate list along with other qualifying new start locations.
FAA advises that it is requesting funds for new tower locations in
FY 1998. If funding is obtained, qualifying locations will be ranked
according to their benefit/cost ratio, and then funding allocated based
on available dollars for new starts.
______
Responses to Additional Questions From Senator Lieberman
Question 1. Outreach: I understand that one of your priorities has
been visiting with local officials, state Departments of
Transportation, and citizen groups throughout the country. Can you tell
us something about those trips and what you learned about our nation's
transportation system?
How has ISTEA's emphasis on empowering local communities changed
the way the country approaches transportation decisions?
Response. The Department undertook an outreach initiative to get
input on ISTEA to develop an ISTEA reauthorization bill that will help
our customers, partners, and stakeholders achieve their goals. We have
met with Members of Congress, State and local officials, State DOTs,
transportation practitioners at all levels, community activists, and
our ultimate customers--the American people.
The Office of the Secretary held 13 regional forums throughout the
country, each focusing on a different subject, to hear about
implementation of ISTEA. The modal agencies convened approximately 100
focus groups in approximately 40 states. These were designed as smaller
sessions, focusing on key areas of reauthorization, to determine
specific solutions to transportation problems. In addition, in my
capacity as Federal Highway Administrator, I participated in several
road tours, during which I was able to talk with officials and citizens
from all over the United States, from the Canadian border to the
Mexican border. I was able to bring back first-hand information from
around the country about our transportation system and its success in
meeting people's needs and enhancing the quality of their lives.
The over-riding and consistent message was that ISTEA works. We
heard that Americans want to refine ISTEA, and build on its foundation.
Americans see the need for a strong transportation system that
contributes to economic development, job creation, environmental
protection, and safety.
The most significant changes have been the opening up of the
decision-making process and the use of a broader array of decision
criteria. Local officials and the public now have better access to the
process before final decisions are made. There is greater involvement
on the part of the ``newly empowered'' stakeholders, including the
environmental community, the freight community, and the transportation
disadvantaged. Increasingly, the focus is on quality of life concerns,
the impacts of transportation investments on the community and
environment in addition to traditional transportation system
performance measures. Major transportation investments (either highway
or transit) are increasingly being evaluated on an intermodal basis
with appropriate consideration of tradeoffs among modes.
Question 2. Innovative Financing: One of Federal Highway
Administration's priorities under your leadership has been to develop
innovative financing techniques that leverage federal dollars and
stimulate greater investment I infrastructure. Can you tell us about
Some of those efforts and how you plan to continue your work in this
area?
Response. The Federal Highway Administration is currently providing
on-going technical assistance to the 71 projects begun under FHWA's
innovative finance Test and Evaluation initiative (TE-045). FHWA is
also working to mainstream the innovative financing techniques
initially tested under TE-045 to accelerate an even larger number of
projects as part of the regular federal-aid program. Congress adopted
most of the Test and Evaluation innovative financing features in the
National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (NHS Act), and FHWA is
providing technical assistance to implement those provisions. In
addition, FHWA has been working closely with the Secretary to implement
the State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) pilot program that built on the
experience of TE-045 and was authorized by Congress in the NHS Act.
FHWA is also assisting the Secretary to expand the pilot based on
provisions in the Fiscal Year 1997 DOT Appropriations Act. FHWA is
considering additional proposals to further leverage the federal dollar
that may be a part of the Administration's proposal for reauthorization
of Federal surface transportation programs.
A total of 71 projects in 31 states with a total construction value
of over $4.5 billion are moving forward under FHWA's Test and
Evaluation Innovative Finance program. The initiative has generated
about $1.2 billion in increased public and private investment, without
any increase in Federal funding. For the actual projects that were
funded, project sponsors used federal funds, State matching funds, and
leveraged non-federal public and private funds. A recent evaluation of
the initiative found that financing for these projects is as follows:
Federal, $2.3 billion (53.4 percent); State and local, $0.47 billion
(11 percent); private and toll authorities, $1.51 billion (35.6
percent). Forty-three of the 71 projects have been accelerated by an
average 2.2 years. As a result of these Test and Evaluation projects,
ultimately 176,400 jobs will be created.
In order to provide States assistance in implementing the
innovative finance provisions in the NHS, FHWA launched a special two-
day training course. The course has been taught 47 times in 32 States
over the past year. FHWA has also established Eastern and Western
Regional Finance Centers, providing direct technical assistance to
States and local governments.
The NHS authorized up to 10 pilot State Infrastructure Banks
(SIBs). As a result, the Secretary designated Arizona, California,
Florida, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, and
Virginia to participate in the SIB pilot program. DOT has been
providing technical assistance to these States to implement their SIBs.
Nine cooperative agreements have been signed with States to establish
the banks (California is in the final stages of completing its
cooperative agreement). Six States have deposited Federal and non-
federal matching funds to capitalize their SIBs. Ohio's SIB has made
the first loan of the pilot program in the amount of $10 million to
Butler County to support a likely $100 million bond issuance. The other
States are currently working with project sponsors to determine which
projects will be most effectively assisted by the SIBs.
The FY 1997 DOT Appropriations Act enabled the Department to
increase the number of pilot States from the 10 previously authorized
and included an additional $150 million from the general fund to
capitalize pilot SIBs. The Department is working to select additional
States ready to implement a SIB from among the 26 applications it has
received from 28 States, including 2 multi-State applications.
Question 3. Air Quality: Under your leadership the Federal Highway
Administration has truly worked as a partner with the Environmental
Protection Agency in ensuring that transportation continues to
contribute to improving the quality of our air. Can you talk about your
view of the importance of integrating air quality and transportation
goals--one of the fundamental premises of ISTEA?
Response. ISTEA reflected a growing recognition that
transportation, while vital to our nation's mobility and economy, must
also be compatible with our commitment to clean air. Integrating air
quality and transportation planning is, and will continue to be, an
important goal of DOT. The need to continue to work on meeting this
goal has been underscored by our customers, including our State and
local partners, as well as our own staff in implementing the programs
and provisions of ISTEA. By increasing program and funding flexibility,
encouraging the consideration of environmental factors in
transportation planning, and providing funds for air quality planning,
ISTEA is helping areas to meet the requirements of the 1990 Clean Air
Act Amendments (CAAA). ISTEA also created the Congestion Mitigation and
Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ), which set aside $6 billion to
assist areas in dealing with congestion and transportation-related air
pollution. CMAQ has been successful in supporting a broad range of
innovative projects which might not have otherwise been funded. I
believe it is important to continue this program.
The Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit
Administration have worked closely with the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) on ISTEA's implementation, as well as on the
implementation of the transportation provisions in the 1990 CAAA. DOT
and EPA collaborated on guidance for implementing the CMAQ program. Our
agencies have also worked extensively with stakeholders to provide
technical assistance and to streamline the transportation conformity
process under the CAAA. Transportation agencies ensure that
transportation plans and programs help support efforts to reach and
maintain air quality standards. Finally, EPA and DOT are exploring a
public education campaign designed to help the public understand the
air pollution consequences of their transportation choices.
One of the Department's five main policy principles in ISTEA
reauthorization is ``enhancing the environment.'' I am committed to
ensuring that ISTEA's successor continues to protect the environment
and integrate our nation's transportation and air quality goals.
Question 4. Transportation enhancements: In Connecticut, the
transportation enhancement program of ISTEA has been a remarkable
success. What did you learn about this program from your interactions
with local and state officials?
Response. While I have not had the opportunity to spend a great
deal of time visiting transportation enhancement projects in
Connecticut, I have stayed in close contact with our Division
Administrator. It is clear from our discussions with state and local
officials that their concerns mirror those of many others across the
nation who want to streamline the project delivery process and minimize
the complexity of the process for project sponsors. We have heard their
concerns, and are working with the State to streamline the
environmental review process, and to complete negotiated agreements
with organizations such as the State Historic Preservation Office in
Connecticut.
It is clear that local officials like the transportation
enhancement program and support its contribution to community
enhancement and revitalization. Projects such as the Farmington Canal
Linear Park in Cheshire, Connecticut, have made enormous contributions
to the renovation and preservation of historic treasures. It is just
one example of a transportation enhancement project that has restored a
recreational and open space corridor thus providing community and
transportation benefits. This fine project was selected as one of 25
best enhancement projects and was featured at the National
Transportation Enhancement Conference FHWA sponsored in June 1996.
Question 5. Technology Development: What type of investments do you
think we need to make in developing the technologies that will provide
really significant leaps forward in the next century in terms of
improving the mobility of both passengers and goods?
Response. We need to invest in technologies to improve the
collection, processing and sharing of information for both the driver
and his or her vehicle, and for the improved operation of our surface
network. Similarly, other Intelligent Transportation Systems
technologies and strategies will allow drivers of both commercial and
passenger vehicles to make trips safer and more efficient through Smart
Vehicle Technology.
We also need to be making investments in the area of commercial
vehicle operations. We are working cooperatively on motor carrier
issues in the public and private sectors to research and develop
applications of advanced technology. This will help to achieve safe and
efficient movement of trucks and buses throughout North America, and to
continue to streamline the regulatory process. We also need to use
advanced communication technologies to enhance the intermodal transfer
of passengers and goods--thus creating a seamless transportation
system.
Furthermore, we must examine the potential for high-speed rail,
Maglev, and other innovative transportation technologies.
<all>