Washingtonpost.com: The Highway Bill
By Eric Pianin and Charles R. Babcock
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, April 19, 1998; Page A06 While Senate leaders say they disapprove of the sort of rampant pork-barrel spending that marks the House-passed version of new federal highway and mass transit legislation, Republican and Democratic senators will bring plenty of pork of their own to the table when the two sides begin negotiating a compromise bill this week.
The House bill -- which earmarks about $9 billion for 1,467 individual highway, bridge, bike path and economic development projects and another $9 billion for hundreds of mass transit and bus projects -- has drawn stinging rebukes from House Budget Committee Chairman John R. Kasich (R-Ohio), congressional conservatives and a raft of groups concerned about fiscal discipline.
"The era of big government is not over," John Berthoud of the National Taxpayers Union complained last week of the $217 billion measure. "The era of really big government is here."
But the slightly less costly Senate version of the legislation, approved early last month with little controversy, includes scores of earmarks or special provisions that would funnel billions of dollars' worth of highway, bridge and mass transit projects to favored states and special interests.
There is nearly $1 billion in the bill to develop and construct high-speed magnetic levitation trains throughout the country. State officials and private developers in Nevada, California, Florida, Maryland and Pennsylvania have expressed interest in the program for developing passenger trains that can travel in excess of 240 mph.
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman John H. Chafee (R-R.I.) added the funds for the project after personally inspecting -- and driving -- a MAG-LEV train in Germany last year, according to an aide.
Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.) added $900 million toward construction of a replacement for the Woodrow Wilson Bridge in metropolitan Washington. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) inserted language which would make San Mateo County, Calif., eligible to receive emergency funding for a proposed $146 million highway tunnel project at Devil's Slide.
The bill also contains funding for road construction in and around Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming, and $72 million to construct a dozen new transportation research centers on college and university campuses to promote different facets of the transportation industry.
Another $420 million was added for an "Interstate 4R and Bridge Discretionary Program." According to a Senate aide, that would give states more discretion in spending funds for resurfacing and restoring portions of interstate highways.
Pork-barrel spending -- and how much is too much -- is among a dozen or so critical issues separating House and Senate transportation committee negotiators as they attempt to iron out a final bill before a May 1 deadline for authorizing new highway projects.
The principal combatants will be House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Bud Shuster (R-Pa.), who championed a huge increase in pork and overall highway and transit spending, and Chafee, who cautioned moderation -- even as the Senate virtually matched the House in overall spending and loaded up the bill with special interest provisions and last-minute deals to placate recalcitrant states.
A key dispute is over the formula for allocating the vast majority of highway funds to the states. Both the House and Senate have approved formulas that eliminate or minimize many of the inequities of the 1991 formula that largely benefited states from the Northeast and upper Midwest to the detriment of southern, western and midwestern states. However, the new House formula would be slightly more advantageous to more heavily populated states with larger highway systems, while the Senate approach would favor more sparsely populated states with smaller highway networks.
Another controversy is over Shuster's demand to require that future federal gasoline tax revenue be used exclusively for highway spending. Shuster and his allies have fought for years to move the highway trust fund "off budget" and hence out of bounds for other types of spending or deficit reduction.
There are no similar provisions in the Senate-passed version of the highway bill. Chafee and other Senate GOP leaders are opposed to that approach because it would greatly complicate Congress's task in balancing the budget and keeping it in balance.
Also, the House bill provides no money for the replacement of the federally operated Woodrow Wilson Bridge. And the House objects to a Senate provision that would penalize states up to 10 percent of their highway funds if they refuse to adopt tougher drunken driving standards.
So-called pork-barrel spending represents a relatively small part of the highway bill -- no more than 5 percent of total highway spending in the House bill. But the issue is politically explosive, coming off the often stormy, long-term efforts to balance the budget.
Some, including Kasich, have attacked the House bill as an "abomination" of pork-barrel spending and argued that it undermines the principles of the GOP's conservative revolution. The libertarian Cato Institute held a forum late last week entitled: "Road to Hell? Problems with the Highway Bill."
Shuster and his aides insist that members are entitled to influence a small percentage of the total spending. They dismiss much of the criticism as unfounded or cheap shots.
Chafee has signaled that he believes the House went overboard in earmarking funds in the bill and that Shuster will have to scale back the list to make it acceptable to the Senate.
"As a practice, the Senate does not include specific earmarks or mandates but provides flexibility to federal and state transportation officials for certain programs nationwide," said Stephen Bentfield, a spokesman for Chafee.
But House GOP negotiators note that if history is a gauge, Senate negotiators are likely to turn up at the bargaining table with a list of additional projects they will insist upon. A House GOP aide complained last week that while some senators are clucking about the length of Shuster's list of pork projects, Shuster has been fairly straightforward in his efforts, but Senate members often resort to stealth in promoting favorite pork projects.
"At least you know in our bill what the money is going for," said the House aide. "In the Senate, they masquerade their pork projects as national policy."
Indeed, the language in the Senate bill providing funding for highway and bridge projects in and around Yellowstone does not mention the site by name. Rather, it states that the funds would go to "a state that contains a national park that was visited by more than 2,500,000 people in 1996 and comprises more than 3,000 square miles of land area, including surface water, that is located in the state."
The special interest provisions in the Senate bill set aside pots of money for some favored projects and set up several "pilot projects" to make policy changes to aid specific sectors of the transportation industry.
The bill would spread around $444 million for improvements of state or municipally owned highways near federal lands or Indian reservations as part of a new "Cooperative Federal Lands Transportation Program."
The Senate wants to designate up to 15 privately owned highway projects to be eligible for tax-exempt bond financing worth up to $15 billion. This is part of a new program to leverage private construction of transportation projects beneficial to the general public, according to a Senate aide.
A provision in the Senate bill would provide relief to fertilizer suppliers who failed to win an exemption from new Transportation Department rules governing the labeling of shipments of hazardous materials. The Senate measure would create a "pilot program" that would effectively grant the exemption. The International Association of Fire Chiefs, and Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety -- a coalition of consumer groups and insurance companies -- have strongly criticized the Senate provision and said it could pose serious safety hazards for firefighters in the case of accidents.
Floyd Gaibler, lobbyist for the Agricultural Retailers Association, said the state of Illinois has exempted small haulers using state and county roads for years without problems.
The Senate, like the House, also would expand the number of "university transportation centers" to promote the transportation industry that were first authorized in the 1987 highway bill.
Both bills earmark funds, $96 million to $120 million, for a "national defense highway outside the United States." The DOT analysis says this is a reference to the Shakwak highway in Canada's Yukon, which is part of the Alaska Highway that runs through the Yukon from one part of Alaska to another. The Yukon News in Whitehorse noted last month that the territory's "ambassador for circumpolar affairs" was in Washington to lobby for the funding.
Researcher Mary Lou White contributed to this report.
© Copyright 1998 The Washington Post Company
ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7uK3SoaCnn6Sku7G70q1lnKedZMSxedKrrWion6G2tbXCrGasqJWYtqK4jqGgoKCnlsZwv9OoqaKdo2S1uMWPbWhycWhjtbW5