{"database": "openregs", "table": "congressional_record", "rows": [["CREC-2000-12-15-pt1-PgS11829-2", "2000-12-15", 106, 2, null, null, "MAKING FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2001", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S11829", "S11830", "[{\"name\": \"Trent Lott\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Frank R. Lautenberg\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John F. Kerry\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"106\", \"type\": \"HJRES\", \"number\": \"133\"}, {\"congress\": \"106\", \"type\": \"HJRES\", \"number\": \"133\"}]", "146 Cong. Rec. S11829", "Congressional Record, Volume 146 Issue 155 (Friday, December 15, 2000)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 155 (Friday, December 15, 2000)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S11829-S11830]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n   MAKING FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2001\n\n  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate\nproceed to the technical continuing resolution, H.J. Res. 133.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the joint resolution by\ntitle.\n  The legislative clerk read as follows:\n\n       A joint resolution (H.J. Res. 133) making further\n     continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2001, and for\n     other purposes.\n\n  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the joint\nresolution.\n  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution\nbe read the third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be laid\nupon the table, all without intervening action, motion, or debate.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  The joint resolution (H.J. Res. 133) was read the third time and\npassed.\n  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I have one further clarification. It seems\nthere is an objection, notwithstanding the receipt of the papers, that\nwe have a vote and then go to debate, but we are working on an\narrangement that will allow us to proceed with debate and get some\ncertainty about how the vote will be dispensed with. We should be able\nto get that clarified in a few minutes. I would hate to ask the Senator\nto yield again in a few minutes, but in view of the importance of the\nissue, I might do that. For now, that is all the business Senator\nDaschle and I have.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from New\nJersey has the floor.\n  Mr. LAUTENBERG. I thank the Chair. I yield 3 minutes to the Senator\nfrom Massachusetts, again with it understood that I retain the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The\nSenator from Massachusetts.\n  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from New Jersey. He is\nvery gracious in doing so. I know he wants to make some important\ncomments that summarize his 18 years of work and commitment on this\nissue. He is generous to allow us to intervene.\n  I join in thanking the majority leader and the minority leader,\nSenator Daschle, Senator Reid, particularly Senator Byrd and Senator\nStevens for responding to the request of a number of us from our\nregion. I thank Senator Biden and Senator Lautenberg for their\nleadership again on this issue.\n  There was a lot of passion in our caucus earlier this afternoon, and\nthe minority leader listened to all of us very carefully. Our caucus, I\nmust say, was united in its commitment to the notion that those of us\nwho cared about this issue needed to have some kind of response on the\nfloor that indicated where we will go. I am grateful for this response.\n  The commitment on the floor openly, as it has been given, to proceed\nas we will proceed, particularly from the distinguished ranking member\nof the Appropriations Committee and the chairman, is as good a\ncommitment as one can get in the Senate.\n  We have 56 sponsors of this legislation today in the Senate. With the\nnew Senators coming in, I am absolutely confident we will have more\nthan 60 sponsors of this legislation. I look forward to building on the\nlegacy of Senator Moynihan and Senator Lautenberg and completing what\nis absolutely essential for this country, which is a rail system of\nwhich the Nation can be proud.\n  I am very grateful to all those who have made this effort. I\nparticularly say about the Senator from New Jersey and the Senator from\nNew York, the two of them will be so missed with respect to their\nleadership and the vision they have expressed with respect to\ntransportation issues as a whole, but particularly for those of us in\nthe Northeast, what voices they have been in the Senate with respect to\ntheir vision for how we can more inexpensively and capably move people\nfrom here to\n\n[[Page S11830]]\n\nthere and increase the productivity of our country. I pledge, along\nwith my other colleagues, to build on their example and on that vision.\nThe day will come when we will all have a better transportation network\nas a consequence of their leadership.\n  Mr. President, I know that every member of the Congress is anxious to\nend this session and get back to our states. We all have work to do and\nfamilies waiting to celebrate the holidays. However, my colleagues\nSenator Lautenberg and Senator Biden are right to be angry and\nfrustrated with this legislation.\n  There is a small but extremely significant item missing from this\nlegislation--the High-Speed Rail Investment Act. The Act would allow\nAmtrak to sell $10 billion in bonds over the next decade and provide\ntax credits to bondholders in lieu of interest payments. Amtrak would\nuse this money to upgrade existing rail lines to high-speed rail\ncapability. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the bill\nwould cost just $95 million over 2 years. Over 5 years, the bill would\nstill cost only $762 million.\n  The High-Speed Rail Investment Act has 56 co-sponsors in the Senate.\nThis is not a partisan issue. It is not a regional issue. It is not an\nurban issue. The High-Speed Rail Investment Act has the support of the\nNational Governors Association, the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the\nNational Conference of State Legislatures. Nineteen newspapers, from\nthe New York Times and Providence Journal, to the Houston Chronicle and\nSeattle Post Intelligencer, have called for the enactment of this\nlegislation.\n  Let me explain why so many people and organizations support this\nlegislation:\n  It is in our national interest to construct a national infrastructure\nthat is truly intermodal. Rail transportation helps alleviate the\nstress placed on our environment by air and highway transportation. It\nis a sad fact that America's rail transportation, and its lack of a\nnational high-speed rail system, lags well behind rail transportation\nin most other nations--we spend less, per capita, on rail\ntransportation than Estonia, Myanmar, and Botswana.\n  There is a compelling need to invest in high-speed rail. Our highways\nand skyways are overburdened. Intercity passenger miles have increased\n80 percent since 1988, but only 5.5 percent of that has come from\nincreased rail travel. Meanwhile, our congested skies have become even\nmore crowded. The result, predictably, is that air travel delays are up\n58 percent since 1995.\n  In the air travel industry, bad weather in one part of the country\nvery often results in delays in other parts of the country. There is\nconsumer demand for more flights. But we know that our skyways and air\ntraffic control systems are finite and that the system is overloaded.\n  Amtrak ridership is on the rise. More than 22.5 million passengers\nrode Amtrak in Fiscal Year 2000, a million more than the previous year.\nFY 2000 was the fourth consecutive year that ridership has increased.\nWe should welcome that increased use and support it by giving Amtrak\nthe resources it needs to provide high-quality, dependable service.\n  High-Speed Rail Investment Act is critical to the future of Amtrak.\nFor half the cost of constructing the new Woodrow Wilson Bridge linking\nMaryland and Virginia, we can create 10 high-speed rail corridors in 28\nstates. For the cost of the St. Louis Airport expansion, we can improve\nintercity transportation in 28 states. In October we passed a $58\nbillion transportation appropriations bill for this fiscal year. What\nwe are talking about today is an additional $95 million over the next\ntwo years, which will leverage $2 billion in funding. This is a sound\ninvestment.\n  There is an alarming misconception among some members of this body\nand around the country that Amtrak is a money pit, where taxpayer\ndollars simply disappear. Nothing could be further from the truth. In\nfact, the federal government has invested $380 billion in our highways\nand $160 billion in airports since Amtrak was created. By contrast, the\nfederal government has spent only $23 billion on Amtrak. We have spent\njust 4 percent of our transportation budget on rail transportation in\nthe last 30 years.\n  Those who criticize Amtrak for not ``turning a profit'' employ a\ndouble standard--a double standard that is misleading, unfair and\nunwise. Between 1985-1995, this country spent $17 billion more on\nfederal highways than it raised through the federal gas tax and highway\ntrust fund. During the same period, the nation spent $30 billion more\non aviation expenditures than it received through the aviation trust\nfund. By their misguided logic, there can be only one solution: since\nneither of those trust funds operated at cost, we should eliminate\nthese programs. That's nonsense. So why are we failing to adequately\ninvest in rail transportation?\n  Mr. President, high-speed rail is a viable transportation\nalternative. There is a large and growing demand for rail service in\nthe Northeast Corridor. Amtrak captures almost 70 percent of the\nbusiness rail and air travel market between Washington and New York and\n30 percent of the market share between New York and Boston. High-speed\nrail will undoubtedly increase that market share.\n  These new trains, like the Acela Express that debuted in the\nNortheast this year, currently run at an average of only 82 miles per\nhour, but with track improvements, will run at 130 miles per hour.\n  As a Nation, we have recognized the importance of having the very\nbest communication system, and ours is the envy of the world. That\ninvestment is one of reasons our economy is the strongest in the world.\nAnd we should do the same for our transportation system. It should be\nequally modern and must be fully intermodal. And in order to do that,\nwe must invest in rail transportation, invest in Amtrak and be certain\nto include this inexpensive legislation in the last bill of the 106th\nCongress.\n  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, before I yield, and I will continue to\ndo so throughout the night, I say to my friends, my colleagues from\nMassachusetts and Delaware, that I am grateful for their comments. I am\nsure we will see, and I am particularly grateful to the majority leader\nand Democratic leader, an Amtrak bill on the floor early in the next\nsession. I am sorry I will not be here, but in the meanwhile, I will\nyield to the majority leader.\n  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, again I thank the Senator.\n\n                          ____________________"]], "columns": ["granule_id", "date", "congress", "session", "volume", "issue", "title", "chamber", "granule_class", "sub_granule_class", "page_start", "page_end", "speakers", "bills", "citation", "full_text"], "primary_keys": ["granule_id"], "primary_key_values": ["CREC-2000-12-15-pt1-PgS11829-2"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 3.5203020088374615, "source": "Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API", "source_url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/developers/api/v1", "license": "Public Domain (U.S. Government data)", "license_url": "https://www.regulations.gov/faq"}