Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 5518 - Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, FY 1993

(Senate Floor)
(Sponsors: Byrd (D), West Virginia; Lautenberg (D), New Jersey)

This Statement of Administration Policy provides the Administration's views on H.R. 5518, the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, FY 1993, as reported by the Committee.

The Administration strongly objects to the Committee's reduction in proposed funding for Federal-aid highways. The total recommended funding level of $18.5 billion is $704 million below the President's request. This level would be insufficient to maintain the condition of the National Highway System, which is one of the most important links in the nation's transportation system.

The Senate is urged to restore Federal-aid highway funding, as well as funding for other necessary transportation programs discussed below. This could be accomplished by redirecting funds from highway demonstration projects, mass transit, local rail freight assistance, and Amtrak, all of which are funded at levels in excess of the President's request.

Excessive Funding for Highway Demonstration Projects. Mass Transit, and Amtrak

Funding provided by the Committee bill for highway demonstration projects ($275 million) would erode the ability of State planners to make sound transportation decisions, distort the formula allocation of funds, and reduce equity among the States.

The Administration objects to the Committee's funding, and earmarking, of $690 million for mass transit new starts. The Committee bill earmarks $140 million for projects that are not ready for construction or cannot use additional funds in FY 1993. Another $180 million is earmarked for projects that, based on Department of Transportation criteria, do not appear to be cost effective.

In addition, the Administration objects to the funding of mass transit operating subsidies at a level that is $585 million above the President's request. Operating expenses are more appropriately funded at the local level where the day-to-day operating decisions are made.

The Administration objects to the funding provided above the President's request for Amtrak capital and operating subsidies and Northeast rail corridor infrastructure improvements. The Federal government has already spent $2.5 billion to upgrade the Northeast corridor. Future infrastructure improvements should be funded from Amtrak's capital grant.

Other Provisions

The Committee has provided only $2.5 million of the $12.9 million requested for magnetic levitation (maglev) systems research. Funds are required at the requested level in order to continue studies of economic, technical, and safety issues. In the Administration's view, full funding should be provided for maglev systems research in place of the $45 million provided for prototype development. Funding the maglev prototype is premature.

The Administration strongly objects to the Committee's attempt to change the terms of the Panama Canal Treaties by delaying the mandatory payment to the Republic of Panama.

OMB is reviewing the Committee's classification of $403 million for Coast Guard programs as entirely defense. Until this review is complete, OMB has preliminarily classified as defense only the $203 million that was requested for the Coast Guard programs.

Additional Administration concerns with the bill as reported by the Committee are contained in the attachment.

Attachment

Attachment
(Senate Floor)

ADDITIONAL CONCERNS
H.R. 5518 — TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, FY 1993

MAJOR PROVISIONS OPPOSED BY THE ADMINISTRATION

A. Funding Levels

Department of Transportation:

Coast Guard. The Administration objects to the Committee's actions that would result in a $63 million reduction to the President's request for the Coast Guard's Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements appropriation. Even when reprogrammed funds from prior years are considered, this reduction constitutes a 15- percent decrease in available funding.

Amtrak. The Committee bill increases the Federal subsidy for Amtrak above the level requested by the Administration. Further, the Committee bill obscures the extent to which Amtrak is dependent upon Federal subsidies by funding mandatory rail payments separately. The Administration believes that Amtrak's payments to the Railroad Retirement Board should be made from Amtrak's revenues or from the Federal operating grant and should reflect the cost of funding rail pensions under Employee Retirement Income Security standards. Furthermore, the Committee's bill does not provide for the reforms necessary to move Amtrak toward self-sufficiency.

Federal Aviation Administration. The Administration objects to the unrequested $28.5 million that the Committee has provided for Airway Service projects. The Administration also objects to statutory language that would increase the Federal share from 50 percent to 80 percent, retroactive to October 1, 1991.

B. Language Provisions

General Provisions Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The Administration requests the removal of a provision that would mandate flight and duty time restrictions for airline flight attendants. The provision adopted by the Committee would produce no safety benefit to the flying public. Most airlines already have collective bargaining agreements or work rules that provide duty and rest time for flight attendants similar to that provided for pilots.

Pay Raise Restriction. The Administration objects to statutory prohibitions against FY 1993 pay raises for FAA employees involved in noise abatement policy and the New York-New Jersey environmental impact statement.

Intrusion into Management Authority. The Administration objects to aspects of the Committee bill that reflect undue intrusion into the management of the Department of Transportation. The Administration objects to the provision that would reduce the ceiling on political appointees at the Department from 120 to 100.

Airport Slots. Language of the Committee bill would reserve airport slots at O'Hare Airport for essential air service between certain points. The Administration believes that this provision would be an inappropriate market intervention.