March 9, 2005
Highway Bill and Protecting Rural Funding from 'Flex Spending'
Floor Speech

Mr. Speaker I rise today in support of H.R. 3 and want to commend Chairman Young and Ranking Member Oberstar as well as our subcommittee chairman, Mr. Petri, and Ranking Member DeFazio for their tireless efforts on behalf of our nation’s infrastructure system. As a Pennsylvanian who represents a broad geographic area, I know the issue of transportation is critical to all of our constituents. I am very pleased that the legislation before us today includes many initiatives to combat congestion on our nation’s highways and further relieves bottlenecks on our roads.

H.R. 3 contains innovative, real time and intelligent transportation initiatives that allow states to monitor and improve traffic flow and enhance safety. Building on these innovative programs, I also encourage support of an amendment that will be offered by my colleague from Minnesota that will create voluntary toll/fast lanes. Drivers who choose to use these fast lanes will be charged electronically, eliminating tollbooths that add to back-ups and congestion. In an era where congestion now means the difference between time with your family or sitting in traffic, this option is sorely needed.

One concern, Mr. Speaker, that I do have with the bill is the rate of return states will receive under this measure. It has been the tradition in surface transportation reauthorizations to take into account that some regions are saddled with greater needs than others and thus deserve a larger rate of return. My home state of Pennsylvania is unique in that we have more miles of state highway to maintain than all of New England and New York combined. Additionally, the Commonwealth ranks third in the amount of through truck traffic that neither originates nor terminates in the state. Pennsylvania receives little benefit from such commerce traveling through our state, yet our highways still suffer from the constant pounding and damage caused by the traffic. As we move forward to conference, I would encourage my colleagues to continue returning funding to states based on needs.

Lastly, Mr. Speaker I want to take a minute to address an issue that has become of increasing concern to me and many of my fellow Pennsylvanians on the committee. In recent weeks, the governor of our state has continued to flex funds designated for highway projects to bail out the state’s transit systems. Earlier this month the governor announced that he plans to pour an additional $412 million in funds into transit systems in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. Mr. Speaker, transferring funds set aside by the government for highway projects to bail out troubled transit systems is wrong. The transit system in my state has had continued problems meeting its financial responsibility, and it is out of the pockets of rural Pennsylvanians that funding shortfalls are met. Critical highway projects in our region are put in jeopardy when highway monies are transferred to transit. Our highway system weaves a thread of economic viability through our state and between our urban centers. Quite simply, you cannot travel from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia without going through central Pennsylvania. Yet these people are too often considered second-class citizens as their tax dollars are repeatedly diverted for urban transit programs. To this end I am pleased that included in the bill is language directing the Government Accountability Office to review this transfer authority and how it is being used. I want to thank my colleagues Mr. Gerlach and Mr. Dent for their support and effort on this issue.

It is critical that Congress address this issue and examine the possible need of limiting governors’ ability to shift funds in the future. Rural Pennsylvanians should not have to continue to foot the bill for transit riders in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. I want to thank the chairman and the staff on the committee for their efforts to work us on this issue.