May 14, 1974
Page 14544
Mr. BUCKLEY. Mr. President, I yield to the distinguished Senator from Maryland.
Mr. MATHIAS. Mr. President, I call up my amendment which is at the desk and ask that it be stated.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated.
The legislative clerk proceeded to read the amendment.
Mr. MATHIAS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
On page 17, after line 2, add a new paragraph (c).
"(C) No parking surcharge regulation may be required by the Administrator under paragraph (1) of this subsection as a part of an applicable implementation plan. All parking surcharge regulations previously required by the Administrator shall be void upon the date of enactment of this subparagraph. This subparagraph shall not prevent the Administrator from approving parking surcharges if they are adopted and submitted by a State as part of an applicable implementation plan. The Administrator may not condition approval of any implementation plan submitted by a State on such plan's including a parking surcharge regulation.
Mr. MATHIAS. Mr. President, I asked that the clerk not read the amendment further because the language is very simple. It eliminates a surcharge on downtown parking.
The language is similar to that of the bill as passed by the House of Representatives. It is a part of the bill which has already been passed in the other body. It is language with which we are familiar because the Senate adopted similar language. I feel that it is necessary language, not because I have any lack of concern over the congestion in downtown Washington, which brings about many problems, including the problem because it is a complex problem, a problem with social overtones, a problem with economic overtones, it goes to the heart of every urban concern we have.
This is not a decision which should be made by any single agency. It is a problem of a complex nature. Many countries in the world have attacked the problem of downtown traffic in a variety of ways. I think we ought to have before us some of the alternatives, some of the several different kinds of solutions, and not merely be restricted to a single, rather dull, blunt economic club which can be waved over the heads of those who have to commute into urban areas in order to earn a living. We ought to have a full variety of solutions available before we make the decision.
I should like to see an economic surcharge provision included in the pending bill as it is included in the House bill.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I fully understand the Senator's concern and his point of view.
This provision, which was included in the earlier conference report on this general subject, is not included in the Senate bill at this point because the Senate committee has never held hearings on this subject. The House committee has. It included the provision in the legislation last December and insisted upon it vigorously in conference. We accepted it at that point for the purpose of that legislation.
Mr. MATHIAS. Mr. President, I think the fact that we have not had hearings in the Senate is all the more reason to withhold this particular power at this time.
Mr. MUSKIE. I understand the Senator's point. The other reason why we did not include the provision in the bill at this time is that we thought that in the emergency, favorable terms have appeared during the past few months, and we ought at least to discuss this issue again in conference.
We would not have a meaningful discussion if the issue were not in conference, and we fully expect to have a discussion. We fully expect that the House will be vigorous in its presentation of its point of view. We are conscious of the fact that the Senator from Maryland and others share that point of view. We will fully take that matter into account as we get into the conference.
Mr. MATHIAS. Mr. President, I. am reassured by the opinion or view just expressed by the distinguished Senator from Maine. I want to be assured, however, that there is a body of opinion in the Senate which questions whether or not that particular power should be delegated at the expense of those who have to earn their living by driving into metropolitan areas all over the country. We believe that the variety of other solutions should be examined very carefully before we take action.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I may say further that it was the purpose of the earlier conference agreement in that the parking surcharge provision should be set aside so that we could have hearings this year. The Senate committee fully expects to have hearings sometime this year on this issue.
Mr. MATHIAS. Mr. President, with that assurance, on which I know I can rely, and know that all Senators can rely, that this problem will get some sympathetic consideration from the conferees, I will not insist on a vote on this amendment at this time.
Mr. President, I withdraw the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is withdrawn.
The question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by the Senator from Maine.
The amendment was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the third reading and passage of the bill.