November 1, 1979
Page 30628
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, the bill pending before us appropriates funds for virtually all Federal transportation programs.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. BAYH. I yield such time as the Senator may need.
Mr. MUSKIE. I thank my good friend.
I will just take a moment to comment on the budgetary implications of the bill.
Before I do so, I want to say that Senator BAYH was faced with budget amendments from the administration of over $700 million. He was able to respond to these while staying within the budget authority assumptions of the Senate-passed second budget resolution, and I compliment him for it.
The DOT appropriation bill, as reported, provides for $9.7 billion in new budget authority and $6.3 billion in associated fiscal year 1980 outlays. I am pleased to say that the budget authority level is just consistent with the Senate-passed second budget resolution, which is also the tentative conference agreement. However, the outlays associated with the bill, when taken together with action already completed including outlays from prior years, are above the levels of the budget resolution by $0.2 billion.
Finally, Mr. President, I am pleased to note that the reported bill includes responsible obligation ceilings for the highway and airport development programs funded through trust funds. These are valuable programs and it is important that they be adequately funded to satisfy our transportation needs. But it is also important that the Congress apply some practical limitations on program growth in any one year. If it did not, then there would be little protection against an unexpected temporary upsurge in new program commitments that could threaten the budget resolution outlay and deficit targets.
I wish to thank the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee (Mr. BAYH) for his support of the budget process, and to commend him and the other members of the Appropriations Committee for reporting a bill containing a budget authority level that is basically consistent with the Senate-passed second budget resolution.
Unfortunately, I remain concerned about the Appropriations Committee's ability to live within its total allocation, and the outlays associated with this bill will make the task that much harder. The outlay overage in this bill may be resolved by the Appropriations Committee's own allocation of the funding contained in the second budget resolution, but there is no guarantee of that. To express my concern, and with all due respect to the sincere efforts of the floor managers, I regret that I must vote against the bill.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a table outlining the outlay overage in this bill be printed in the RECORD at this point.
There being no objection, the table was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
[Table omitted]
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, just yesterday the Budget Committee conferees reached agreement on the second budget resolution after a long conference. As a result of this agreement, the funding allocation to the Committee on Appropriations pursuant to section 302(a) of the Budget Act will be increased. Therefore, the conference report will contain a higher Appropriations Committee ceiling into which all appropriations bills for fiscal year 1980 must fit. Even so, I am sorry to say that, based on Senate action to date and expected later requirements, Budget Committee estimates suggest that when all action is completed the fiscal year 1980 spending ceilings for the Appropriations Committee could be breached by $1.2 billion in budget authority and by $2.0 billion in outlays.
This estimate continues to assume that reconciliation instructions to other committees will be followed. If not, the overage will be higher.
Mr. President, this causes me grave concern. It means that the allowance for supplemental funding will be extremely tight and that many meritorious programs could be squeezed out simply because their funding is not included in a regular appropriation bill.
Mr. President, from my point of view, this is a serious matter. We have been struggling without sufficient success all year to stay within the constraints of the budget resolutions adopted by the Senate and by the Congress. We have not succeeded. The bill before us will make it more difficult on the outlay side, notwithstanding the very effective efforts on the part of the floor managers to hold down the amount of budget authority appropriated.
So I find it necessary, often in seeming opposition to good friends and Senators I respect, to remind Senators that we are getting to the end of the appropriations process. And all the signs indicate that when we reach the end of that line, we will be over the budget resolution, potentially by billions of dollars that we ought to be making an effort to save.
With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.
Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, I appreciate the remarks of our distinguished colleague and my friend, the chairman of the Budget Committee. He recognizes, I am sure, that the appropriating committee is sort of between the rock and the hard place on the one outlay area he addressed because of a different interpretation that exists between his committee and the authorizing committee. I hope, if he has not, he will look at page37 of the committee report where we have called this very fact to the attention of the Senate and urged that next year the practice recommended by the Senator from Maine be followed. In the meantime, we felt that the responsible thing to do was to go ahead because if we did not, we would be $10 million short on Amtrak's services.
Mr. MUSKIE. I understand what the distinguished floor manager is saying, Mr. President. I understand that problem. I appreciate the fact that it is his intention next year to change the practice, and that will be sound. That problem can be worked out. I am not inclined to press that solution at this time. I simply have put this before the Senate to call attention to the overall problem which the Appropriations Committee and the Senate faces. In the reconciliation instructions passed by the Senate in the second budget resolution, the Appropriations Committee assumed the responsibility of initiating rescission bills if at the end of the appropriating process it has breached the funding ceilings provided there. It would be much more comfortable if, when we get to the end of the appropriations process, we were under those ceilings. I dislike the prospect that we will be facing that crunch.
It is for that reason that I have chosen this bill — not because I am particularly unhappy with Senator BAYH — because it gives me an occasion to once again express that warning. I think the distinguished floor manager of the bill understands my point.
Mr. BAYH. I do indeed understand. As I recall the Senator's first remarks, he was very gracious and said he was happy with Senator BAYH. I just wanted to put into the RECORD the particular problem we have and to state that we are trying our best to cooperate with the Senator from Maine and make us all more aware of these problems.
Mr. MUSKIE. I thank the distinguished Senator from Indiana, who has been my friend for many years.