Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
122242344
label
ISTEA [Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
122242344
contentType
document
title
ISTEA [Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act]
citationUrl
collections
Records of the Office of the Chief of Staff (Clinton Administration)
Erskine Bowles' Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
122242344
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-2790502-20150463F-002-026-2017
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
79632f6e43a4d349
ocrText
FOIA Number: 2015-0463-F
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Office of Origin:
Chief of Staff
Series/Staff Member:
Erskine Bowles
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
12885
FolderID:
Folder Title:
ISTEA [Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
21
7
10
2
Briefing Materials for the Chief of Staff
Erskine B. Bowles
Event:
ISTEA Strategy Meeting
Date:
Monday, October 20, 1997
Time:
3:00 p.m.
Participants:
Bowles
Sperling
Slater
Raines
Hilley
Purpose:
The purpose of the meeting is to agree on the Administration's strategy
toward likely Senate amendments to the ISTEA bill (bill will be on Sen.
floor next week) -- particularly a Gramm-Byrd amendment that has a lot of
support and that would have significant budget implications.
Background:
See attached memo from Dorothy Robyn.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 17, 1997
MEMORANDUM FOR ERSKINE BOWLES AND GENE SPERLING
FROM:
Dorothy Robyn
SUBJ:
ISTEA Meeting
On Monday, October 20 at 3 pm, Gene will chair a meeting of the Administration's "core"
ISTEA group. The agenda includes key issues related to the upcoming Senate debate.
Gramm-Byrd Amendment
This amendment would raise contract (budget) authority for ISTEA by about $5.5 billion a
year and give surface transportation "first dibs" on up to $31 billion of any future budget
surplus that Congress deems should be spent. (Note: There is some debate about whether
the "first dibs" mechanism is, in fact. part of Gramm-Byrd.) The amendment has
considerable support because it would not raise the domestic discretionary cap and therefore
is not seen as violating the balanced budget agreement.
The "first dibs" mechanism is highly objectionable, because it would preempt debate on
spending. (Even without that mechanism, the higher levels of contract authority would put
pressure on appropriators to raise their allocation to surface transportation.) OMB is
circulating for clearance a statement of opposition 10 Gramm-Byrd.
Chafee-Domenici
Sen. Chafee is reportedly livid at Baucus and Warner for supporting Gramm-Byrd. He and
Sen. Domenici have countered with a proposal that provides for accelerated consideration of
any additional funding for surface transportation that is agreed to as part of the FY99
budget resolution. To elaborate, if next year's budget resolution allocates an additional,
say, $3 billion for highways, the authorizing committees would have 10 days to modify or
reject the proposai; at the end of that time. it would automatically go to the full House and
Senate for a vote.
Because additional funds could be approved and spent more quickly, this mechanism may
give surface transportation a leg up in the budget resolution process. although. it's not clear
how much of one. Because it bypasses the appropriations committees (and gives more
power to the budget committees), we would expect appropriators to oppose it. We do not
yet know Sen. Lott's position on Chafee-Dominici or Gramm-Byrd. Question for meeting:
What should the Administration's position be toward this amendment?
Againt boh
Six-Month Extension VS. No Bill
DOT believes that if Gramm-Byrd passes, there will be far more momentum in the Senate
for getting a six-year ISTEA bill. Likewise, Rep. Shuster may well decide he can live with
a six-year bill that contains Gramm-Byrd.
Nevertheless, the most likely scenario is that the Senate will run out of time to consider the
six-year ISTEA bill (there are more than 40 amendments scheduled for debate). For that
reason, the Senate may be faced with a choice between passing either a six-month extension
of current law (as the House has done) or no bill at all. According to a former OMB
examiner on Sen. Chafee's staff, there is far more sentiment for the latter, because it would
force the Congress to pass a multi-year bill next spring. By contrast, because a six-month
extension, combined with the existence of several months worth of carry-over ISTEA funds,
means that the Congress could avoid dealing with a multi-year bill until next fall. Chafee
and other senators want to avoid a showdown with Rep. Shuster in the heat of a campaign,
when Members are most hungry for transportation spending.
See attached memo from OMB Examiner David Worzala on the problems of the no-bill
scenario. Question for meeting: If the Administration cannot get a six-year bill, which is
preferable -- a six-month extension or по bill at all?
sends like no bill isbra
Other Issues
if you below BB
I will get you information on Monday about a Faircloth amendment that would distort
allocation of transit funds.
You may want to review where we stand on the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE)
amendment and whether additional outreach efforts (e.g., by Secretary Cohen) are needed.
David J. Worzala
10/10/97 06:26:00 PM
Record Type:
Record
To:
Dorothy Robyn
CC:
Subject: ISTEA - No bill Scenario
Message Creation Date was at 10-OCT-1997 18:26:00
This E-mail responds to your request that we look into a no-ISTEA scenario. At
the FHWA FY 1999 Budget Hearing, we had a a long discussion with Gloria Jeff,
the Acting-Administrator of FHWA, on the downsides of no reathorization of
ISTEA this fall. This email summarizes the impacts of a no bill scenario.
As you are aware, some believe it is preferable that no bill to be enacted
rather than acquiesce to the House proposal for an extension. This scenario
assumes Congress will be forced to complete the reauthorization more speedily
if there is no extension. However, as Gloria Jeff pointed out this morning,
there are serious problems with this approach. The problems center around
safety initiatives, effective delivery of programs and administrative problems.
Safety initiatives
While safety is the number one priority of Secretary
Slater,
the safety grant programs of FHWA motor carriers and NHTSA are at a standstill
today because there is no contract authority. In addition, construction funds
for hazard elimination are only available to the extent carryover funds are
available: To the public, this means that motor carrier inspections, seat-belt
and alcohol awareness efforts, and highway safety enforcement efforts are
diminished. The National Driver Register, which State Motor Vehicle
Departments query for commercial and personnel licensing histories, may have to
cease operating. Both FAA and CG use this system as a check for certification
of pilots and merchant mariners.
Effective delivery of programs
There is approximately $12 billion of
unobligated contract authority held by the States. However, categories of
carryover CA do not always match the priority needs of the States. For
example, States may have unobligated CMAQ funds, but not NHS funds. In
addition to the mismatch of funding to needs, State planning and contracting
schedules will be disrupted. Bid proposals will not be published absent the
resources to conduct the projects. Delayed starts, or stretching a project
over two construction periods, will result in increased project costs.
Contractors are also less likely to apply for projects where funding is in
question. At a minimum, these disruptions will cause bidders to raise prices
commensurate with the perceived risk associated with delayed funding.
Administrative - FHWA runs out of Operating Expenses contract authority on
January 1. If no bill is enacted by then, or other relief provided, all FHWA
employees would be furloughed. Currently, approximately $62 million is
available for an account that spends roughly $500 million on an annual basis.
Under FHWA's emergency operating plan they are delaying as many payments as
possible. This would include GSA rent and OST centralized costs. On the
personnel management front, no performance awards are being given out and
travel has been curtailed. For the programs funded by LGOE, such as research
and development, no projects are moving to the bid phase.
Transit
Similar to highways, transit has significant unobligated balances
that can be used by transit grantees through the first quarter. However,
after that time, the lack of an authorization will begin to cause problems for
the smaller less financially robust transit operators. These would include
rural and small urban transit systems. Transit does not have an administrative
problem because operations, planning and research are funded by appropriations
(BA) rather than authorizations (CA).
If you need additional information, please let me know.