S.Amdt. 720

SA 720. Mr. McCAIN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed to
amendment SA 605 proposed by Mr. Inhofe to the bill H.R. 3, to
authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety programs, and
transit programs, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on
the table as follows:

At the end of chapter 3 of subtitle E of title I, insert
the following:

SEC. __. SENSE OF CONGRESS RELATING TO PROJECT EARMARKS.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) the House of Representatives adopted a rule in 1914
stating that it shall not be in order for any bill providing
general legislation with respect to roads to contain any
provision for any specific road;
(2) diverting funds to low-priority earmarks diminishes the
ability of States and local communities to establish
priorities and address mobility problems;
(3) the Government Accountability Office has reported that
demonstration projects reviewed were not considered by State
and regional transportation officials as critical to their
transportation needs, and more than half of the projects
reviewed were not included in State and local transportation
plans;
(4) some earmarks have nothing to do with transportation
and may worsen congestion by diverting scarce resources from
higher priorities;
(5) the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (96
Stat. 2097) contained 10 earmarks at a cost of $385,925,000;
(6) the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation
Assistance Act of 1987 (101 Stat. 132) contained 157 projects
at a cost of $1,416,000,000;
(7) the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of
1991 (105 Stat. 1914) contained 538 projects at a cost of
$6,082,873,000;
(8) the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112
Stat. 107) contained 1,851 projects at a cost of
$9,359,850,000;
(9) annual transportation appropriations Acts demonstrate
the same trend in increasing earmarking of projects;
(10) the funding earmarked for many projects does not cover
the full cost of the project and requires State and local
communities to cover the unfunded costs; and
(11) funding of earmarked projects can have a dramatic
effect on the rate of return that a State receives on its
contributions to the Highway Trust Fund.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient
Transportation Equity Act of 2005 should not include project
earmarks;
(2) if earmarked projects are included, the projects should
be included within the funding that a State would otherwise
receive so as not to penalize other States; and
(3) any earmarked projects should be included in the
funding equity provisions of the next surface transportation
Act so that the projects do not adversely affect the rate of
return that a State receives from its contributions to the
Highway Trust Fund.
______