Metavid

Video archive of the US Congress

Senate Proceeding 09-11-07 on Sep 11th, 2007 :: 1:31:00 to 1:40:28
Total video length: 5 hours 45 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:87 Duration: 0:09:28 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

Patty Murray

0:32:45 to 1:31:00( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Patty Murray

Patty Murray

1:30:46 to 1:31:00( Edit History Discussion )

Patty Murray: that excess money goes against the rest of the transportation priorities. and then finally, many earmark projects are being funded over higher-priority nonearmark projects. this is a simple amendment. it says we're not

Mary Landrieu

1:31:00 to 1:31:22( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: going to spend money on earmarks unless they're for roads and bridgesdg at this time. it doesn't stop the earmarks. it just slows them down. says whoa! this is a lower priority than what we're doing. in this

Mary Landrieu

1:31:00 to 1:40:28( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Mary Landrieu

Mary Landrieu

1:31:22 to 1:31:34( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: bill are over 500 eerls earmarks that come right now to $2.8 billion. $2.8 billion would go a long way in termser of fixing the tremendous number of bridges that are structurally deficient in this country.

Mary Landrieu

1:31:34 to 1:31:48( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: and that's just within the national highway system. that doesn't have anything to do with state transportation highlights. the real question for this body -- and there's been many claims made against

Mary Landrieu

1:31:48 to 1:32:03( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: this amendment -- number one, is this amendment won't lessen the amount of money that goes to transportation, the state transportation department. and that money can be rerouted so that certain things

Mary Landrieu

1:32:03 to 1:32:17( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: like transit initiatives won't have to stop, but what what it will say is the u.s. senate is on record for saying the highest priority ought to have the highest priority. minnesota is a tragic example

Mary Landrieu

1:32:17 to 1:32:34( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: of the misplace ed priorities that we have, of the billions and billions of dollars -- well over 10% of the last transportation bill, transportation bill, and a significant amount of this bill

Mary Landrieu

1:32:34 to 1:32:50( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: that will be spent on projects that aren't a priority for a state, aren't priority for the national transportation, but are our priorities. we can differ on what the low- low-level priorities are. but nobody

Mary Landrieu

1:32:50 to 1:33:08( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: can deny that we don't have a significant problem with structurally deficient bridges in this country. and when we're going to spend $6 $600,000 on horse ride ing facility ies, $5.9 million on a snowmobile

Mary Landrieu

1:33:08 to 1:33:24( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: trail, $8 million on a parking garage, $532,000 just on one particular earmark for a pedestrian trail, $1.25 million for a day center and park-and- park-and-ride facility, dust- dust-control mitigation

Mary Landrieu

1:33:24 to 1:33:38( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: to the tune of $3 million, the national packard museum, $2.75 million for a museum when we have bridges falling down? i think we've got plenty of room to reorder our priorities. and so this amendment

Mary Landrieu

1:33:38 to 1:33:49( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: doesn't eliminate any earmark. what it does is delay it. there's no question about it. about the purpose is s. s. , is to put us in touch with the american people saying fifers first things first

Mary Landrieu

1:33:49 to 1:34:00( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: first. this doesn't eliminate fixing the 134,000 people who die each year on -- 13,000 people who die each year on unsafe roads. those are still available. doesn't cause a problem -- i think we

Mary Landrieu

1:34:00 to 1:34:15( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: heard that 4 people from the senator from -- that 4 400 people from the senator from missouri did succumb to accident accidents relate ed to bridges in the last year. the fact is we have almost 40 40,000

Mary Landrieu

1:34:15 to 1:34:30( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: people die a year on our roads. a third of that is use ed -- is secondary to alcohol excess. but another third of that is a associate ed with unsafe roads and bridges. that's according to the department

Mary Landrieu

1:34:30 to 1:34:47( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: of transportation. an investigation by the inspector general -- and i'd ask unanimous consent to enter the inspector general's report for the department of transportation into the record. the presiding

Mary Landrieu

1:34:47 to 1:35:06( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: officer: without objection, it will be done. mr. coburn: found the follow following. for 2006, there were 8,256 earmarks with a total of $8.54 billion or over 35 13% of d.o.t.'s appropriation. so one

Mary Landrieu

1:35:06 to 1:35:21( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: in $1 in $7.5 we have directed to spending and most often it is against the highest priority things we should be funding. so thinking about the risks, thinking about the costs, thinking about our standing

Mary Landrieu

1:35:21 to 1:35:42( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: in terms of doing what we should be doing to make sure that the high highest-ordered priorities are taken care of, that the bridges that are structurally deficient will be addressed, that the highways

Mary Landrieu

1:35:42 to 1:35:54( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: that do not meet or exceed a good or acceptable level of safety, we ought to be redirecting this money in that direction. that's what this amendment is about. we get three choices. we can table

Mary Landrieu

1:35:54 to 1:36:09( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: it, as i think the motion will be made, so that we don't have to deal with it, saying that we shouldn't change our priorities. we can say "yes," and we can re renew the faith of the american people

Mary Landrieu

1:36:09 to 1:36:20( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: that we understand that we're here to do priority work. we are not necessarily here to do the next-best h.i.v. best-thing for our political career. however you slice it, many of the earmarks are great things.

Mary Landrieu

1:36:20 to 1:36:39( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: there are great needs that have to be met at some point in time. but most of the earmarks that go for the bridges and roads won't be affected by this at all. the ones that will be affected are those

Mary Landrieu

1:36:39 to 1:36:56( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: earmarks which are not of a priority. i know we're going to have a vote. i want to give the subcommittee chairman as well as ranking member bond a chance to answer this debate. i will say i plan on

Mary Landrieu

1:36:56 to 1:37:09( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: offering this amendment in another form, if this amendment goes down, limiting it and more directing it, if in fact thealts case. but we ought to be -- we have a duty to do what is in the best interest

Mary Landrieu

1:37:09 to 1:37:24( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: of our transportation needs in this country. and i reels realize there is a debate. and i realize there's disagreement with me on this issue. but it's going to be hard for us as a body to justify

Mary Landrieu

1:37:24 to 1:37:38( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: 500 separate earmarks that do not address the bridges in this country, will not help us assess that. earlier today senator murray state ed the $1 billion increase. well, that's true. but we didn't increase

Mary Landrieu

1:37:38 to 1:38:07( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: the money money. we just made it where the transportation fund, the trust fund, will run out of money a year earlier. so all we did was speed up spending that is allowed in the trust fund that

Mary Landrieu

1:38:07 to 1:38:27( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: we have today and that will be consumed quick quicker. i agree that we probably should do that. but we will in fact have to address this issue and it is about priorities. with that, i'd yield back.

Mary Landrieu

1:38:27 to 1:38:39( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: the presiding officer: the senator from missouri. mr. bond: mr. president, we have had a good discussion with the senator from oklahoma earl earlier today and just to rap for those who may have missed

Mary Landrieu

1:38:39 to 1:38:54( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: it it, after he gave his eloquent pitch, i would say, on behalf of those those of us who worked on the bill, certainly the greater leadership of our chair, the distinguished senator from washington,

Mary Landrieu

1:38:54 to 1:39:10( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: that when we put in earmarks, when we target specific investments to our state, they reflect the judgment of each member of this body on what is important in his or her state based on what we hear from

Mary Landrieu

1:39:10 to 1:39:25( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: elected officials, transportation officials, and community leaders who say these are their top priorities. now, my friends from oklahoma -- my friend from oklahoma is earmarking money for bridges. if he

Mary Landrieu

1:39:25 to 1:39:36( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: feels oklahoma is not put putting an adequate share of its money to bridges, then we'd be happy to entertain earmarks. but don't tell us to earmark ours. i work with missouri department of transportation

Mary Landrieu

1:39:36 to 1:39:48( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: officials. they say our highest needs are mostly in highways. we don't want to lose that money from highways.~ the presiding officer: the question before the senate will be the coburn amendment. mrs.

Mary Landrieu

1:39:48 to 1:40:28( Edit History Discussion )

Mary Landrieu: murray: move to table and ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll on the motion to table the coburn amendment.

Personal tools

MetaVid is a non-profit project of UC Santa Cruz and the Sunlight Foundation. Learn more About MetaVid

The C-SPAN logo and other servicemarks that may be found in video content are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Metavid