On the recordOctober 8, 1997
That is correct, and it is an appropriate deficiency to note. By the way, as the Senator talks about the State of Maryland and a change in formula, ours goes from 2.82 to 2.41. There is a difference of more than 15 percent in just that change in formula. The Senator was not in the Chamber when I talked about the fact that if changes were necessitated in formula, they should have been debated at length. They should have had the appropriate kind of committee reviews. I know the Senator sits on the committee where transit needs are considered. We have the Commerce Committee involved with aviation and rail, we have the Environment Committee on which I sit and under whose auspice this bill is presented for highway and road travel. To suddenly change that formula without considering the national aspects of the requirements that Maryland has imposed upon it or that New Jersey has imposed upon it--Maryland happens to be in a critical location in terms of our defense needs. If there is an emergency, we have to be able to move troops and equipment through in a hurry. That readiness costs something to maintain. There is also a requirement, I know the State of Maryland shares with New Jersey an interest in having high-speed rail service pass through your State and commuter rail service. Look at the success we have seen just with the establishment of WAMATA. The investments in those areas are critical if we are going to have a national perspective.
Source
govinfo.gov




