EMERSON FOCUSES ON TRANSPORTATION

Had the House of Representatives not voted to shift funds from foreign aid to fund the federal highway bill, Missouri would have lost $43 million in planned transportation funding next year, U.S. Rep. Bill Emerson said Friday.

Emerson was one of 16 House Republicans who voted to support a Democratic plan to shift money that had been earmarked for foreign aid to transportation because of the boost the funding would give the nation's economy.

"It was a positive thing ... I think we did the right thing, although it is very controversial," said Emerson in remarks to the Chamber of Commerce First Friday Coffee.

Emerson was to have attended the monthly event, but because of the Thursday night vote on the issue the congressman had to stay in Washington and addressed the group via a satellite feed.

"As it stands right now, transportation funding will not be curtailed," said Emerson, pointing out that the matter still had to be considered by the Senate.

Emerson said allocating the money for transportation is not an attempt to overspend because all money in the highway trust fund comes from the federal gas tax and is earmarked for transportation. In the past, money in the trust fund has not always been released as a way of "masking the size of the deficit," he said.

"When we earmark taxes, I feel very strongly they should be used for the purpose intended," said Emerson. "I think this is an appropriate and responsible use of funds."

"When the highway bill passed the House last fall we all praised it as an investment in America," said Emerson. "I have said all along that it would create thousands of jobs and make vast improvements in our infrastructure and transportation needs; I contend that is the case if it is fully funded.

"But now, when it comes time to put the money on the table for this desperately needed piece of domestic legislation, some members of Congress want to foolishly back away from that responsibility. I feel this funding for the highway bill is a fiscally responsible approach in light of our federal budget restraints and our infrastructure necessities."

Emerson told the group he was disappointed that a balanced budget amendment was defeated by the House recently by nine votes, but predicted there would be enough change in the make up of the House in this election year to make passage likely in the next session.

Emerson said he supports the amendment and giving the president line-item veto authority.

He termed the balanced budget requirement "an enforcement mechanism" that would "force this discipline on us collectively that we can't do ourselves."

Emerson agreed that voters want change in 1992. He anticipated movement after this year's election to start breaking the gridlock in government.

"We need massive reform in our system," said Emerson. "We need to reform our tax, regulatory and welfare systems. No longer can we rely on Band-Aid approaches; we need massive reform."

Emerson said he hopes the change movement will lead to more conservatives being elected to Congress. "I think Congress, as a body, is more liberal than the country as a whole," he said.

Electing a conservative majority would go a long way toward easing the gridlock in government, Emerson said.

In response to a question, the congressman conceded the Freedom of Choice Act being considered in Congress might pass the House and could eventually win approval in the Senate. But Emerson said a presidential veto would be certain and there are not enough votes for an override.

Discussing the conflict in Yugoslavia, Emerson said he did not see the United States getting involved, except in support of the United Nations effort to keep peace.

"You may see a heavier U.N. hand, not a heavier United States hand in this situation."