[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 121 (Thursday, September 30, 2004)]
[House]
[Pages H7869-H7887]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EXTENSION ACT OF 2004, PART V

  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 811 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 811

       Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it 
     shall be in order without intervention of any point of order 
     to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 5183) to provide an 
     extension of highway, safety, motor carrier safety, transit, 
     and other programs funded out of the Highway Trust Fund 
     pending enactment of a law reauthorizing the Transportation 
     Equity Act for the 21st Century. The bill shall be considered 
     as read for amendment. The previous question shall be 
     considered as ordered on the bill to final passage without 
     intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate on the bill 
     equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking 
     minority member of the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure; and (2) one motion to recommit.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Reynolds) 
is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. 
During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the 
purpose of debate only.
  (Mr. REYNOLDS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 811 is a closed rule that 
provides for consideration of H.R. 5183, the Surface Transportation Act 
of 2004. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of 
the bill and provides 1 hour of debate in the House equally divided and 
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure. The rule further provides one 
motion to recommit.
  Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
currently has under its consideration the multiyear reauthorization of 
the Transportation Equity Act. The current authorization expires at 
midnight tonight and the bill before us today provides funding for 
essential programs for an additional 8 months, through May 31, 2005. 
This extension is necessary to give the authorizing conferees 
additional time to agree on a larger reauthorization bill.

                              {time}  1030

  This Congress recognizes the many needs of our Nation and is 
answering the call by diligently working through its process to produce 
a bill that deals with the Nation's priorities in a whole host of 
areas.
  The final authorization bill will ensure that we have a reliable and 
stable transportation infrastructure from Federal highways and highway 
safety to public transportation and motor-carrier safety programs.
  In the meantime, the extension before us today authorizes $24.5 
billion for the Federal Aid Highway program for highway and bridge 
construction and safety-related infrastructure improvements. Mr. 
Speaker, $5.2 billion is authorized for the Federal Transit 
Administration for grants to State and local transit agencies to reduce 
congestion and ensure mobility for all Americans in urban and rural 
areas.
  Additionally, the bill authorizes $200 million for highway safety 
programs, including programs to encourage seatbelt use and prevent 
drunk driving. The $287 million is authorized for the Federal Motor 
Carrier Safety Administration for truck and bus-related safety 
programs.
  Mr. Speaker, the underlying bill also releases the final portion of 
contract authority and obligation authority for

[[Page H7870]]

the highway program in fiscal year 2004. This funding was reserved 
until the end of the fiscal year and is now being used to ensure that 
States receive at least a 90.5 percent minimum guaranteed rate of 
return on their Highway Trust Fund contributions.
  Without our action today, vital programs and projects under the 
jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation will be put on hold. 
States will not be reimbursed with the Federal share of projects. 
Safety grants will not be provided to States, and transit construction 
will be halted, all of which puts jobs at risk.
  Mr. Speaker, we simply cannot allow States and transportation 
projects to suffer. I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the 
underlying extension.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Reynolds), my good friend, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, 
and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this rule and the underlying bill are for an 8-month 
extension of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st century, TEA 
21. It marks the sixth extension of that landmark legislation since it 
expired last year and reveals, once again, the rank and utter 
incompetence of the Republican leadership to get a transportation 
reauthorization bill. This extension, while absolutely necessary to 
keep the Nation's highway and transportation agencies running is, 
simply stated, another glaring failure of the Republican leadership in 
this session of Congress.
  Mr. Speaker, let us pause for a moment to remind everyone of the 
facts. They are in charge of the White House. They are in charge of the 
Senate, and they are in charge of the House of Representatives. The 
transportation reauthorization bill is one of the most strongly 
supported, popular and bipartisan measures to be considered in the 
House. The programs authorized in this bill touch every American and 
affect their lives every single day. There are probably only a handful 
of Members who do not want to see a transportation bill reauthorized 
for another 6 years. Nevertheless, this President and the Republican 
leadership, which have presided over a historic loss of more than 2 
million American jobs, are stonewalling a transportation bill which 
will create 47,000 new jobs for every $1 billion of investment.
  The refusal of this leadership to work in good faith with the other 
body is costing our economy precious jobs, while the condition of our 
roads and bridges continue to deteriorate. Instead of providing real 
leadership, the majority party and the President have let the conferees 
twist in the wind while we continue to pass short-term extension after 
short-term extension of these important programs. The States, which we 
were elected to represent, are left to guess at when we will have a 
transportation bill, as they endeavor to undertake critically important 
public works projects. According to the American Association of State 
Highway Transportation officials, 33 States say that a short-term 
extension rather than enactment of a 6-year bill will mean $2.1 billion 
in project delays and the loss of over 90,000 jobs.
  Now, I understand that the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young) and 
the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) and everybody on the committee are doing the 
best they can given the Draconian allocations set by the Republican 
leadership. The members of that committee, the bipartisan cooperation 
of that committee deserves to be praised by all of us, and it should be 
an example to the rest of this body. I support these extensions because 
we cannot afford to let these programs expire. But it is important to 
know that the leadership of this House and the administration have not 
done all they can to ensure that the full reauthorization is completed 
and signed before the programs expire.
  Mr. Speaker, as I said before, the President is the leader of his 
party. Where is the leadership? The transportation bill will provide 
every American with the roads and bridges that they need. It will 
provide economic stimulus across the country with various projects that 
are written into it. And, most importantly, this bill will create new 
jobs at a time when new jobs are desperately needed. But instead of 
looking out for the American public, the leadership and the President 
have held on to their ideology to the detriment of this country.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I want to say again that while I support this 
extension, I am disappointed and discouraged by the way the leadership 
has so profoundly mismanaged this process, and I hope that we can do 
better next year.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  It is now almost October 1, and we are getting into the election 
season. I expect the gentleman from Massachusetts to have some finger-
pointing going on. But I was here, as he was, when the debate occurred 
on transportation, and I would say that the authorizers had some pretty 
good, wholehearted debate that seemed to almost be on the same page 
between Republicans and Democrats, the majority and the minority of 
this House.
  I would remind all of us that while we had some harmony passing that 
legislation in the House and apparently in the other body, they had 
some harmony on what they passed, we have, as we well know as students 
of government, to pass an identical piece of legislation in the House, 
in the Senate and the President to sign it, or if he vetoes it, it 
would require a two-thirds vote in both of the bodies of Congress.
  Now, what we have seen, because the other body has publicly debated 
some of their positions, is that we have disagreements between the 
House and the other body and we have some from the White House on just 
what the spending will be. But while we are in an election year, we 
need to make sure we also get some of the facts back here. And that is 
that my understanding of this extender, is that the 2005 authorization 
is using the 2004 levels, and there is absolutely zero loss of 
anything, that each State will have their money. As a matter of fact, 
in the underlying legislation, it is my understanding that we will see 
that the $2 billion that Members on both sides of the aisle worked hard 
to achieve for their districts will also be distributed to those States 
under the current formula.
  Now, I cannot speak for Massachusetts, but I know, in New York, 
number one, that is going to be fair and equitable money. Number two, 
it is still a jobs bill that is keeping my people working across my 
State and, quite frankly, I think across the 50 States. So when we look 
at this, we also need to come to terms with a funding level of 
transportation authorization in a future 6-year bill that is equitable 
for all of us. And we know that different regions of the country have 
different viewpoints, and we know that non-mass-transit States have 
different views than those who are in high-growth States looking to 
develop further road infrastructure in their communities. It is not an 
easy bill to put together to get a 6-year consensus in this body, let 
alone between the House, the Senate, and the White House.
  But the important thing that is to be noted today as we preserve 
those jobs, those jobs are working, and a ``yes'' vote today keeps 
these projects moving forward and protects those jobs. A ``no'' vote 
puts people out of work. I will willing to predict, Mr. Speaker, that 
we will have strong bipartisan support for the extension over the next 
8 months.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. 
I thank my colleague, the gentleman from New York, for his comments. I 
always enjoy listening to his interesting spin on things.
  The fact of the matter is, the problem is not with the authorizers. 
The authorizers have done a great job. As I said, we need to praise, in 
a bipartisan way, the members of the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure. But the problem is with the leadership, and the problem 
is with the White House who is insisting on unbelievably low numbers 
for the reauthorization of this bill.
  As a result of not having a 6-year bill, there are a number of States 
that have put projects on hold, and that means that these projects are 
not being built. They are not going forward. The jobs are not being 
created. We should have done better.
  We are all going to support this extension. We have to. We have no

[[Page H7871]]

choice. This is the right thing to do. I am just lamenting the fact 
that we should have had a 6-year bill, and I regret that the White 
House and the leadership were not able to get together and make this a 
priority, especially at a time when there is record job loss.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), a member of the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I listened to the explanation of my 
friend, the gentleman from New York, and I agree with a number of the 
things he said. There will be a large, bipartisan majority supporting 
this extension, but the notion that somehow there are not problems 
associated with the repeated failure of Congress to pass, despite what 
my friend from New York says, what should be one of the easiest bills. 
We can take the bill that passed the Senate and put it on the floor of 
the House, and I am quite confident that it would pass with an 
overwhelming majority. It passed the other body with some 72 or 73 
votes. The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure offered up an 
approach to the Floor of the House that was substantially above that 
level. We have assembled the broadest coalition in the history of 
infrastructure legislation. We have interests ranging from the Sierra 
Club to the Chamber of Commerce, from the Women's Federation Garden 
Club of America to the cyclists, to the people who put down asphalt, 
who all agree on the basic structure of this legislation.
  There has been a lot of hard work on behalf of the gentleman from 
Alaska and the gentleman from Minnesota to try and craft a piece of 
legislation that is acceptable. I see on the floor here my friends, the 
gentleman from Wisconsin and the gentleman from Illinois, who have been 
working, chairing the subcommittee, trying to put something forward 
underneath these artificial restrictions.
  But the point is that it is not a failure of agreement between the 
Members of the two bodies of Congress. We are substantially in 
agreement, and we are in agreement with the vast majority of the 
American public. And the failure to allow that agreement to be fully 
and fairly debated on this floor and enacted means that we are holding 
in suspense important transportation priorities.
  Yes, we are going to allow the spigot to be opened, or rather, we 
will avoid slamming the spigot closed at midnight tonight. I do not 
think anybody in their right mind thinks that we would or should do 
that. But that does not mean that there are not negative problems 
associated with it. We have projects in the Pacific Northwest that were 
slated to go forward that are multiyear in nature, and because of the 
uncertainty, these are on hold; significant problems that speak to 
economic development, that speak to environmental protection, to 
reducing congestion. And it is not just in the northwest. It is New 
York. It is in Massachusetts. It is Florida and Texas.
  If we talk to any of the transportation officials, they will tell us 
that we are not well served having to repeatedly come to the floor with 
a short-term extension. But I am going to argue in support of this 8-
month extension because, frankly, it is better to kick the can down the 
road past the election. We have shown that we are not really capable of 
doing that in an election year. With a new Congress, maybe with a new 
administration, without the pre-election posturing, I think we will, in 
fact, have a better piece of legislation. Were we to enact a flawed 
piece of legislation, it would not just be a problem for today or 
tomorrow; we would be crippling our transportation initiatives for the 
entire 6-year period of the authorization, and it would establish an 
artificially low standard for subsequent reauthorizations. We would be 
severely penalizing transportation for a generation to come.
  I hope that, in the course of the next 8 months, but particularly in 
the course of the next 5 weeks, the American public takes the time to 
pin down the politicians in the House, in the Senate, running for 
President, about where they stand on transportation infrastructure. 
This is the most important transportation piece of legislation for the 
next 6 years. It is also the most important economic development 
legislation, and done right, it is the most important environmental 
legislation.
  This should have been the easiest piece of legislation for this 
Congress to pass. Sadly, we are seeing today that it has proven that we 
are not up to the challenge. I hope we can take these next 8 months and 
do better by the American public.

                              {time}  1045

  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I respect the gentleman and what his view is, but I come 
from a State that has some complex transportation, from new to old 
aging infrastructure, to mass transit, to ports, to motor carriers, to 
dealing with buses and transit systems.
  As I look at this, if we keep this moving forward by passing this 
extender, we are going to keep those projects moving forward to protect 
jobs. A ``no'' vote puts people out of work. It stops transit.
  I have taken great care to listen to the transportation experts, and 
they assure me of the following. We came here with such great spirit in 
the House to pass this legislation, and it was bipartisan work. We 
certainly lauded both the chairman of the full Committee of 
Transportation and Infrastructure and the subcommittee chairs who put 
together this complex bill and in a bipartisan fashion. Yes, there 
certainly are differences of agreement to different aspects of what I 
see in the other body just from public statements of negotiation. We 
have also seen that the White House and Department of Transportation 
has some of their opinions on this bill as well.
  I accept the fact that we are getting into the election season, and 
we are going to have all sorts of consumption going on back home as to 
what this means. But what my transportation experts of New York say, as 
well as talking to experts in this body, they tell me that if we do 
this extension, it is going to maintain the spending in the 2005 
authorization and 2004 funding levels and that basically no one will 
lose any money at all in any of our States or, for the most part, in 
our districts unless some of the Members do not have a relationship 
with their State transportation people on some of the priorities that 
they might be looking for in their State.
  It is important to understand, for those who are listening to this 
debate, that this maintains the spending of a multiyear plan in the 
extension of 8 months, and it does in the 2005 authorization as well as 
looking at the 2004 funding levels that are currently available.
  My local folks in New York, the State commissioner and his people, 
tell me that we will be able to continue in the continuity of a complex 
transportation system by being able to count on this extension and the 
funding to continue the multiyear projects.
  So I do not quite understand the gentleman's aspect of where it 
starts and stops maybe as he sees the view, because I have been assured 
that we have continuity of transportation services in a multiyear 
fashion by extending this.
  Again, I must say to my colleagues, a ``yes'' vote today keeps those 
projects moving forward and protects jobs and protects the work and 
plans that are in our respective States, and a ``no'' vote just plain 
stops that or puts people out of work.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield for a question?
  Mr. REYNOLDS. I yield to the gentleman from Oregon for a question.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's notion 
about having the funds flow.
  Mr. REYNOLDS. I said I yield for a question. I do not want to hear 
the gentleman's debate on my time.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I am seeking not to debate. I was just 
trying to establish a context for a question.
  Is it not true that, in both the House and the Senate version of the 
transportation reauthorization, there are a vast number of specific 
projects, new starts, that are multiyear in nature and that cannot 
proceed in the absence of their being reauthorized, and that this 
extension has no bearing on those longer-term, complex, important 
projects in the gentleman's State and in mine?

[[Page H7872]]

  Mr. REYNOLDS. I thank the gentleman for his question, and what I 
understand is as follows. Sure, I have projects; I think most Members 
of this body have specific projects earmarked in our legislation. It is 
my understanding that the other body would not consider earmarks that 
we would like to begin in the 2005 project year. Therefore, the 
compromise of extension, because we have had disagreements between the 
two bodies and we also have the White House in consideration of getting 
a final bill, was that we would take $2 billion of funding of Member-
earmarked items of 2004 and roll them into our respective States on the 
existing formulas. That is what makes the States content to have that 
money back into their aspect of continuing in the projects.
  The gentleman's influence, as a member of the Oregon delegation, 
might put an opportunity where the gentleman could talk to the DOT 
commissioner and begin their projects based on some of the monies they 
will receive.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Let me be clear to everybody here, because the gentleman from New 
York keeps on talking about this in terms of a ``yes'' or ``no'' vote. 
We are all going to vote for it because there is no other choice. 
Nobody is opposing the extension here. What we are simply saying is 
they have mismanaged this process.
  He talks about jobs that could be maintained. Well, we want to not 
only maintain jobs, we want to create them.
  Let me repeat to him, according to the American Association of State 
Highway Transportation Officials, 33 States say that a short-term 
extension rather than enactment of a 6-year bill will mean $2.1 billion 
in project delays and the loss of over 90,000 jobs. If we did our job 
right in this House, then this would not be the case. There would be 
more jobs coming.
  I would remind the gentleman, again, I am pretty sure that one party, 
one party, controls the House and controls the Senate and controls the 
White House. Contrary to what the gentleman says, this is not about 
finger-pointing to point out that you guys cannot get your act 
together.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. 
DeFazio).
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the time.
  October 1, 2003: What is important about that date? That is the date 
that the last highway bill expired. Here we are, almost a year later, 
legislation that sets the course of all spending on roads, bridges, 
highways, mass transit in the United States of America has been in 
suspended animation working under a 7-year-old law for the last 11 
months.
  I guess if the Republicans controlled things, things would not be 
like that; that is the kind of thing we hear around here all the time. 
They control the White House, the Department of Transportation, the 
House and the Senate. The White House is low-balling the number and 
underinvesting in America. They only want to spend $259 billion. They 
want to take our gas tax money and spend it on other things instead of 
transportation.
  The House did a little better, $283 billion, not enough, but they did 
better. But they do not want to confront the President in an election 
year. We could roll them easily. It would be embarrassing, though, just 
before the election for him to be against jobs and investment in 
America and spending gas taxes on the purposes for which it was 
collected. The Senate did a lot better yet, $318 billion.
  Then, of course, there was the unanimous bipartisan vote of the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, on which I serve, where 
we voted unanimously for $379 billion, $120 billion more than the 
President is willing to spend, because that is what the President's 
Department of Transportation said is necessary to take care of the 
problems in New York and other States. We need another $120 billion 
over what the President's asking for to deal with those problems.
  It is disingenuous to get up here and say, oh, if we follow these 
lower numbers, nothing is being hurt. We are foregoing new starts. We 
are foregoing new investments. We are foregoing additional investments 
that the President's own Department of Transportation says is 
necessary. Why? Why are we doing that? We collect gas taxes from each 
and every American every time they fill up their car, a bunch of them, 
and that money is supposed to be spent on roads, bridges and highways. 
We have seen the potholes. I have got failing bridges in my district. 
We could put hundreds of thousands of people to work tomorrow if we had 
more investment and more spending.
  I cannot understand why they will not spend our gas tax money to put 
people to work and meet needed investment in our infrastructure. So I 
stand here saying we should be doing more than just this continuing 
resolution, obviously. We should have sometime in the last 11 months. 
The Republicans should have been able to get their act together and 
agree on a highway bill. That has not happened. Well, if we cannot do 
that, at least let us put a little more money in there, put a few more 
people back to work, begin to address some of these problems that are 
out there, begin to take care of some of the new starts that New York 
has asked for that cannot go forward under this legislation.
  My colleagues cannot say, oh, the transportation experts in New York 
say this is going to take care of all the problems. It is not. It is 
not even beginning to address the backlog of problems of failing roads 
and bridges.
  Another interesting statistic from the President's own Department of 
Transportation is that, for every $1 billion we spend on roads, 
bridges, highways, mass transit, we create 47,500 jobs; not just 
construction jobs, but those are good jobs and good wage jobs. And 
guess what? They cannot be outsourced to another country. That is a 
really good thing about those jobs, but what it also does is it spills 
over into communities and small businesses. The suppliers, the 
contractors, the equipment operators, they are all local. They are 
locally based. It helps our local communities who need more jobs and 
investment. It helps small businesses, 47,500 jobs.
  So, that means by walking away from the higher numbers proposed by 
the Senate, that is $318 billion, that we are foregoing $34 billion of 
investment that is needed to repair our failing bridges, roads, 
highways and our mass transit inadequacies, new starts in New York and 
other States. I cannot do the math quite here, but 34 times 47 sounds 
like a heck of a lot of jobs to me, somewhere around 1.5 million jobs. 
This country could use another 1.5 million jobs. In fact, if the 
President would sign a bill at that higher number, then he could say he 
delivered on his promise of creating 2 million jobs during his 
presidency. Right now, he is kind of short on that.
  This is at best an absolutely minimal stopgap that is not meeting the 
real needs of Americans, that is not putting people back to work, that 
is not spending their gas tax money in the manner in which it was 
intended when it was collected and extracted from them, when they 
bought gas at the pump.
  I would say we have apparently no alternative but to support this 
inadequate level of funding, but the American people should be aware it 
is inadequate. It does mean no new starts. It does mean that we are not 
going to address a whole bunch of problems all around the country, and 
we can do better.
  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  It is a well-known fact in the House that the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure is probably the largest of membership 
in our great body. It amazes me when I look at the members of the 
committee, that might share from the other side of the aisle, kind of 
going back and forth between an extension and the 6-year bill, kind of 
mixing it up.
  I just want to make sure we have the record straight, although I have 
said it so many times in this debate already. The extension does not 
prejudice the 6-year bill. It actually keeps a continuity of funding 
levels at the authorization of our budget resolution.
  The gentleman is actually continuing, as previous speakers have, to 
go back and forth between a simple extension that guarantees all States 
their money and some planning purposes over the next 8 months versus 
trying to get to a 6-year bill.
  I am used to a situation where legislation does not come to the floor 
as

[[Page H7873]]

fast as some Members would want, that there is finger-pointing. I also 
acknowledge that we have disagreements between the other body, the 
White House and this on getting a conclusion of a 6-year bill.
  But the Chairman of the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure has made sure, with his subcommittee chairmen, that we 
have an 8-month extension that guarantees each State their money so 
they can continue in their planning purposes. As I have said before, it 
clearly says a ``yes'' vote today keeps those projects moving forward 
and protects jobs. A ``no'' vote puts people out of work and brings 
that construction to an end.
  I also want to make sure that some of these alarmist accusations, 
that there is clear, on-the-record information so that they do not get 
caught up without a response. As the previous gentleman talked about 
the fact of money going all over the place, this bill includes an 
extension of the budgetary firewalls and spending guarantees for the 
highway category and transit category. These firewalls and guarantees 
protect the integrity of the Highway Trust Fund to ensure the highway 
user-related fees are used exclusively for highway transit and highway 
safety programs.
  I want to just let America know that we extend those protections in 
this extension of 8 months, just as it was in underlying legislation in 
the past.

                              {time}  1100

  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Tennessee (Mr. Davis).
  Mr. DAVIS of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, as I look at this particular 
road bill, the reauthorization, I think of comments made back home, 
where it is called road kill. In essence, what is happening with this 
legislation and the reauthorization, quite frankly our folks back home 
will call it road kill; and let me explain why.
  We have individuals this morning that got up in my district and 
districts throughout this country and they have traveled to work at the 
factory or at their workplace, and in many cases in my district, on 
unsafe roads. So this legislation will provide, if enacted, as it 
should have been, will provide a safe way for working moms and dads to 
go to work and return to their families later that afternoon, and in 
many cases working at low-wage jobs.
  We have also heard that maybe we can pass this legislation in a lame 
duck session. Well, that obviously is not going to happen. But I submit 
to you that is what we have been doing the past year and a half: we 
have been having a lame duck session. And quite frankly with the lame 
duck session we have been having concerning transportation needs, we 
have provided an avenue for many of our folks back home to be sitting 
ducks, sitting ducks that unless we pass this legislation and fully 
fund it, as many of us on this side of the Chamber have asked for, it 
may bring about a situation where the American public and the jobs that 
we have will bring about an economy that will create a dead duck 
scenario.
  It is my hope that we realize, as we engage in the next 8 months, and 
I am sure that is what is going to happen, that for the American public 
and the safety of the American public and the American workers, that we 
pass an adequately funded reauthorization bill that will help build 
roads to many of our rural areas; that will help the inner cities with 
mass transit; and will bring about safe traveling as well as providing 
an economic boost.
  Many years ago, Mr. Speaker, when our interstate systems were built, 
it helped bring about what we called ``just-in-time manufacturing.'' 
Small rural areas could in fact become the suppliers for the assembly 
lines of American manufacturers. As a result of that, we were able to 
move from small rural areas the products being built there, or that 
portion of it, to the larger manufacturing companies and create jobs in 
rural areas. We, in fact, by languishing and not fulfilling our 
responsibilities are bringing about a situation and circumstance for 
many of our workers and many of our families and our economy that will 
not be able to compete should, say, China decide to do as we did in the 
1950s and the 1960s.
  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DAVIS of Tennessee. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I was listening carefully to the comments 
of the gentleman, but I was at the point where I wondered if the 
gentleman intends to vote for the extension or not to vote for the 
extension, based on your remarks.
  Mr. DAVIS of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I would say 
to the gentleman from New York that my intention is to vote for a 
reauthorization bill adequately funded. Unfortunately, we do not have 
that option.
  Mr. Speaker, my hope is that we do what is right and that we put 
first the safety of the American public and pass the reauthorization 
bill at the level it should be.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time, and 
let me just conclude for our side here by saying that this debate is 
not about whether or not we are going to support this extension. We are 
all going to support it. That is not the issue.
  What we are expressing here is a frustration that we do not have a 6-
year bill. And contrary to what the gentleman from New York says, most 
transportation planners that I have talked to, and I am sure he has 
talked to, if he has listened to them, would tell him that a 6-year 
bill is better than an 8-month extension for this reason: that many 
transportation programs require long-term planning. It is not a quick 
one-time investment. With an 8-month extension there is not the 
certainty of what happens after 8 months.
  My point earlier was simply that this is another missed opportunity 
by this leadership. The Republicans control the House, they control the 
Senate, and they control the White House. Surely, surely they could 
have worked out a deal. Surely they could have helped accomplish a 6-
year extension. That is what the frustration is on this side.
  Our Governors and our mayors and our town managers and our city 
planners are all looking for a long-term guarantee of funding, and they 
are not going to get that. They are going to get an 8-month extension. 
And, yes, that is better than nothing. We need to keep this funding 
going. But the fact is they cannot plan long term; and as a result of 
that, we are not going to create as many jobs. The future for some of 
the economic development that we all hoped for that will come from some 
of these projects will have to be put on hold, and I think that is a 
shame.
  So I want to commend the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure, the chairman, the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), 
and the ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), 
and all the Members who have worked hard in a bipartisan way. I only 
wish that their spirit of cooperation would have translated to the 
leadership of this House and the other body and the White House. We 
should be doing so much better than this. We should be passing a 6-year 
extension right now.
  So I urge my colleagues to vote for the rule, and I urge them to vote 
for the extension; and, hopefully, we will, sooner rather than later, 
get a 6-year bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, my colleague said it well, we should vote for this rule 
and then the underlying legislation. As I opened my remarks, I 
commented that I understand it is the election season. So many of us 
have to get up and try to say something for back home on whatever that 
may be.
  I have talked to planners in my years of service, and some planners I 
know would like to have an exact fund for the entire length of their 
career in planning. But the reality is that this bill is going to 
provide an extension and continuity in both planning and money to our 
respective States. My State, as I outlined earlier, has a complex 
transportation network and understands that this extension keeps the 
funding levels the same as it has been. As a matter of fact, the 
opportunity of all States will have the same funding levels. So we have 
continuity of our programmatic services and dollars to the States and 
for them to also distribute as they see fit the monies that will come 
in this 8-month extension.

[[Page H7874]]

  It is not easy to formulate an agreement of an extension, and I laud 
Chairman Young of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
and his subcommittee chairman in working with the other body to get a 
compromise of extension that works so well for our States as we 
continue this continuity of transportation projects and creating and 
maintaining the jobs that these construction opportunities exist 
through the transportation bill. But as we also look here, it is an 
opportunity for us to continue to get an agreement that both bodies and 
the White House will look to be a 6-year plan following the extension 
that is here.
  My colleague, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), has 
been clear. A ``yes'' vote today keeps the projects moving and keeps 
and protects jobs. A ``no'' vote puts people out of work. The extension 
will do the job and we can continue in having a multi-year plan of the 
future based on the results of our actions today. So I call upon my 
colleagues to support this rule and the underlying extension.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 811, I 
call up the bill (H.R. 5183) to provide an extension of highway, 
highway safety, motor carrier safety, transit, and other programs 
funded out of the Highway Trust Fund pending enactment of a law 
reauthorizing the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, and 
ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Miller of Florida). Pursuant to House 
Resolution 811, the bill shall be considered as read for amendment:
  The text of H.R. 5183 is as follows:

                               H.R. 5183

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Surface Transportation 
     Extension Act of 2004, Part V''.

     SEC. 2. ADVANCES.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Apportionment ratio.--Except as provided in paragraph 
     (2), the Secretary of Transportation shall apportion funds 
     made available under section 1101(l) of the Transportation 
     Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 111; 118 Stat. 
     876), as amended by this section, to each State in the ratio 
     that--
       (A) the State's total fiscal year 2004 obligation authority 
     for funds apportioned for the Federal-aid highway program; 
     bears to
       (B) all States' total fiscal year 2004 obligation authority 
     for funds apportioned for the Federal-aid highway program.
       (2) Exception.--The ratios determined under this subsection 
     shall be subject to the same adjustments as the adjustments 
     made under section 105(f) of title 23, United States Code.
       (b) Programmatic Distributions.--
       (1) Programs.--Of the funds to be apportioned to each State 
     under subsection (a), the Secretary shall ensure that the 
     State is apportioned an amount of the funds, determined under 
     paragraph (2), for the Interstate maintenance program, the 
     National Highway System program, the bridge program, the 
     surface transportation program, the congestion mitigation and 
     air quality improvement program, the recreational trails 
     program, the Appalachian development highway system program, 
     and the minimum guarantee.
       (2) In general.--The amount that each State shall be 
     apportioned under this subsection for each item referred to 
     in paragraph (1) shall be determined by multiplying--
       (A) the amount apportioned to the State under subsection 
     (a); by
       (B) the ratio that--
       (i) the amount of funds apportioned for the item to the 
     State for fiscal year 2004; bears to
       (ii) the total of the amount of funds apportioned for the 
     items to the State for fiscal year 2004.
       (3) Administration of funds.--Funds authorized by the 
     amendment made under subsection (d) shall be administered as 
     if the funds had been apportioned, allocated, deducted, or 
     set aside, as the case may be, under title 23, United States 
     Code; except that the deductions and set-asides in the 
     following sections of such title shall not apply to such 
     funds: sections 104(a)(1)(A), 104(a)(1)(B), 104(b)(1)(A), 
     104(d)(1), 104(d)(2), 104(f)(1), 104(h)(1), 118(c)(1), 
     140(b), 140(c), and 144(g)(1).
       (4) Special rules for minimum guarantee.--In carrying out 
     the minimum guarantee under section 105(c) of title 23, 
     United States Code, with funds apportioned under this section 
     for the minimum guarantee, the $2,800,000,000 set forth in 
     paragraph (1) of such section 105(c) shall be treated as 
     being $1,866,666,667 and the aggregate of amounts apportioned 
     to the States under this section for the minimum guarantee 
     shall be treated, for purposes of such section 105(c), as 
     amounts made available under section 105 of such title.
       (5) Extension of off-system bridge setaside.--Section 
     144(g)(3) of title 23, United States Code, is amended by 
     inserting after ``2004'' the following: ``and in the period 
     of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005,''.
       (c) Repayment From Future Apportionments.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall reduce the amount that 
     would be apportioned, but for this section, to a State for 
     programs under chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code, for 
     fiscal year 2005, under a multiyear law reauthorizing the 
     Federal-aid highway program enacted after the date of 
     enactment of this Act by the amount that is apportioned to 
     each State under subsection (a) and section 5(c) for each 
     such program.
       (2) Program category reconciliation.--The Secretary may 
     establish procedures under which funds apportioned under 
     subsection (a) for a program category for which funds are not 
     authorized under a law described in paragraph (1) may be 
     restored to the Federal-aid highway program.
       (d) Authorization of Contract Authority.--Section 1101 of 
     the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 
     111-115; 117 Stat. 1118; 118 Stat. 876) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following:
       ``(l) Advance Authorization for Fiscal Year 2005.--
       ``(1) In general.--There shall be available from the 
     Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) to 
     carry out section 2(a) of the Surface Transportation 
     Extension Act of 2004, Part V $21,311,774,667 for the period 
     of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005.
       ``(2) Special rule.--Funds apportioned under section 2(a) 
     of the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2004, Part V 
     shall be subject to a limitation on obligations for Federal-
     aid highways and highway safety construction programs.
       ``(3) Contract authority.--Funds made available by this 
     subsection shall be available for obligation in the same 
     manner as if such funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of 
     title 23, United States Code.''.
       (e) Limitation on Obligations.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), upon enactment 
     of an Act making appropriations for the Department of 
     Transportation for fiscal year 2005 (other than an Act or 
     resolution making continuing appropriations), the Secretary 
     shall distribute \8/12\ of the obligation limitation for 
     Federal-aid highways and highway safety construction programs 
     provided by such Act according to the provisions of such Act.
       (2) Exceptions.---
       (A) Determination of amounts.--Any instruction in such Act 
     that would require the distribution or reservation of 
     obligation limitation prior to distributing the remainder of 
     the obligation limitation to the States shall be executed as 
     if the program, project, or activity for which obligation 
     limitation is so distributed or reserved was authorized at an 
     amount equivalent to the greater of--
       (i) the amount authorized for such program, project, or 
     activity in this Act; or
       (ii) \8/12\ of the amount provided for or limitation set on 
     such program, project, or activity in the Act making 
     appropriations for the Department of Transportation for 
     fiscal year 2005.
       (B) Minimum guarantee.--Obligations for the period October 
     1, 2004, through May 31, 2005, shall not exceed the 
     obligation limitation distributed by this subsection, except 
     that this limitation shall not apply to $426,000,000 in 
     obligations for minimum guarantee for such period.
       (3) Time period for obligations.--After May 31, 2005, no 
     funds shall be obligated for any Federal-aid highway program 
     project until the date of enactment of a multiyear law 
     reauthorizing the Federal-aid highway program enacted after 
     the date of enactment of this Act.
       (4) Treatment of obligations.--Any obligation of obligation 
     authority distributed under this subsection shall be 
     considered to be an obligation for Federal-aid highways and 
     highway safety construction programs for fiscal year 2005 for 
     the purposes of any obligation limitation set in an Act 
     making appropriations for the Department of Transportation 
     for fiscal year 2005.

     SEC. 3. TRANSFERS OF UNOBLIGATED APPORTIONMENTS.

       (a) In General.--In addition to any other authority of a 
     State to transfer funds, for fiscal year 2005, a State may 
     transfer any funds apportioned to the State for any program 
     under section 104(b) (including amounts apportioned under 
     section 104(b)(3) or set aside, made available, or 
     suballocated under section 133(d)) or section 144 of title 
     23, United States Code, before, on, or after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, that are subject to any limitation on 
     obligations, and that are not obligated, to any other of 
     those programs.
       (b) Treatment of Transferred Funds.--Any funds transferred 
     to another program under subsection (a) shall be subject to 
     the provisions of the program to which the funds are 
     transferred, except that funds transferred to a program under 
     section 133 (other than subsections (d)(1) and (d)(2)) of 
     title 23, United States Code, shall not be subject to section 
     133(d) of that title.

[[Page H7875]]

       (c) Restoration of Apportionments.--
       (1) In general.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of a multiyear law reauthorizing the Federal-aid 
     highway program enacted after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall restore any funds 
     that a State transferred under subsection (a) for any project 
     not eligible for the funds but for this section to the 
     program category from which the funds were transferred.
       (2) Program category reconciliation.--The Secretary may 
     establish procedures under which funds transferred under 
     subsection (a) from a program category for which funds are 
     not authorized may be restored to the Federal-aid highway 
     program.
       (3) Limitation on statutory construction.--No provision of 
     law, except a statute enacted after the date of enactment of 
     this Act that expressly limits the application of this 
     subsection, shall impair the authority of the Secretary to 
     restore funds pursuant to this subsection.
       (d) Guidance.--The Secretary may issue guidance for use in 
     carrying out this section.
       (e) Prohibition of Transfers.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of this section, no funds may be transferred by a 
     State under subsection (a)--
       (1) from amounts apportioned to the State for the 
     congestion mitigation and air quality improvement program; 
     and
       (2) from amounts apportioned to the State for the surface 
     transportation program and that are subject to any of 
     paragraphs (1), (2), and (3)(A)(i) of section 133(d) of title 
     23, United States Code.

     SEC. 4. ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.

       (a) Authorization of Contract Authority.--There shall be 
     available from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass 
     Transit Account) for administrative expenses of the Federal-
     aid highway program $234,682,667 for fiscal year 2005.
       (b) Contract Authority.--Funds made available by this 
     section shall be available for obligation in the same manner 
     as if such funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 
     23, United States Code, and shall be subject to a limitation 
     on obligations for Federal-aid highways and highway safety 
     construction programs; except that such funds shall remain 
     available until expended.

     SEC. 5. OTHER FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAY PROGRAMS.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations Under Title I of 
     TEA21.--
       (1) Federal lands highways.--
       (A) Indian reservation roads.--Section 1101(a)(8)(A) of the 
     Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 
     112; 118 Stat. 877) is amended--
       (i) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``and $183,333,333 for the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005''; and
       (ii) by adding at the end the following: ``The minimum 
     amount made available for such period that the Secretary, in 
     cooperation with the Secretary of the Interior, shall reserve 
     for Indian reservation road bridges under section 202(d)(4) 
     of title 23, United States Code, shall be $8,666,667 instead 
     of $13,000,000.''.
       (B) Public lands highways.--Section 1101(a)(8)(B) of such 
     Act (112 Stat. 112; 118 Stat. 878) is amended by inserting 
     before the period at the end the following: ``and 
     $164,000,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 
     31, 2005''.
       (C) Park roads and parkways.--Section 1101(a)(8)(C) of such 
     Act (112 Stat. 112; 118 Stat. 878) is amended by inserting 
     before the period at the end the following: ``and 
     $110,000,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 
     31, 2005''.
       (D) Refuge roads.--Section 1101(a)(8)(D) of such Act (112 
     Stat. 112; 118 Stat. 878) is amended by inserting before the 
     period at the end the following: ``and $13,333,333 for the 
     period of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (2) National corridor planning and development and 
     coordinated border infrastructure programs.--Section 
     1101(a)(9) of such Act (112 Stat. 112; 118 Stat. 878) is 
     amended by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``and $93,333,333 for the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (3) Construction of ferry boats and ferry terminal 
     facilities.--
       (A) In general.--Section 1101(a)(10) of such Act (112 Stat. 
     113; 118 Stat. 878) is amended by inserting before the period 
     at the end the following: ``and $25,333,333 for the period of 
     October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (B) Set aside for alaska, new jersey, and washington.--To 
     carry out section 1064 of the Intermodal Surface 
     Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (23 U.S.C. 129 note; 
     105 Stat. 2005; 112 Stat. 185; 118 Stat. 878), of funds made 
     available by the amendment made by subparagraph (A)--
       (i) $6,666,667 shall be available for section 1064(d)(2);
       (ii) $3,333,333 shall be available for section 1064(d)(3); 
     and
       (iii) $3,333,333 shall be available for section 1064(d)(4).
       (4) National scenic byways program.--Section 1101(a)(11) of 
     the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 
     113; 118 Stat. 878) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``and'' the last place it appears; and
       (B) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, and $17,666,667 for the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (5) Value pricing pilot program.--Section 1101(a)(12) of 
     such Act (112 Stat. 113; 118 Stat. 878) is amended by 
     inserting before the period at the end the following: ``, and 
     $7,333,333 for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 
     2005''.
       (6) Highway use tax evasion projects.--Section 1101(a)(14) 
     of such Act (112 Stat. 113; 118 Stat. 878) is amended by 
     inserting before the period at the end the following: ``and 
     $3,333,333 for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 
     2005''.
       (7) Commonwealth of puerto rico highway program.--
       (A) In general.--Section 1101(a)(15) of such Act (112 Stat. 
     113; 118 Stat. 879) is amended by inserting before the period 
     at the end the following: ``and $73,333,333 for the period of 
     October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (B) Conforming amendment.--Section 1214(r)(1) of such Act 
     (112 Stat. 209; 117 Stat. 1114) is amended by striking 
     ``2004'' and inserting ``2005''.
       (8) Safety grants.--Section 1212(i)(1)(D) of such Act (23 
     U.S.C. 402 note; 112 Stat. 196; 112 Stat. 840; 118 Stat. 879) 
     is amended by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``and $333,333 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005''.
       (9) Transportation and community and system preservation 
     pilot program.--Section 1221(e)(1) of such Act (23 U.S.C. 101 
     note; 112 Stat. 223; 118 Stat. 879) is amended by inserting 
     before the period at the end the following: ``and $16,666,667 
     for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (10) Transportation infrastructure finance and 
     innovation.--Section 188 of title 23, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (A) in subsection (a)(1)--
       (i) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (E);
       (ii) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (F) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (iii) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(G) $86,666,667 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005.'';
       (B) in subsection (a)(2) by inserting after ``2004'' the 
     following: ``and $1,333,333 for the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005''; and
       (C) in subsection (c)--
       (i) by striking ``2004'' and inserting ``2005''; and
       (ii) by striking the period at the end of the table and 
     inserting the following:

  
  ``2005............................................$1,733,333,333.''. 

       (11) National Scenic Byways Clearinghouse.--Section 
     1215(b)(3) of the Transportation Equity Act of the 21st 
     Century (112 Stat. 210) is amended by inserting before the 
     period at the end ``and $1,000,000 for the period of October 
     1, 2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations Under Title V of 
     TEA21.--
       (1) Surface transportation research.--Section 5001(a)(1) of 
     the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 
     419; 118 Stat. 879) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``2003, and'' and inserting ``2003,''; and
       (B) by inserting after ``2004'' the following: ``, and 
     $68,666,667 for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 
     31, 2005''.
       (2) Technology deployment program.--Section 5001(a)(2) of 
     such Act (112 Stat. 419; 118 Stat. 879) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``2003, and'' and inserting ``2003,''; and
       (B) by inserting after ``2004'' the following: ``, and 
     $33,333,333 for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 
     31, 2005''.
       (3) Training and education.--Section 5001(a)(3) of such Act 
     (112 Stat. 420; 118 Stat. 879) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``2003, and'' and inserting ``2003,''; and
       (B) by inserting after ``2004'' the following: ``, and 
     $13,333,333 for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 
     31, 2005''.
       (4) Bureau of transportation statistics.--Section 
     5001(a)(4) of such Act (112 Stat. 420; 118 Stat. 879) is 
     amended by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, and $20,666,667 for the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (5) ITS standards, research, operational tests, and 
     development.--Section 5001(a)(5) of such Act (112 Stat. 420; 
     118 Stat. 879) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``2003, and'' and inserting ``2003,''; and
       (B) by inserting after ``2004'' the following: ``, and 
     $73,333,333 for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 
     31, 2005''.
       (6) ITS deployment.--Section 5001(a)(6) of such Act (112 
     Stat. 420; 118 Stat. 880) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``2003, and'' and inserting ``2003,''; and
       (B) by inserting after ``2004'' the following: ``, and 
     $81,333,333 for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 
     31, 2005''.
       (7) University transportation research.--Section 5001(a)(7) 
     of such Act (112 Stat. 420; 118 Stat. 880) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``2003, and'' and inserting ``2003,''; and
       (B) by inserting after ``2004'' the following: ``, and 
     $17,666,667 for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 
     31, 2005''.
       (c) Metropolitan Planning.--
       (1) Authorization of contract authority.--There shall be 
     available from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass 
     Transit Account) to carry out section 134 of title 23, United 
     States Code, $145,000,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005.
       (2) Distribution of funds.--The Secretary shall distribute 
     funds made available by this subsection to the States in 
     accordance with

[[Page H7876]]

     section 104(f)(2) of title 23, United States Code.
       (3) Contract authority.--Funds made available by this 
     subsection shall be available for obligation in the same 
     manner as if such funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of 
     title 23, United States Code, and shall be subject to a 
     limitation on obligations for Federal-aid highways and 
     highway safety construction programs.
       (d) Territories.--Section 1101(d)(1) of the Transportation 
     Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 111-115; 117 Stat. 
     1116; 118 Stat. 880) is amended by inserting after ``2004'' 
     the following: ``and $24,266,667 for the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (e) Alaska Highway.--Section 1101(e)(1) of such Act (117 
     Stat. 1116; 118 Stat. 880) is amended by inserting after 
     ``2004'' the following: ``and $12,533,333 for the period of 
     October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (f) Operation Lifesaver.--Section 1101(f)(1) of such Act 
     (117 Stat. 1117; 118 Stat. 880) is amended by inserting after 
     ``2004'' the following: ``and $333,333 for the period of 
     October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (g) Bridge Discretionary.--Section 1101(g)(1) of such Act 
     (117 Stat. 1117; 118 Stat. 880) is amended by inserting after 
     ``2004'' the following: ``and $66,666,667 for the period of 
     October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (h) Interstate Maintenance.--Section 1101(h)(1) of such Act 
     (117 Stat. 1117; 118 Stat. 880) is amended by inserting after 
     ``2004'' the following: ``and $66,666,667 for the period of 
     October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (i) Recreational Trails Administrative Costs.--Section 
     1101(i)(1) of such Act (117 Stat. 1117; 118 Stat. 880) is 
     amended by inserting after ``2004'' the following: ``and 
     $500,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 
     2005''.
       (j) Railway-Highway Crossing Hazard Elimination in High 
     Speed Rail Corridors.--Section 1101(j)(1) of such Act (117 
     Stat. 1118; 118 Stat. 881) is amended--
       (1) by inserting before ``; except'' the following: ``and 
     $3,500,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 
     2005''; and
       (2) by inserting before ``for eligible'' the following: 
     ``and not less than $166,667 instead of $250,000 shall be 
     available for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 
     2005,''.
       (k) Nondiscrimination.--Section 1101(k) of such Act (117 
     Stat. 1118; 118 Stat. 881) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1) by inserting after ``2004'' the 
     following: ``and $6,666,667 for the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2) by inserting after ``2004'' the 
     following: ``and $6,666,667 for the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (l) Administration of Funds.--Funds authorized by the 
     amendments made by this section shall be administered as if 
     the funds had been apportioned, allocated, deducted, or set 
     aside, as the case may be, under title 23, United States 
     Code, except that the deductions under sections 104(a)(1)(A) 
     and 104(a)(1)(B) of such title shall not apply to funds made 
     available by the amendment made by subsection (a)(1) of this 
     section.
       (m) Reduction of Allocated Programs.--The Secretary of 
     Transportation shall reduce the amount that would be made 
     available, but for this section, for fiscal year 2005 for 
     allocation under a program, that is continued both by a 
     multiyear law reauthorizing such program enacted after the 
     date of enactment of this Act and by this section, by the 
     amount made available for such program by this section.
       (n) Program Category Reconciliation.--The Secretary may 
     establish procedures under which funds allocated under this 
     section for fiscal year 2005 for a program category for which 
     funds are not authorized for fiscal year 2005 under a 
     multiyear law reauthorizing the Federal-aid highway program 
     enacted after the date of enactment of this Act may be 
     restored to the Federal-aid highway program.

     SEC. 6. EXTENSION OF HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAMS.

       (a) Chapter 1 Highway Safety Programs.--
       (1) Seat belt safety incentive grants.--Section 157 of 
     title 23, United States Code, is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a)(3) by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2003'';
       (B) in subsection (a)(8)(B) by striking ``2002'' and 
     inserting ``2003'';
       (C) in subsection (b) by striking ``2003'' and inserting 
     ``2005'';
       (D) in subsection (c)(1) by striking ``2003'' and inserting 
     ``2004'';
       (E) in subsection (c)(2) by striking ``2003'' and inserting 
     ``2004'';
       (F) in subsection (f)(4) by striking ``2003'' and inserting 
     ``2004'';
       (G) in subsection (g)(1)--
       (i) by striking ``and''; and
       (ii) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, and $74,666,667 for the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005'';
       (H) in the heading to subsection (g)(3)(B) by striking 
     ``2004'' and inserting ``2005''; and
       (I) in subsection (g)(3)(B) by striking ``2004'' and 
     inserting ``2005''.
       (2) Prevention of intoxicated driver incentive grants.--
     Section 163(e)(1) of such title is amended--
       (A) by striking ``and''; and
       (B) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, and $73,333,333 for the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (b) Chapter 4 Highway Safety Programs.--Section 2009(a)(1) 
     of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 
     Stat. 337; 118 Stat. 886) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and''; and
       (2) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, and $110,000,000 for the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (c) Highway Safety Research and Development.--Section 
     2009(a)(2) of such Act (112 Stat. 337; 118 Stat. 886) is 
     amended by inserting after ``2004'' the following: ``, and 
     $48,000,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 
     31, 2005''.
       (d) Occupant Protection Incentive Grants.--Section 
     2009(a)(3) of such Act (112 Stat. 337; 118 Stat. 886) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' the last place it appears; and
       (2) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, and $13,333,333 for the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (e) Alcohol-Impaired Driving Countermeasures Incentive 
     Grants.--
       (1) Extension of program.--Section 410 of title 23, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (A) in subsection (a)(3) by striking ``7'' and inserting 
     ``8''; and
       (B) in subsection (a)(4)(C) by striking ``and seventh'' and 
     inserting ``, seventh, and eighth''.
       (2) Authorization of appropriations.--Section 2009(a)(4) of 
     such Act (112 Stat. 337; 118 Stat. 886) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``and'' the last place it appears; and
       (B) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``, and $26,666,667 for the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (f) National Driver Register.--Section 2009(a)(6) of such 
     Act (112 Stat. 338; 118 Stat. 886) is amended by inserting 
     after ``2004'' the following: ``, and $2,400,000 for the 
     period of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005''.
       (g) Allocations.--Section 2009(b) of such Act (112 Stat. 
     338) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1) by striking ``2004'' and inserting 
     ``2005''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2) by striking ``2004'' and inserting 
     ``2005''.
       (h) Applicability of Title 23.--Section 2009(c) of such Act 
     (112 Stat. 338) is amended by striking ``2004'' and inserting 
     ``2005''.

     SEC. 7. EXTENSION OF MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Administrative Expenses.--
       (1) In general.--There shall be available from the Highway 
     Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) for the 
     Secretary of Transportation to pay administrative expenses of 
     the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration $160,552,536 
     for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005.
       (2) Use of funds.--Funds authorized by this subsection may 
     be used for personnel costs; administrative infrastructure; 
     rent; information technology; and programs for research and 
     technology, regulatory development, and other operating 
     expenses and similar matters. Such funds available may also 
     be used to make grants to, or enter into contracts with, 
     States, local governments, or other persons for 
     implementation of the Commercial Driver's License Improvement 
     Grants and the Border Enforcement Grants programs.
       (b) Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program.--Section 
     31104(a) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(8) Not more than $112,512,329 for the period of October 
     1, 2004, through May 31, 2005.''.
       (c) Information Systems and Commercial Driver's License 
     Grants.--
       (1) Authorization of appropriation.--Section 31107(a) of 
     such title is amended--
       (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (4);
       (B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (5) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(6) $13,315,068 for the period of October 1, 2004 through 
     May 31, 2005.''.
       (2) Emergency cdl grants.--From amounts made available by 
     section 31107(a) of title 49, United States Code, for the 
     period of October 1, 2004 through May 31, 2005, the Secretary 
     of Transportation may make grants of up to $665,753 to a 
     State whose commercial driver's license program may fail to 
     meet the compliance requirements of section 31311(a) of such 
     title.
       (d) Crash Causation Study.--There shall be available from 
     the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) 
     for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to 
     continue the crash causation study required by section 224 of 
     the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999 (49 U.S.C. 
     31100 note; 113 Stat. 1770-1771), $665,753 for the period of 
     October 1, 2004 through May 31, 2005.
       (e) Contract Authority.--Funds made available by this 
     section shall be available for obligation in the same manner 
     as if such funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 
     23, United States Code.
       (f) Rule Stay.--The hours-of-service regulations applicable 
     to property-carrying commercial drivers contained in the 
     Final Rule published on April 28, 2003 (68 Fed. Reg. 22456-
     22517), as amended on September 30, 2003 (68 Fed. Reg. 56208-
     56212), and made applicable to motor carriers and drivers on 
     January 4, 2004, shall be in effect until the earlier of--
       (1) the effective date of a new final rule addressing the 
     issues raised by the July 16, 2004, decision of the United 
     States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 
     Public Citizen, et al. v. Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
     Administration (No. 03-1165); or

[[Page H7877]]

       (2) September 30, 2005.

     SEC. 8. EXTENSION OF FEDERAL TRANSIT PROGRAMS.

       (a) Allocating Amounts.--Section 5309(m) of title 49, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) of paragraph 
     (1) by inserting ``and for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005'' after ``2004'';
       (2) in paragraph (2)(B) by inserting after clause (ii) the 
     following:
       ``(iii) October 1, 2004 through may 31, 2005.--Of the 
     amounts made available under paragraph (1)(B), $6,933,333 
     shall be available for the period of October 1, 2004, through 
     May 31, 2005, for capital projects described in clause 
     (i).'';
       (3) in paragraph (3)(B) by inserting after ``2004'' the 
     following: ``(and $2,000,000 shall be available for the 
     period October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005)''; and
       (4) in paragraph (3)(C) by inserting after ``2004)'' the 
     following: ``, and $33,333,333 shall be available for the 
     period October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005,''.
       (b) Apportionment of Appropriations for Fixed Guideway 
     Modernization.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     determine the amount that each urbanized area is to be 
     apportioned for fixed guideway modernization under section 
     5337 of title 49, United States Code, on a pro rata basis to 
     reflect the partial fiscal year 2005 funding made available 
     by sections 5338(b)(2)(A)(vii) and 5338(b)(2)(B)(vii) of such 
     title.
       (c) Formula Grants Authorizations.--Section 5338(a) of such 
     title is amended--
       (1) in the heading to paragraph (2) by inserting ``and for 
     the period of october 1, 2004, through may 31, 2005'' after 
     ``2004'';
       (2) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraphs (2)(A)(v) 
     and (2)(B)(v);
       (3) by striking the period at the end of paragraphs 
     (2)(A)(vi) and (2)(B)(vi) and inserting ``; and'';
       (4) by adding at the end of paragraph (2)(A) the following:
       ``(vii) $2,201,760,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005.'';
       (5) by adding at the end in paragraph (2)(B) the following:
       ``(vii) $550,440,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005.''; and
       (6) in paragraph (2)(C) by striking ``2003'' and inserting 
     the following: ``2005 (other than for the period of October 
     1, 2004, through May 31, 2005)''.
       (d) Allocation of Formula Grant Funds for October 1, 2004, 
     Through May 31, 2005.--Of the aggregate of amounts made 
     available by and appropriated under section 5338(a)(2) of 
     title 49, United States Code, for the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005--
       (1) $3,233,300 shall be available to the Alaska Railroad 
     for improvements to its passenger operations under section 
     5307 of such title;
       (2) $33,333,333 shall be available for clean fuels formula 
     grants under section 5308 of such title;
       (3) $65,064,001 shall be available to provide 
     transportation services to elderly individuals and 
     individuals with disabilities under section 5310 of such 
     title;
       (4) $172,690,702 shall be available to provide financial 
     assistance for other than urbanized areas under section 5311 
     of such title;
       (5) $4,633,333 shall be available to provide financial 
     assistance in accordance with section 3038(g) of the 
     Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century; and
       (6) $2,473,245,331 shall be available to provide financial 
     assistance for urbanized areas under section 5307 of such 
     title.
       (e) Capital Program Authorizations.--Section 5338(b) of 
     such title is amended--
       (1) in the heading to paragraph (2) by inserting ``and for 
     the period of october 1, 2004, through may 31, 2005'' after 
     ``2004'';
       (2) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraphs (2)(A)(v) 
     and (2)(B)(v);
       (3) by striking the period at the end of paragraphs 
     (2)(A)(vi) and (2)(B)(vi) and inserting ``; and'';
       (4) by adding at the end of paragraph (2)(A) the following:
       ``(vii) $1,740,960,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005.''; and
       (5) by adding at the end of paragraph (2)(B) the following:
       ``(vii) $435,240,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005.''.
       (f) Planning Authorizations and Allocations.--Section 
     5338(c) is amended--
       (1) in the heading to paragraph (2) by inserting ``and for 
     the period of october 1, 2004, through may 31, 2005'' after 
     ``2004'';
       (2) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraphs (2)(A)(v) 
     and (2)(B)(v);
       (3) by striking the period at the end of paragraphs 
     (2)(A)(vi) and (2)(B)(vi) and inserting ``; and'';
       (4) by adding at the end of paragraph (2)(A) the following:
       ``(vii) $41,813,334 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005.'';
       (5) by adding at the end of paragraph (2)(B) the following:
       ``(vii) $10,453,333 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005.''; and
       (6) in paragraph (2)(C) by inserting ``or any portion of a 
     fiscal year'' after ``fiscal year''.
       (g) Research Authorizations.--Section 5338(d) of such title 
     is amended--
       (1) in the heading to paragraph (2) by inserting ``and for 
     the period of october 1, 2004, through may 31, 2005'' after 
     ``2004'';
       (2) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraphs (2)(A)(v) 
     and (2)(B)(v);
       (3) by striking the period at the end of paragraphs 
     (2)(A)(vi) and (2)(B)(vi) and inserting ``; and'';
       (4) by adding at the end of paragraph (2)(A) the following:
       ``(vii) $28,266,667 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005.'';
       (5) by adding at the end of paragraph (2)(B) the following:
       ``(vii) $7,066,667 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005.''; and
       (6) in paragraph (2)(C) by inserting after ``a fiscal 
     year'' the following: ``(other than for the period of October 
     1, 2004, through May 31, 2005)''.
       (h) Allocation of Research Funds for October 1, 2004, 
     Through May 31, 2005.--Of the funds made available by or 
     appropriated under section 5338(d)(2) of title 49, United 
     States Code, for the period of October 1, 2004, through May 
     31, 2005--
       (1) not less than $3,500,000 shall be available for 
     providing rural transportation assistance under section 
     5311(b)(2) of such title;
       (2) not less than $5,500,000 shall be available for 
     carrying out transit cooperative research programs under 
     section 5313(a) of such title;
       (3) not less than $2,666,667 shall be available to carry 
     out programs under the National Transit Institute under 
     section 5315 of such title, including not more than $666,667 
     shall be available to carry out section 5315(a)(16) of such 
     title; and
       (4) any amounts not made available under paragraphs (1) 
     through (3) shall be available for carrying out national 
     planning and research programs under sections 5311(b)(2), 
     5312, 5313(a), 5314, and 5322 of such title.
       (i) University Transportation Research Authorizations.--
     Section 5338(e) of such title is amended--
       (1) in the heading to paragraph (2) by inserting ``and for 
     the period of october 1, 2004, through may 31, 2005'' after 
     ``2004'';
       (2) in paragraph (2)(A) by inserting after ``2004'' the 
     following: ``and $3,200,000 for the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005'';
       (3) in paragraph (2)(B) by inserting after ``2004'' the 
     following: ``and $800,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005''; and
       (4) in paragraphs (2)(C)(i) and (2)(C)(iii) by inserting 
     after ``fiscal year'' the following: ``(other than for the 
     period of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005)''.
       (j) Allocation of University Transportation Research 
     Funds.--
       (1) In general.--Of the amounts made available under 
     section 5338(e)(2)(A) of title 49, United States Code, for 
     the period October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005--
       (A) $1,333,333 shall be available for the center identified 
     in section 5505(j)(4)(A) of such title; and
       (B) $1,333,333 shall be available for the center identified 
     in section 5505(j)(4)(F) of such title.
       (2) Training and curriculum development.--Notwithstanding 
     section 5338(e)(2) of such title, any amounts made available 
     under such section for the period October 1, 2004, through 
     May 31, 2005, that remain after distribution under paragraph 
     (1), shall be available for the purposes identified in 
     section 3015(d) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st 
     Century (112 Stat. 857).
       (3) Conforming amendment.--Section 3015(d)(2) of the 
     Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 
     857; 118 Stat. 884) is amended by inserting ``or in the 
     period October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005'' after 
     ``2004''.
       (k) Administration Authorizations.--Section 5338(f) of such 
     title is amended--
       (1) in the heading to paragraph (2) by inserting ``and for 
     the period of october 1, 2004, through may 31, 2005'' after 
     ``2004'';
       (2) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraphs (2)(A)(v) 
     and (2)(B)(v);
       (3) by striking the period at the end of paragraphs 
     (2)(A)(vi) and (2)(B)(vi) and inserting ``; and'';
       (4) by adding at the end of paragraph (2)(A) the following:
       ``(vii) $41,600,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005.''; and
       (5) by adding at the end of paragraph (2)(B) the following:
       ``(vii) $10,400,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005.''.
       (l) Job Access and Reverse Commute Program.--Section 
     3037(l) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century 
     (49 U.S.C. 5309 note; 112 Stat. 391-392; 118 Stat. 884) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraphs (1)(A)(v) 
     and (1)(B)(v);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraphs 
     (1)(A)(vi) and (1)(B)(vi) and inserting ``; and'';
       (3) by adding at the end of paragraph (1)(A) the following:
       ``(vii) $80,000,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005.'';
       (4) by adding at the end of paragraph (1)(B) the following:
       ``(vii) $20,000,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005.''; and
       (5) by inserting before the period at the end of paragraph 
     (2) the following: ``; except that in the period of October 
     1, 2004, through May 31, 2005, not more than $6,666,667 shall 
     be used for such projects''.
       (m) Rural Transportation Accessibility Incentive Program.--
     Section 3038(g) of such Act (49 U.S.C. 5310 note; 112 Stat. 
     393; 118 Stat. 885) is amended--
       (1) by adding at the end of paragraph (1) the following:
       ``(G) $3,500,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, through 
     May 31, 2005.''; and

[[Page H7878]]

       (2) in paragraph (2) by inserting after ``2004'' the 
     following: ``(and $1,133,333 shall be available for the 
     period of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005)''.
       (n) Urbanized Area Formula Grants.--Section 5307(b) of 
     title 49, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in the heading to paragraph (2) by inserting ``and for 
     the period of october 1, 2004, through may 31, 2005'' after 
     ``2004''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2)(A) by inserting ``and for the period 
     of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005'' after ``2004,''.
       (o) Obligation Ceiling.--Section 3040 of the Transportation 
     Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 394; 118 Stat. 
     885) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (5);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (6) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(7) $5,172,000,000 for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005.''.
       (p) Fuel Cell Bus and Bus Facilities Program.--Section 
     3015(b) of such Act (112 Stat. 361; 118 Stat. 885) is amended 
     by inserting ``(or, in the case of the period of October 1, 
     2004, through May 31, 2005, $3,233,333)'' after 
     ``$4,850,000''.
       (q) Advanced Technology Pilot Project.--Section 3015(c)(2) 
     of such Act (49 U.S.C. 322 note; 112 Stat. 361; 118 Stat. 
     885) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``and for the period of October 1, 2004, 
     through May 31, 2005,'' after ``2004,''; and
       (2) by inserting ``and $3,333,333 for such period'' after 
     ``$5,000,000 per fiscal year''.
       (r) Projects for New Fixed Guideway Systems and Extensions 
     to Existing Systems.--Section 3030 of such Act (112 Stat. 
     373-381; 118 Stat. 885) is amended--
       (1) in subsections (a) and (b) by inserting ``and for the 
     period of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005,'' after 
     ``2004''; and
       (2) in subsection (c)(1) by inserting ``and for the period 
     of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005'' after ``2004''.
       (s) New Jersey Urban Core Project.--Subparagraphs (A), (B), 
     and (C) of section 3031(a)(3) of the Intermodal Surface 
     Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2122; 112 
     Stat. 379; 118 Stat. 885) are amended by inserting ``and for 
     the period of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005,'' after 
     ``2004,''.
       (t) Treatment of Funds.--Amounts made available under the 
     amendments made by this section shall be treated for purposes 
     of section 1101(b) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 
     21st Century (23 U.S.C. 101 note) as amounts made available 
     for programs under title III of such Act.
       (u) Local Share.--Section 3011(a) of the Transportation 
     Equity Act for the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 5307 note; 118 
     Stat. 637; 118 Stat. 708; 118 Stat. 886) is amended by 
     inserting ``and for the period of October 1, 2004, through 
     May 31, 2005'' after ``2004''.

     SEC. 9. SPORT FISHING AND BOATING SAFETY.

       (a) Funding for National Outreach and Communications 
     Program.--Section 4(c) of the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish 
     Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 777c(c)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (5);
       (2) by inserting ``and'' after the semicolon at the end of 
     paragraph (6); and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (6) the following:
       ``(7) $6,666,664 for the period of October 1, 2004, through 
     May 31, 2005;''.
       (b) Clean Vessel Act Funding.--Section 4(b) of such Act (16 
     U.S.C. 777c(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (4) by striking the paragraph heading and 
     inserting ``Fiscal year 2004'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (6); and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following:
       ``(5) First 8 months of fiscal year 2005.--For the period 
     of October 1, 2004, through May 31, 2005, of the balance of 
     each annual appropriation remaining after making the 
     distribution under subsection (a), an amount equal to 
     $54,666,664, reduced by 82 percent of the amount appropriated 
     for that fiscal year from the Boat Safety Account of the 
     Aquatic Resources Trust Fund established by section 9504 of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to carry out the purposes 
     of section 13106(a) of title 46, United States Code, shall be 
     used as follows:
       ``(A) $6,666,664 shall be available to the Secretary of the 
     Interior for 3 fiscal years for obligation for qualified 
     projects under section 5604(c) of the Clean Vessel Act of 
     1992 (33 U.S.C. 1322 note).
       ``(B) $5,333,334 shall be available to the Secretary of the 
     Interior for 3 fiscal years for obligation for qualified 
     projects under section 7404(d) of the Sportfishing and 
     Boating Safety Act of 1998 (16 U.S.C. 777g-1(d)).
       ``(C) The balance remaining after the application of 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B) shall be transferred to the 
     Secretary of Transportation and shall be expended for State 
     recreational boating safety programs under section 13106 of 
     title 46, United States Code.''.
       (c) Boat Safety Funds.--Section 13106(c) of title 46, 
     United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(c)(1) Of the amount transferred to the Secretary of 
     Transportation under paragraph (5)(C) of section 4(b) of the 
     Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 
     777c(b)), $3,333,336 is available to the Secretary for 
     payment of expenses of the Coast Guard for personnel and 
     activities directly related to coordinating and carrying out 
     the national recreational boating safety program under this 
     title, of which $1,333,336 shall be available to the 
     Secretary only to ensure compliance with chapter 43 of this 
     title.
       ``(2) No funds available to the Secretary under this 
     subsection may be used to replace funding traditionally 
     provided through general appropriations, nor for any purposes 
     except those purposes authorized by this section.
       ``(3) Amounts made available by this subsection shall 
     remain available until expended.
       ``(4) The Secretary shall publish annually in the Federal 
     Register a detailed accounting of the projects, programs, and 
     activities funded under this subsection.''.

     SEC. 10. BUDGET LIMITATIONS.

       (a) Adjustments to Annualized Discretionary Spending 
     Limits.--In the matter that precedes subparagraph (A) of 
     section 251(b)(2) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
     Deficit Control Act of 1985, strike ``through 2002''.
       (b) Discretionary Spending Limits.--Section 251(c) of the 
     Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 is 
     amended as follows:
       (1) Strike paragraphs (1) through (7) and redesignate 
     paragraph (8) (which relates to fiscal year 2005) as 
     paragraph (1) and in such redesignated paragraph strike ``(1) 
     with respect to fiscal year 2005'', redesignate the remaining 
     matter as subparagraph (C), and before such redesignated 
     matter insert the following:
       ``(1) with respect to fiscal year 2005--
       ``(A) for the highway category: $31,113,000,000 in outlays;
       ``(B) for the mass transit category: $1,453,000,000 in new 
     budget authority and $6,535,000,000 in outlays; and''.
       (2) Redesignate paragraphs (9) through (16) as paragraphs 
     (2) through (9).
       (c) Category Defined.--Section 250(c)(4) of the Balanced 
     Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (B) by inserting after ``Century'' the 
     following: ``and the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 
     2004, Part V''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (C)--
       (A) by inserting after ``Century'' the first place it 
     appears the following: ``and the Surface Transportation 
     Extension Act of 2004, Part V''; and
       (B) by striking ``that Act'' and inserting ``those Acts''.
       (d) Conformance With the Concurrent Resolution on the 
     Budget for Fiscal Year 2005.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, all adjustments made pursuant to section 
     110(a)(2) of title 23, United States Code, to sums authorized 
     to be appropriated from the Highway Trust Fund (other than 
     the Mass Transit Account) to carry out each of the Federal-
     aid highway and highway safety construction programs (other 
     than emergency relief) in fiscal year 2005 shall be deemed to 
     be zero.
       (e) Sense of Congress on Adjustment to Align Highway 
     Spending With Revenues.--It is the sense of Congress that, in 
     any multiyear reauthorization of the Federal-aid highway 
     program, the alignment of highway spending with revenues 
     under section 251(b)(1)(B)(ii) of the Balanced Budget and 
     Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 should be restructured 
     to minimize year-to-year fluctuations in highway spending 
     levels and to ensure the uniform enforcement of such levels.
       (f) Sense of Congress on Fully Guaranteed Funding.--It is 
     the sense of Congress--
       (1) in any multiyear law reauthorizing of the Federal-aid 
     highway program enacted after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, the level of obligation limitations for fiscal year 
     2005 under the highway category and the mass transit category 
     in section 8103 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st 
     Century (2 U.S.C. 901 note), as amended and extended, should 
     equal the obligation limitations for such categories 
     authorized in such multiyear law;
       (2) the highway account category obligation limitation 
     level for fiscal year 2005 should be equal to the sum of the 
     Federal Highway Administration, National Highway Safety 
     Administration, and Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
     Administration obligation limitations for fiscal year 2005 in 
     such multiyear law; and
       (3) the mass transit category obligation limitation level 
     for fiscal year 2005 should be equal to the sum of budget 
     authority and obligation limitation authorizations for 
     Federal Transit Administration programs for fiscal year 2005 
     in such multiyear reauthorization.

     SEC. 11. LEVEL OF OBLIGATION LIMITATIONS.

       (a) Highway Category.--Section 8103(a) of the 
     Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (2 U.S.C. 901 
     note; 112 Stat. 492; 117 Stat. 1128) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (5);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (6) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(7) for fiscal year 2005, $35,392,000,000.''.
       (b) Mass Transit Category.--Section 8103(b) of such Act (2 
     U.S.C. 901 note; 112 Stat. 492; 117 Stat. 1128) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (5);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (6) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:

[[Page H7879]]

       ``(7) for fiscal year 2005, $7,265,000,000.''.
       (c) Treatment of Funds.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, funds made available under this Act, 
     including the amendments made by this Act, shall be deemed to 
     be zero for the purposes of section 110 of the title 23, 
     United States Code.

     SEC. 12. EXTENSION OF HIGHWAY PROGRAMS THROUGH END OF FISCAL 
                   YEAR 2004.

       (a) Advances.--Section 2(a) of the Surface Transportation 
     Extension Act of 2003 (23 U.S.C. 104 note; 117 Stat. 1110; 
     118 Stat. 876) is amended by striking ``and the Surface 
     Transportation Extension Act of 2004, Part IV'' and inserting 
     ``the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2004, Part IV, 
     and the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2004, Part 
     V''.
       (b) Authorization of Contract Authority.--Section 
     1101(c)(1) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st 
     Century (117 Stat. 1111; 118 Stat. 876) is amended by 
     striking ``the period of October 1, 2003, through September 
     24,'' and inserting ``fiscal year''.
       (c) Limitation on Obligations.--Section 2(e) of the Surface 
     Transportation Extension Act of 2003 (117 Stat. 1111; 118 
     Stat. 478; 118 Stat. 876) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraphs (1) through (4) and inserting:
       ``(1) Distribution of obligation authority.--For the fiscal 
     year 2004, the Secretary shall distribute the obligation 
     limitation made available for Federal-aid highways and 
     highway safety construction programs under the heading 
     `Federal-aid highways' in the Transportation, Treasury, and 
     Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 2004 (division F of 
     Public Law 108-199; 118 Stat. 291; 118 Stat. 1013), in 
     accordance with section 110 of such Act.''; and
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (2).
       (d) Period of Availability.--Obligation authority made 
     available for fiscal year 2004 under section 2 of the Surface 
     Transportation Extension Act of 2003 as a result of the 
     amendments made by this section, that is in addition to 
     obligation authority previously made available for fiscal 
     year 2004 under section 2 of such Act (117 Stat. 1110; 118 
     Stat. 478; 118 Stat. 627; 118 Stat. 698; 118 Stat. 876), 
     shall remain available for obligation during fiscal years 
     2004 and 2005, or for additional fiscal years if so made 
     available in a law enacted before the date of enactment of 
     this Act.
       (e) Payment from Future Apportionments.--The Surface 
     Transportation Extension Act of 2003 (117 Stat. 1110) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking section 2(c) (117 Stat. 1111; 118 Stat. 
     877);
       (2) by striking section 3(c)(1) (117 Stat. 1112) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(1) In general.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 
     2004, Part V, the Secretary of Transportation shall restore 
     any funds that a State transferred under subsection (a).''; 
     and
       (3) by striking section 5(n) (117 Stat. 1119; 118 Stat. 
     483; 118 Stat. 632; 118 Stat. 703; 118 Stat. 881).
       (f) Supplemental Minimum Guarantee.--
       (1) General rule.--For fiscal year 2004, the Secretary 
     shall allocate among the States amounts sufficient to ensure 
     that each State's percentage of the total apportionments for 
     such fiscal year pursuant to sections 2(a) and 5(c) of the 
     Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2003 and amounts 
     apportioned under this section shall equal the percentage 
     listed for each State in section 105(b) of title 23, United 
     States Code. The shares in such section shall be adjusted in 
     accordance with section 105(f) of such title. The minimum 
     amount allocated to a State under this subsection for the 
     fiscal year shall be $1,000,000.
       (2) Authorization.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     out of the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit 
     Account) such sums as may be necessary to carry out this 
     subsection for fiscal year 2004.
       (3) Administration of funds.--Funds apportioned to a State 
     under this subsection--
       (A) shall be available for obligation in the same manner as 
     if such funds were apportioned to the State under chapter 1 
     of title 23, United States Code;
       (B) shall be combined with funds apportioned to the State 
     for the minimum guarantee program under section 2(a) of the 
     Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2003; and
       (C) shall be administered in the same manner as funds 
     apportioned under section 105 of such title.
       (4) Obligation limitation.--Funds apportioned under this 
     subsection shall be subject to any limitation on obligations 
     for Federal-aid highways and highway safety construction 
     programs.
       (g) Calculation of Estimated Trust Fund Contributions.--The 
     amendment made by section 13(c) of this Act shall have no 
     effect on the estimates of tax payments attributable to 
     highway users in each State paid into the Highway Trust Fund 
     for purposes of apportioning funds to States in fiscal year 
     2004 until enactment of a multiyear law reauthorizing surface 
     transportation programs.

     SEC. 13. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF TRUST FUNDS 
                   FOR OBLIGATIONS UNDER TEA-21.

       (a) Highway Trust Fund.--
       (1) In general.--Paragraph (1) of section 9503(c) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
       (A) in the matter before subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``October 1, 2004'' and inserting ``June 1, 2005'',
       (B) by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (I),
       (C) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (J) 
     and inserting ``, or'',
       (D) by inserting after subparagraph (J) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(K) authorized to be paid out of the Highway Trust Fund 
     under the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2004, Part 
     V.'', and
       (E) in the matter after subparagraph (K), as added by this 
     paragraph, by striking ``Surface Transportation Extension Act 
     of 2004, Part IV'' and inserting ``Surface Transportation 
     Extension Act of 2004, Part V''.
       (2) Mass transit account.--Paragraph (3) of section 9503(e) 
     of such Code is amended--
       (A) in the matter before subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``October 1, 2004'' and inserting ``June 1, 2005'',
       (B) in subparagraph (G), by striking ``or'' at the end of 
     such subparagraph,
       (C) in subparagraph (H), by inserting ``or'' at the end of 
     such subparagraph,
       (D) by inserting after subparagraph (H) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(I) the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2004, 
     Part V,'', and
       (E) in the matter after subparagraph (I), as added by this 
     paragraph, by striking ``Surface Transportation Extension Act 
     of 2004, Part IV'' and inserting ``Surface Transportation 
     Extension Act of 2004, Part V''.
       (3) Exception to limitation on transfers.--Subparagraph (B) 
     of section 9503(b)(5) of such Code is amended by striking 
     ``October 1, 2004'' and inserting ``June 1, 2005''.
       (4) Conforming amendment.--Subsection (a) of section 10 of 
     the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2004, Part IV is 
     amended by striking paragraph (4).
       (b) Aquatic Resources Trust Fund.--
       (1) Sport fish restoration account.--Paragraph (2) of 
     section 9504(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended by striking ``Surface Transportation Extension Act of 
     2004, Part IV'' each place it appears and inserting ``Surface 
     Transportation Extension Act of 2004, Part V''.
       (2) Boat safety account.--Subsection (c) of section 9504 of 
     such Code is amended--
       (A) by striking ``October 1, 2004'' and inserting ``June 1, 
     2005'', and
       (B) by striking ``Surface Transportation Extension Act of 
     2004, Part IV'' and inserting ``Surface Transportation 
     Extension Act of 2004, Part V''.
       (3) Exception to limitation on transfers.--Paragraph (2) of 
     section 9504(d) of such Code is amended by striking ``October 
     1, 2004'' and inserting ``June 1, 2005''.
       (c) All Alcohol Fuel Taxes Transferred to Highway Trust 
     Fund for Fiscal Year 2004.--Subparagraphs (E) and (F) of 
     section 9503(b)(4) (relating to certain taxes not transferred 
     to Highway Trust Fund) are each amended by inserting ``before 
     October 1, 2003, and for the period beginning after September 
     30, 2004, and'' before ``before October 1, 2005''.
       (d) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     amendments made by this section shall take effect on the date 
     of the enactment of this Act.
       (2) Transfers to highway trust fund.--The amendments made 
     by subsection (c) shall apply to taxes imposed after 
     September 30, 2003.
       (e) Temporary Rule Regarding Adjustments.--During the 
     period beginning on the date of the enactment of the Surface 
     Transportation Extension Act of 2003 and ending on May 31, 
     2005, for purposes of making any estimate under section 
     9503(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 of receipts of 
     the Highway Trust Fund, the Secretary of the Treasury shall 
     treat--
       (1) each expiring provision of paragraphs (1) through (4) 
     of section 9503(b) of such Code which is related to 
     appropriations or transfers to such Fund to have been 
     extended through the end of the 24-month period referred to 
     in section 9503(d)(1)(B) of such Code, and
       (2) with respect to each tax imposed under the sections 
     referred to in section 9503(b)(1) of such Code, the rate of 
     such tax during the 24-month period referred to in section 
     9503(d)(1)(B) of such Code to be the same as the rate of such 
     tax as in effect on the date of the enactment of the Surface 
     Transportation Extension Act of 2003.
       (f) Apportionment of Highway Trust Funds for Fiscal Year 
     2004.--Section 9503(d)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 shall not apply to any apportionment to the States of 
     the amounts authorized to be appropriated from the Highway 
     Trust Fund for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2004.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the 
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Lipinski) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young).
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, much has been said during the rule 
about the obvious need for this extension, and I will agree with those 
who say we need a finalization of the 6-year

[[Page H7880]]

bill; but this extension gives us time to allow the States to go forth 
with their construction, with their projects that are necessary, and to 
keep some stability in our continued efforts to improve the 
transportation system in this great Nation of ours.
  I truly believe this will be the last extension. I have endeavored 
and will continue to work until we sine die to try to make a 
finalization of the 6-year bill. I want to make sure everybody 
understands that just because this is an 8-month extension, it does not 
mean we have to wait 8 months to get it done. If I can get it done next 
week, we are going to get it done. If I can get it done the week after 
that, if we are not here, I cannot do that, but if we can get it done 
during the lame duck, we can do it then. Or we can do it in February, 
March, April, May, June, July, or in that period of time. Whatever we 
have to do, we will do to continue to improve our transportation system 
in our great Nation.
  May I suggest, respectfully, since some have spoken on this bill 
about the reauthorization, our committee has done its work. The 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski), I see, is managing the bill 
today instead of the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar). We are 
going to miss him. He is no longer going to be with us next year, but 
he has done his work as the ranking member of the Subcommittee on 
Highways, Transit and Pipelines. The gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. 
Oberstar) has done his work; the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) 
has done his work. We have done our work, and we have passed this 
legislation over to the other body.
  Now, we can point a lot of fingers and we can say this guy, that 
person, this other person in the other body did not do it; but in 
reality there is a difference of philosophies. I personally will say 
that when we passed this bill in the House, I had $375 billion. That is 
the number I would like to have. Well, a lot of us would like to have 
some things which we cannot achieve. We have agreed and we have worked 
with the other body, and we did reach a number that, to me, was a great 
victory, $299 billion of contractual authority, $284.3 as obligated 
dollars, real dollars, with policies and philosophies in the bill. We 
reached those agreements. But, unfortunately, on both sides of the 
aisle there are some people in the other body that desire more, and we 
were unable to reach that agreement because it was not there.
  I would have liked to have had what we agreed to, because I think it 
was the appropriate way to go. It did not mean it would be the final 
number, but we did not and were not able to achieve that. Consequently, 
we are here for this extension. As they said in the rules debate, this 
extension is badly needed to continue the stability of our 
transportation system.
  But I will commit to this House and to this Nation that this 
committee will continue to work to finish this job and to work with the 
other body to arrive at a conclusion that I think is long overdue.
  In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would suggest to this body that we are on 
the cusp of a disaster in transportation if we do not act soon. We are 
gathering in population more each day. We are importing more each day, 
we are exporting more each day, and we are becoming more congested each 
day. I am hoping that my State Governors, my State legislators, my 
State department of transportation and my mayors, all those people 
understand they too have to participate in solving this problem. It 
just cannot come from this body. They too must participate with 
ambitious and visionary ideas in helping to solve our transportation 
problems.
  We all must work together. If we do not, we do not leave the 
appropriate legacy behind us so this country can continue to grow. I 
will say, Mr. Speaker, there are some in this country that do not want 
to improve the transportation system, because they realize if they do 
not improve upon it, then our ability to be competitive and to be the 
leaders of the free world will not occur. So I suggest to this body we 
must awaken the people and make sure they understand the effect upon 
them and they must respond and ask us, and, yes, their local 
legislators, their Governors, their mayors, and those people who lead 
them to say yes to participate together with us so we can solve this 
problem.
  Mr. Speaker, this extension is necessary, and I urge passage of the 
extension.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri).
  Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the legislation before 
us.
  H.R. 5183, the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2004, part V, 
continues the highway construction, highway safety, transit, motor 
carrier, and surface transportation research programs for 8 months of 
fiscal year 2005, expiring on May 31, 2005. Fiscal year 2004 is 
completed in this extension as well. The transportation programs under 
all previous extensions will be continued under this extension.
  This is, we hope, the final short-term extension of the surface 
transportation programs' authorization. We have gotten extremely close 
to a fair and broadly accepted conclusion to the House-Senate 
conference on our multiyear authorization bill, but a stopgap measure 
is needed, once again, to give us time to finalize this deal.
  This short-term extension is a ``must-pass'' bill. If Congress does 
not pass a bill and send it to the President today, new highway 
projects will be shelved, safety grants will not be provided to states, 
transit construction will be halted, and Federal enforcement of motor 
carrier safety regulations on the highways and at the borders will end.
  H.R. 5183 provides more than $30 billion in new funding authority, 
which reflects 8 months' worth--or two-thirds of the funding 
authorization levels the House approved for fiscal year 2005 in TEA LU, 
H.R. 3550.
  I urge my colleagues to support the passage of H.R. 5183 today. It is 
vitally important that this bill be passed by both the House and senate 
today, delivered to the President--the bill must be flown down to 
Florida--and signed before midnight tonight. Our economy cannot 
withstand the shutdown of the national surface transportation programs.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. LIPINSKI asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, on September 29, the bipartisan leadership 
of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure introduced H.R. 
5183, the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2004. H.R. 5183 would 
extend our Nation's surface transportation programs for an additional 8 
months, through May 31, 2005. While I fully support this extension, I 
am certainly not pleased that we need to consider such a measure once 
again. This is the fifth such extension we are considering since our 
highway and transit programs expired exactly 1 year ago.
  Earlier this year, my colleagues in this body labored long and very 
hard to pass H.R. 3550. In writing TEA-LU, our committee considered the 
interests and needs of almost every single Member of this body.

                              {time}  1115

  We held dozens of hearings and we heard from many Members. We heard 
about their needs in their districts that they represent. Most 
importantly, we listened. We tried to accommodate the needs of every 
Member within the $275 billion bill. All in all, I think that the 
gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young), the ranking member, the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the gentleman from Wisconsin 
(Mr. Petri) and myself on the Committee on Transportation and the 
Infrastructure did a good job. I believe we wrote a good bipartisan 
bill.
  This body passed TEA-LU by a vote of 357-65. But now many, many 
months later, this measure is stalled in conference. Let me be clear, 
the leadership in this body has worked long and hard to negotiate an 
increase in the funding level from $275 billion to $299 billion. I 
believe that this is a good funding level. We would all like to have 
more, but democracy is compromise and we have all had to compromise.
  My understanding is that most of my colleagues in this Chamber will 
accept the $299 billion funding for this bill. The leadership of this 
body should be commended for their efforts. Unfortunately, the 
conference is still stalled due to opposition from some Members of the 
other body.
  We simply cannot continue to allow our highway and transit programs 
to limp along, extension after extension. States and localities are 
bearing the brunt of this inaction. State DOTs are flatlining their 
capital budgets. Critical transportation projects are not getting 
completed. Congestion problems are getting worse.

[[Page H7881]]

  However, hope springs eternal. I, for one, believe we can get it 
done. Much like Ronald Wilson Reagan, I am an eternal optimist. I also 
have faith in our democratic process, and I have faith in our 
leadership on the committee and in this body. We still have an 
opportunity to finish negotiations on the highway conference, but to do 
so I would urge the other body to put aside partisan differences and 
think about the Nation, and we simply need to get this job done. But 
for now I urge my colleagues to support the extension.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time. First of all, I want to say nothing but kudos to the leadership 
of this committee, the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), the gentleman 
from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), and the subcommittee leadership. This 
committee has worked together as well as any committee in Congress, 
particularly during these hard times, on a bill that was entirely 
responsive to other Members and entirely responsive to the needs of the 
country.
  We can keep extending bills. The problem is we cannot extend the 
need. The need just gets worse. Many of us are close to desperation 
now. We have done our work. Our leadership has tried desperately to get 
this bill out, and we are left with what looks like the sixth 
extension. The highway bill is about extensions, not bills. This is the 
first time that I have ever seen a White House that did not want a 
highway bill, that wanted to go into an election without a highway 
bill.
  Members recognize we had some concerns here and we tried to work them 
out. I was a conferee, and I understand what those concerns were. My 
problem with the extension is we are extending with funding from 6 
years ago. The problem with that is the need has grown larger and 
people want this bill because they want whatever new amounts the 
committees and the Congress can give them.
  I will be frank; most of the money that comes to the District of 
Columbia does not have anything to do with the 600,000 residents of the 
District of Columbia. My desperation comes because the highway money 
for my district could just as well be put in the homeland security 
budget because it is going to go for tunnels and bridges which will get 
people out of here in the case of an event, and for well-traveled 
Federal roads which are used by literally millions of commuters and 
visitors every year. So operating at levels from 6 years ago puts us in 
a real trick bag. I ask that we finally get this bill out before the 
end of the year.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) for his tireless work because this will be his 
last action on this legislation. I would like to thank my colleagues on 
the committee and the chairman of the committee for their work. If we 
ran things, we would have already completed a much more robust 
investment in our roads, bridges, highways and mass transit here in the 
United States, putting millions of people to work and beginning to deal 
with the backlog of projects.
  Unfortunately, we not only have to deal with the House, the other 
body, the Senate and the White House; in this case the White House has 
been the big problem. What we are doing here today will mean no 
increase. This will be the second year in a row with no increase in 
transportation infrastructure spending, even with the accelerating rate 
of deterioration of our bridges, even with growing congestion, no new 
starts. This does not get anywhere near what we would consider a good 
push toward dealing with those problems and putting people back to 
work. But the White House has chosen this extraordinarily low number, 
$256 billion. They would essentially underspend the highway trust fund. 
They collect gas tax from Americans and they would divert some of that 
money to other purposes by borrowing from it instead of fully investing 
it in roads, bridges, highways and mass transit. That means we are 
walking away from a lot of jobs. For every $1 billion we invest in 
transportation, the estimates are that we create 47,500 jobs, not just 
direct construction jobs which are good jobs which cannot be outsourced 
out of the United States, but also spill over into communities, small 
businesses, equipment providers, suppliers; all those people would 
benefit dramatically.
  If we were to adopt the numbers proposed by the Senate at $318 
billion, we would create nearly another 2 million jobs. We could use 
those jobs. It would also help the President, who is dragging his feet 
on this, to deliver on his promise of creating 2 million jobs, which he 
has not done yet and is unlikely to be able to accomplish before 
November except with the stroke of a pen and signing a bill and showing 
that he will create them in the future. But he is refusing to do that.
  Unfortunately, there is hesitation with going forward with a more 
robust level and challenging the President. Someone spoke earlier about 
how the system works, and we have to deal with the Senate and White 
House, but we have the power to send something to the White House, 
allow him to veto it, and then override. The first vote I cast in the 
United States Congress was to override a much more popular President's 
veto of a highway bill, Ronald Reagan.
  This is not only good for the transportation infrastructure, the 
economy, just-in-time delivery, small businesses, construction workers, 
it would be of tremendous benefit to the entire economy.
  In closing, I want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Lipinski). He has been a great mentor and friend to me. I will miss 
him. I am sure that we will take care of him when we do the highway 
bill next year. Although we do not know how much money we will have, 
but if we have lots of money, he will still do well, I am sure, and his 
State will do well.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown).
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, first of all I thank the 
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Petri) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) for their hard work in pushing 
for the highest amount possible for our Nation's transportation system. 
I want to particularly thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) 
who I have enjoyed working with over the past 12 years. I thank the 
gentleman for his leadership.
  American transportation infrastructure is in need of sufficient 
additional funding, particularly as we struggle to finance the security 
upgrades needed to protect our transportation system from terrorist 
attack. Transportation projects are also a natural economic development 
tool which this Nation sorely needs. Department of Transportation 
statistics show that every $1 billion invested in transportation 
infrastructure creates 42,000 jobs and $2.1 million in economic 
activity. It also saves the lives of 1,400 people. We cannot ignore 
those numbers. Transportation funding is a win/win for everyone 
involved. States get to improve their transportation infrastructure 
which creates economic development, puts people back to work, enhances 
safety and improves local communities.
  Unfortunately, we were unable to add a rail title to the bill, but 
that does not mean that our rail infrastructure is taken care of. We 
have dangerously underfunded rail security. It is surprising after what 
happened in Madrid that rail is not a priority in this administration.
  By delaying the passage of much-needed legislation, we are doing a 
disservice to the driving population and the Nation as a whole. The 
States who are battling red ink want to see a bill passed. Construction 
companies laying off employees want to see a bill passed, and citizens 
waiting in traffic jams want to see a bill passed. If this Congress 
fails to pass a bill funding transportation, shame on us.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, the fact is that the importance of 
infrastructure investments to my home

[[Page H7882]]

State of New Jersey and our Nation cannot be overstated. More resources 
are desperately required to satisfy unmet needs, to improve livability, 
to alleviate congestion, to build safer roads, to upgrade and expand 
our mass transit system, to facilitate commerce, and create good-paying 
local construction jobs. Every $1 billion invested in Federal highway 
and transit spending means over 40,000 jobs are created or sustained.

                              {time}  1130

  Why do we only have an extension on the floor today rather than a 
good 6-year bill, a full 6-year bill that can benefit all of our 
States? The administration has been one of the biggest roadblocks in 
our path. For months, the administration would stonewall on supporting 
the funding necessary to get a right-sized bill. Their original 
proposal actively ignored new needs, choosing to keep the status quo. 
They did not want to make the tough choices in an election year to do 
what is right. The gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), the gentleman 
from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Lipinski), the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri), et cetera know 
what is right. They put a lot of hours into this legislation. Both 
sides of the aisle.
  The President has been deafening in his silence on the importance of 
a highway bill. They choose to hold the highway bill hostage as a 
credit to their ideology of fiscal responsibility. That is a laugh. It 
is a joke. Everybody knows it is. This ignores the reality that we are 
running up record deficits. It ignores the reality that the interest we 
are paying on the debt, $300 billion this year, is equal to the entire 
government outlay in 1974.
  So it cannot really be an issue of fiscal responsibility. It is just 
politics, plain and simple. I support the extension because we need to 
keep the funding flowing to the States, or we will stop those projects 
right in their tracks. Chairman Young and Ranking Member Oberstar 
understand that we need to keep our States working. They have 
understood it too well. Our committee to its credit always works in a 
bipartisan manner. At one point, 74 members of our committee supported 
a bill which actually provided the level of funding that our own 
Department of Transportation recommended. Imagine that, actually 
passing a bill based on need, not politics.
  We need to keep up with aging roads and bridges and transit systems. 
Rather than sitting in traffic, we need to get parents home after work 
on time to take care of their families. But leadership has held down 
the investment and is holding back trust fund dollars which would 
alleviate congestion. Folks are paying gas taxes, user fees, and not 
spending that money as we should. 1998 was a long way off, the last 
time we passed this legislation. This is terrible. But we need to do 
this to keep the projects that are in the ground already working.
  I welcome and congratulate the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) 
for the fantastic job that he has done, not on our side of the aisle 
but for the United States Congress, not only for the people in his 
district but for all Americans; and we thank him today.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. I thank the gentleman from New Jersey very much.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the ranking member of the full 
committee.
  (Mr. OBERSTAR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Here we are again doing an extension. In the famous words of 
President Reagan, there you go again, doing another extension. But, 
frankly, you might just call this a no-fault divorce. We tried. The 
other body tried. The two parties in the other body tried. They could 
not come to a meeting of the minds. They could not come to a meeting of 
the minds with the White House. The only body that has its act together 
is this body. The only group that has its act together is this 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. We have worked shoulder 
to shoulder and, may I say, kneecap to kneecap across the table to 
fashion a bill that is good for America, to move transportation ahead, 
that would address congestion and safety and mobility of all things in 
America.
  We introduced that bill a year ago at a time when gasoline prices 
were $1.34 a gallon. They are now consistently well over $2 a gallon 
all across the country and that 70-plus cents of increase in fuel 
price, about 60 percent of it, 70 percent of it, is going overseas to 
OPEC. We are not getting any transportation benefit of that increase in 
fuel price. Not a penny of that increase in fuel price is going to fill 
pot holes, build new bridges, improve safety on our highways, build 
more bicycle lanes.
  Incidentally, I must say to the chairman of our committee and ranking 
member, I thank the ranking member of the subcommittee for managing 
this bill. It is his last hurrah, if you will, on the House floor in a 
management position. But I was out on my bicycle doing what I thought 
was going to be a 20-mile ride this morning, and I got the message that 
this bill was being called up. It seems the leadership over here just 
sort of all of a sudden decides in a big rush, this is the time to do 
this thing without any advance notice. That is not particularly useful. 
In fact, I was dodging pot holes, cursing the road conditions as most 
travelers are doing.
  But we need to do this. I want to take this opportunity to express my 
great appreciation to the gentleman from Illinois for his 2-decade 
tenure in this House, for the partnership that we have had, on 
aviation, on surface transportation, on railroads, on water resource 
issues, everything that has affected this committee. He has really 
devoted his career to the work of this committee. The gentleman has 
absorbed the subject matter and made it a core of his service in the 
Congress. He has not only served his district well and his State well; 
he has served the Nation well. I salute the gentleman from Illinois on 
this, his last opportunity to manage a major transportation bill.
  Perhaps there may be another opportunity. We never know. But it may 
be the last. One never knows what happens in this body. Winds blow. 
Conditions change. The barometer rises. The barometer falls. Something 
happens. It can all happen in the blink of an eye, and we could have a 
major bill back on the House floor yet before this Congress adjourns.
  I regret, frankly, that we are here with an extension, that we are 
not here doing the TEA-LU bill that the chairman of the full committee 
and I and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) and the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) and our committee staff and members have 
worked so hard to fashion, because we know that at $375 billion, that 
is the level of investment America needs to move this country ahead, at 
a time when global mobility at home is a cornerstone of our global 
presence in international competition in the marketplace.
  About 6 months ago, I visited China to speak at an aviation 
conference and traveled to the city of Laiwu, which is the home of a 
steel mill which is a part owner in an iron ore mine in my district. I 
traveled from Jinan 2 hours to Laiwu. Jinan is a city of 6 million 
people. Laiwu is a city of 1.2 million people. They have a six-lane 
divided, controlled-access superhighway connecting these two cities, 
the vanguard of the equivalent of our interstate highway system which 
China is planning to build in the next 15 years to invest well over 
$200 billion in improving their mobility, their ability to move goods 
to market and people to their destinations; and they are doing it with 
the savings of the Chinese people who have a savings rate of over 60 
percent.
  They are investing $200 billion in modernizing their ports, they are 
halfway through a $100 billion airport modernization plan, and we are 
sitting here, standing here, advancing the cause of transportation by 
taking the 6-year-old TEA-21 and moving it incrementally forward and 
saying, sorry, folks, this is the best we can do. That is not right. 
This committee knows what is right.
  Members of this committee have worked hard. They understand 
transportation problems. They understand what America needs. They 
understand the needs of mobility. They understand the needs of safety 
and investment in America. Yet because of ideological

[[Page H7883]]

hard-and-fast positions by the White House and divisiveness over in the 
other body, we cannot move the agenda ahead.
  I say, let us pass this bill. Let us inch forward. Let us come back 
after this Congress has concluded its business and into the next 
Congress and do the right thing for America. Make the right 
investments. Let us move America ahead in the way we know it needs to 
move, keep our mobility, keep our marketplace production and 
productivity and reduce the cost of moving people and goods in America.
  Exactly 1 year ago today we ended an era: The era in which our 
Nation's transportation policy was governed by legislation establishing 
a multiyear plan with the funding needed to implement the plan.
  During the past year, our national transportation policy has gone 
forward in fits and starts, by extensions of a month or two.
  Just over a year ago, on September 24, 2003, when this House was 
considering the first surface transportation extension bill, I stated: 
``I am afraid . . . we will be back here on this floor once again 
pleading for another extension of time to keep transportation programs 
from once again expiring. . . . I do not want to be back on this floor 
saying again what I said 6 years ago, time is running out.'' What I 
predicted then has repeatedly proven correct--we have had 5 additional 
extensions since that day. And here we are today pleading once again 
for a temporary extension of authorization for highway construction, 
highway safety, and public transportation funding.
  Our inability to enact legislation to reauthorization surface 
transportation programs is caused by an administration guided by 
ideology rather than good transportation policy and by the 
unwillingness of the Republican leadership in Congress to let the 
people's branch of government work its will.
  Analysis by the U.S. Department of Transportation shows that we need 
to invest $375 billion to maintain and improve our aging 
infrastructure. On November 19, 2003, the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure introduced H.R. 3550, authorizing that same amount--
$375 billion for the highway, transit, and transportation safety 
programs for the next 6 years. The T&L Committee marked up that 
legislation and unanimously voted it favorably to the House, but the 
Republican leadership blocked its consideration because of objections 
from the administration to the funding level. But that funding level 
was derived from the administration's own analysis, and the bill, 
included proposals to fully fund the investments. Nevertheless, our 
committee was prevented from moving the bill through the legislative 
process.
  That 1-year delay has been costly to our Nation. AASHTO, the American 
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, estimated 
when the first extension was about to expire early this year that 
failure to enact a long-term reauthorization would mean a $2.1 billion 
increase in project costs and a loss of more than 90,000 jobs that 
could have been created a long-term authorization bill.

  Today, we continue our muddling through, debating on a measure that 
would temporarily extend funding authorization for another 8 months 
before the current extension expires at midnight. This is no way to do 
business, especially when we are dealing with costly, multiyear 
transportation projects that require long-term certainty in planning, 
development, and financing. I can only imagine what further damage we 
have now done, and at what new financial cost due to another year of 
inadequate funding levels.
  The extension bill now before us provides some modest increase in the 
investment levels of a number of the highway and transit programs, 
other programs are less fortunate. Their funding is held constant at 
the FY 2003 levels. Moreover, the insistence on passing ``clean'' 
extension bills, Congress has not been able to modify or update current 
surface transportation programs and policies that are in need of such 
adjustment.
  Overall, this bill would provide $24.5 billion in contract authority 
for the 8 months ending on May 31, 2005, for highway programs. This is 
based on $36.76 billion for the entire fiscal year 2005. Of these 
amounts, $21.3 billion for 8 months is guaranteed. For transit 
programs, this bill would provide $5.17 billion guaranteed funding for 
8 months.
  Despite the fact that the funding levels included in our original 
bill were derived from the Department of Transportation's highway and 
transit needs report, the administration has strongly opposed 
additional infrastructure investment. The President's budget to 
Congress flat-lined the highway and transit programs. The President's 
bill did not include one additional dollar for highway and transit 
investment, nor would it produce one additional job in the 
transportation construction sector, over the next 6 years.
  But what's worse is the mess we have created in the last year. The 
lack of vision, the lack of a clear plan, the continual struggle to 
give States scraps from the table. We should do better.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Minnesota for 
those words, particularly those kind words about myself.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Eddie Bernice Johnson).
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, allow me to thank 
the great leadership we have on this committee and the diligence with 
which they have led us and with which we have worked. The gentleman 
from Alaska (Mr. Young), the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), 
the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri), and the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Lipinski), the members of the committee respect and honor 
their leadership. It makes for a very good committee.
  Three in four Americans now believe that the Nation is facing a 
transportation capacity crisis. Our infrastructure desperately needs 
attention. There are 17 bridges in my district alone that are currently 
in critical condition. Yet in spite of this, we stand poised to 
shortchange the American people with another short-term highway 
extension.
  If you poll any local, State, or transportation industry 
representatives, they will tell you that the transportation needs of 
this country will only be met by passing a fully funded 6-year bill, 
$376 billion, but no less than $319 billion. We did not pull these 
numbers out of the air. They are numbers from the administration's own 
Department of Transportation's research and assessment. Our leaders in 
this committee traveled this country looking at conditions to verify 
what we have been told by the administration.
  It is ironic that the current argument is over funding levels. Yet 
the longer we delay in enacting a fully funded transportation bill, the 
costs associated with addressing our Nation's infrastructure will 
continue to rise. So just neglecting going through and doing what is 
right, we are going to cause ourselves to spend more money.
  If the Republican administration can find time to place such a great 
emphasis on the reconstruction of other countries, surely priority 
should be given to our Nation's crumbling infrastructure and bringing 
the needed jobs. Our constituents are counting on us to do the right 
thing and we really should not let them down. We have cars collapsing 
on bridges. The highways are so bad until accidents are being caused. 
It is time for us to stand up and pass this bill and do something for 
our Nation and bring about good jobs.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  First of all, I want to once again say that I appreciate the kind 
words the gentleman from Minnesota had to say about me. I would like to 
say that I learned a great deal from him over the course of my time 
here in the House of Representatives. Oftentimes I refer to him as Mr. 
Transportation, and I sincerely mean that. He probably knows more about 
transportation than anyone I have met in the 22 years I have been in 
the House of Representatives and he has certainly been enormously 
helpful to me in my career here. I also want to thank Chairman Young 
and Chairman Petri for including me as much as they have in the 
deliberations on this bill, through the subcommittee, the full 
committee, the House floor, and in the conference committee. I have 
really felt like a partner in this legislation. If I had been in the 
majority, I do not think that I could have been treated any better than 
I was by Chairman Young and Chairman Petri, and I sincerely appreciate 
that.
  It has been very enjoyable working on this bill. I have been very 
pleased, as I say, with the participation that we have been given by 
the majority. There has been a lot of talk here today about this bill 
not becoming law and us not getting out of conference. I simply want to 
say, and I will preface this for the benefit of the few people who do 
not know, the Speaker of the House and I have a very good relationship 
and we have had for a long time. So I say that because I want to say 
that no one has worked harder to get this bill passed into law than 
Denny Hastert. I know that Chairman Young has had many, many meetings 
with him.

[[Page H7884]]

                              {time}  1145

  I know that the Speaker has gone to the White House on countless 
occasions. I know he has talked to the Senators, the Senate conference 
committee members. I know that the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman 
Young); the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), ranking member; 
the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) have worked very hard on this 
bill. But I do not think they worked any harder on getting this bill 
passed than the gentleman from Illinois (Speaker Hastert) has, and I 
want to make sure everyone understands that in this body. Yes, we have 
problems. Yes, the Republicans control the White House, the Senate, and 
the House. But as I know from Illinois, where the Democrats control the 
governorship, the Senate, and the House, sometimes when one party 
controls everything, they do not quite get along as well as they would 
have if they were in the minority. So I appreciate that. I understand 
that.
  I would also like to say in conclusion that there have been people 
who have helped our staff and helped the Democratic side considerably. 
That is, people from the House Legislative Counsel, Dave, Curt, and 
Rosemary; from DOT, Megan, Brigham, Jim, Gary; from NHTSA, Scott, 
Brian, Marlene; from FTA, William, Kris, Rita; from FHWA, Ross, Sue, 
Carolyn, and Susan. And certainly, David and Ward on our staff here 
have put an awful lot of work into this bill.
  I am still hopeful that when we get back from our recess during the 
course of the election period of time that we will be able to pass this 
bill so that I will still be here in the House of Representatives when 
this bill becomes law. I am for the extension. Let us move on it. Let 
us get back to work trying to be bring this bill to conference.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  In closing, this is a time that is always difficult for someone who 
has served with something for so long, but I will tell the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) we are going to miss him. We are going to 
probably see him. But as Members leave this body that have contributed 
to not only their districts but the Nation, it is a loss. We know that. 
I know he knows that. But I also respect his desire to go and do bigger 
and greater things. But I look forward to seeing him back on the Hill 
during this period of time in the near future so that we can 
communicate and work together on a cause that he has great feeling for, 
and that is transportation. And he can be assured that I will always be 
there to hear his wisdom, and he can be sure that I and the gentleman 
from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) are going to accomplish the goals along 
with our subcommittee chairman on this transportation bill, I hope in 
the near future. If we cannot, it will be, not in the far future, but 
in the close future. So, again, I wish him Godspeed and be well on his 
travels. We will miss him.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the 
Surface Transportation Extension Act, which extends funding for vital 
highway and transit programs for eight months, through May 31, 2005. I 
want to thank Chairman Young and Ranking Member Oberstar for working to 
pass an extension that is fair and equitable. They have had to deal 
with the truly difficult task of coming to agreement on a multi-year 
transportation agreement and I commend them on the job they have done 
so far.
  I am pleased to hear that this current extension has been made much 
more fair and equitable to all states through the use of current gas 
tax contribution data instead of the proposed use of outdated data. The 
use of outdated data would have meant that a number of states led by 
Texas would not have received the proper amount of funding due to them. 
This extension is now in line with the funding formula structure of the 
Federal-Aid Highway program as stipulated by TEA 21's Minimum Guarantee 
program that provides all states at least a 90.5 percent rate of return 
from each state's federal gas tax contributions through the core 
highway formula programs and High Priority Projects.
  Had the outdated gas tax contribution data been used Texas would have 
stood to lose $115.8 million in contract authority. Clearly, this 
simple issue of using current data could have been devastating to 
transportation projects in the state of Texas and would have been 
inequitable considering Texas's increased contribution to the federal 
Highway Trust Fund. Again, I commend Chairman Young and Ranking Member 
Oberstar for having the foresight to correct this inequity and ensure 
that states that contribute to the federal Highway Trust Fund are given 
a proper rate of return.
  This extension provides an advance of $21.3 billion in contract 
authority for federal-aid highway programs for the eight-month period. 
It also sets an obligation limit of \8/12\ of the obligation limit in 
the FY 2005 Transportation-Treasury appropriations measure, which 
should provide about $24.5 billion over the eight-month period. This 
money is necessary as we continue vital highway construction projects 
that will benefit the American people.

  This extension also suspends the Harry Byrd Rule, which prevents 
highway spending from exceeding gas-tax revenues. This year, the 
estimated receipts for the trust fund fell, which may have triggered a 
reduction in the apportionments to the states. By suspending the Harry 
Byrd Rule, the extension prevents states from receiving reduced 
allocations at a time when most states are in dire need of additional 
transportation funding.
  As a body we must insist on a proper agreement for a long term 
transportation agreement because it is of such vital interest to our 
Nation. Investments in our Nation's surface transportation 
infrastructure create millions of family-wage jobs and billions of 
dollars of economic activity. Each $1 billion of Federal funds creates 
47,500 jobs and $6.1 billion in economic activity. In addition, this 
investment in transportation infrastructure will increase business 
productivity by reducing the costs of producing goods in virtually all 
industrial sectors of the economy. Increased productivity results in 
increased demand for labor, capital, and raw materials and generally 
leads to lower product prices and increased sales.
  Because so much is literally riding on a transportation agreement for 
the 21st Century we must insist on a balanced surface transportation 
program that serves the mobility needs of our country in a manner 
consistent with key Democratic principles, including: economic growth, 
intermodalism, security, safety, continuity, equal opportunity, 
protecting our human and natural environment, rebuilding our transit 
and highway systems, encouraging alternative transportation, 
encouraging smart growth, encouraging advanced technology solutions, 
and protecting the rights of workers in transportation industries. 
While I am satisfied with this current extension I look forward to the 
day when we can pass a comprehensive and equitable transportation 
agreement that serves the 21st Century transportation needs of the 
American people.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Miller of Florida). All time for debate 
has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 811, the bill is considered read for the 
amendment, and the previous question is ordered.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


               Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. DeFazio

  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I offer motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I am, Mr. Speaker, in its present form.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. DeFAZIO moves to recommit the bill H.R. 5183 to the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure with 
     instructions to report the same back to the House promptly 
     with an amendment increasing each number in the bill by 
     12.8485 percent.

  Mr. DeFAZIO (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
consent that the motion to recommit be considered as read and printed 
in the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Oregon?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) is recognized for 5 minutes in support to his 
motion.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, this is a straightforward motion within the 
parliamentary constraints of the House. Some might say, because we 
would ask the bill to be sent back promptly, that we are dooming it to 
death.
  We have been waiting 11 months for a highway bill, 11 months since 
the last one expired. Give us 2 hours, and we will give them a lot more 
investment

[[Page H7885]]

and a lot more jobs. We can deliver this bill back within 2 hours. The 
House could pass a bill at the Senate levels this evening.
  All across America that would make a big difference. Across the 
entire country, that would mean that we would have, if we adopted that 
level ultimately for 6 years, an increase of $37 billion in spending. 
That is 1.7 million jobs; 1.7 million jobs could be created. We could 
begin to deal with the 161,000 bridges in this country that are 
structurally deficient, one in four. My own little State has a $4.7 
billion bridge problem.
  We are trying to do our own part, as the chairman asked. We have 
raised registration and other fees. But we need a little bit of help 
because this is Interstate 5, the federal highway that goes between 
Canada, Mexico and includes Oregon, Washington, and California. There 
is some federal obligation, I believe, to help maintain that highway.
  This has been a maddening process for those of us who care about 
transportation, who care about our failing bridges and the potholes and 
our congestion and the lack of new starts and mass transit, all those 
things. If we had our way, we would have significantly more investment, 
according to a unanimous vote of the committee on which I serve, 
bipartisan. We voted for the number which has been outlined by the 
President's own Department of Transportation, $375 billion over 6 
years. And even that would not take care of all the problems, but it 
would sure be a lot more to address them. But the President has taken a 
hard line at $259 billion, far below the number passed by the House, 
way below the number passed by the Senate, and about one-third below 
the number recommended by his own experts. This is inexplicable. This 
is investment. This is paid for out of gas taxes, which each and every 
American pays every time they tank up their car. We owe them an 
obligation to make this investment, not to stick with the levels of 
that are now 6 years out of date under the old legislation but to look 
at something that will spend more, begin to deal more with the backlog, 
put more people to work. We could help the President deliver on his own 
promise. This would create 1.7 million jobs. The President could sign a 
bill which we could have back and have ready for consideration by five 
o'clock tonight. He could sign it tomorrow in the Rose Garden, and he 
could refute the claims of his opponent that he had lost 1.7 million 
jobs because he would just have signed a bill to create 1.7 million 
jobs.
  For the life of me, I do not understand the reluctance at the White 
House to invest the people's tax dollars paid for every time they tank 
up their car in investment in the people's infrastructure, the 
infrastructure that will benefit not only individuals but businesses 
all across America who depend upon just-in-time delivery. Just-in-time 
delivery is pretty hard when they have got to detour a truck over the 
Cascade Mountains in Oregon, down the far side and then back down again 
to I-5 because of failed bridges. And that is unique. That kind of 
thing takes place all across America. Trucks are detouring hundreds of 
miles out of their way, wasting fuel, wasting time, making us less 
efficient because the Federal Government says we do not have the money 
to catch up with this backlog on bridges.
  Well, we do have the money. We are taxing the people. We should adopt 
a more robust level. We should deal with some of the problems and the 
disparities among the States, the whole issue that States give a whole 
bunch more in than they get back. But we cannot do that unless we have 
higher levels of funding. It is impossible.
  And that is what this amendment does, very simply. It would bring the 
bill back later this evening, spending at the levels of the Senate 
bill, which would put over 6 years, if finally adopted, 1.7 million 
people to work, 20,000 people in my State, and begin to defray that 
backlog.
  I would hope that we will pass this motion unanimously and make the 
investment that we need. And I think the President will sign it. I 
doubt very much he will see fit to veto the bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri).
  Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this 
time.
  I would hope that we not pass this motion immediately. I understand 
the point that is being made, and it is perfectly reasonable. But the 
fact is that we are currently operating under a continuing resolution. 
It expires at midnight tonight, and if we do not get this measure 
through the Senate and to the President, who is down in Florida on 
other business, before that time, some of the money that would 
otherwise be spent on transportation, some of the jobs that would 
otherwise exist in the transportation sector will be lost.
  And the motion is very short. It simply changes the numbers in the 
bill by 12 and a fraction percent. But, in fact, trying to figure out 
how that would work in practice and the consequences of it, it would be 
anything but short. This would endanger the ability to continue our 
transportation programs.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. PETRI. I yield to the gentleman from Oregon.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
  My staff says that they can do the computer runs and have the numbers 
within 2 hours, which would give us ample time to get the bill faxed 
before the President for signature before midnight tonight.
  Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I am not talking about 
the mechanics of running the numbers. I am talking about the mechanics 
of operating the political machinery in order to get something that, in 
fact, would be passed by the Senate and signed by the President.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion 
to recommit.
  I know my good friend from Oregon is a good soldier, and I understand 
what he is trying to do, but I hope no one takes it too seriously 
because this would kill this legislation that we have today for an 
extension of our highway program which would cost us about 150,000 
immediate jobs, disrupt all State programs, all projects in districts 
and, in fact, create chaos. And there is a time problem because the 
reality is that this has to be signed by the President tonight or it 
does come to a halt. And so what we have to do now is pass this 
legislation, vote against this motion to recommit, pass this 
legislation and send it over to the Senate. And I am not speaking too 
broadly about the Senate because we do not control it, and I know I am 
not supposed to mention it. But the other body must also act. And then 
it has to get on an airplane and be flown to Florida because there is 
the big debate tonight. And he has to sign it. I am sure it is not a 
big deal with the President, but it is necessary for highway projects.
  And just tongue in cheek, to the gentleman from Oregon, the way his 
motion to recommit is that each number in the bill would have to be 
raised 12.84, 12.85 percent, and that means that H.R. 5183 would no 
longer be H.R. 5183, it would be, I guess, 52.6 or something, and all 
the numbers in the bill, instead of section 22, it would have to be 
section 22.8 and on down the line.
  I understand the reasoning why, but I do urge my colleagues to think 
very seriously about it. Let us keep the course. Vote against the 
motion to recommit and then pass this legislation so we can continue 
our transportation needs in this country, not to the degree we want but 
what is necessary at this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clauses 8 and 9 of rule XX, this 
15-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by 5-minute 
votes on passage of H.R. 5183, if ordered; the motion to suspend the 
rules on H.R. 5149; and the motion to suspend the rules on H.R. 4231.

[[Page H7886]]

  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 199, 
nays 218, not voting 15, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 480]

                               YEAS--199

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Becerra
     Bell
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Case
     Chandler
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley (CA)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Gephardt
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green (TX)
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Herseth
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley (OR)
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     John
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lynch
     Majette
     Maloney
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Menendez
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sabo
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner (TX)
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Wexler
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                               NAYS--218

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burns
     Burr
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Coble
     Cole
     Collins
     Cox
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Doolittle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English
     Everett
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Issa
     Istook
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Oxley
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Saxton
     Schrock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Turner (OH)
     Upton
     Vitter
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--15

     Boehlert
     Brown, Corrine
     Cannon
     Davis (IL)
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Harman
     Harris
     Hastings (FL)
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Nethercutt
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Tauzin
     Weldon (PA)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Miller of Florida) (during the vote). 
Members are advised 2 minutes remain in this vote.

                              {time}  1223

  Mr. MORAN of Virginia changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 409, 
noes 8, not voting 15, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 481]

                               AYES--409

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Ballenger
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Becerra
     Bell
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burns
     Burr
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Carter
     Case
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Chocola
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cole
     Collins
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley (CA)
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gephardt
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Herseth
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley (OR)
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Lynch
     Majette
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Menendez
     Mica
     Michaud
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)

[[Page H7887]]


     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner (OH)
     Turner (TX)
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--8

     Flake
     Franks (AZ)
     Hensarling
     Jones (NC)
     Oxley
     Paul
     Stearns
     Toomey

                             NOT VOTING--15

     Boehlert
     Brown, Corrine
     Cannon
     Davis (IL)
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Harman
     Harris
     Hastings (FL)
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Nethercutt
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Saxton
     Tauzin


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised 2 
minutes remain in this vote.

                              {time}  1230

  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________