[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 100 (Friday, June 29, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H4609-H4614]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 5856, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2013; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 6020,
FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2013; AND
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 4348, MOVING
AHEAD FOR PROGRESS IN THE 21ST CENTURY ACT
Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 717 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 717
Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this
resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule
XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of
the bill (H.R. 5856) making appropriations for the Department
of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2013, and
for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be
dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of
the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the
bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and
controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the
Committee on Appropriations. After general debate the bill
shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule.
Points of order against provisions in the bill for failure to
comply with clause 2 of rule XXI are waived except for
section 8121. During consideration of the bill for amendment,
the chair of the Committee of the Whole may accord priority
in recognition on the basis of whether the Member offering an
amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion of the
Congressional Record designated for that purpose in clause 8
of rule XVIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as
read. When the committee rises and reports the bill back to
the House with a recommendation that the bill do pass, the
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill
and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening
motion except one motion to recommit with or without
instructions.
Sec. 2. At any time after the adoption of this resolution
the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII,
declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole
House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill
(H.R. 6020) making appropriations for financial services and
general government for the fiscal year ending September 30,
2013, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill
shall be dispensed with. All points of order against
consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be
confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally
divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority
member of the Committee on Appropriations. After general
debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the
five-minute rule. Points of order against provisions in the
bill for failure to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI are
waived except as follows: beginning with ``: Provided'' on
page 95, line 9, through ``level'' on page 95, line 11. Where
points of order are waived against part of a paragraph,
points of order against a provision in another part of such
paragraph may be made only against such provision and not
against the entire paragraph. During consideration of the
bill for amendment, the chair of the Committee of the Whole
may accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether
the Member offering an amendment has caused it to be printed
in the portion of the Congressional Record designated for
that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII. Amendments so printed
shall be considered as read. When the committee rises and
reports the bill back to the House with a recommendation that
the bill do pass, the previous question shall be considered
as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final
passage without intervening motion except one motion to
recommit with or without instructions.
Sec. 3. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to consider the conference report to accompany the bill
(H.R. 4348) to provide an extension of Federal-aid highway,
highway safety, motor carrier safety, transit, and other
programs funded out of the Highway Trust Fund pending
enactment of a multiyear law reauthorizing such programs, and
for other purposes. All points of order against the
conference report and against its consideration are waived.
The conference report shall be considered as read. The
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the
conference report to its adoption without intervening motion
except: (1) one hour of debate; and (2) one motion to
recommit if applicable.
Sec. 4. It shall be in order at any time on the
legislative day of June 29, 2012, for the Speaker to
entertain motions that the House suspend the rules, as though
under clause 1(c) of rule XV, relating to the following: (a)
measures addressing expiring provisions of law; and (b) a
concurrent resolution correcting the enrollment of H.R. 4348.
Sec. 5. The requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII for a
two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on
Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is waived
with respect to any resolution reported on the legislative
day of June 29, 2012, providing for consideration or
disposition of the following: (a) measures addressing
expiring provisions of law; and (b) a concurrent resolution
correcting the enrollment of H.R. 4348.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Schock). The gentleman from Florida is
recognized for 1 hour.
{time} 0920
Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to my good friend and colleague, the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Hastings), 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.
General Leave
Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule and
the underlying bills.
House Resolution 717 provides for a standard conference report rule
for the consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 4348,
the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2012, Part II, also known
simply as the ``highway bill.'' The conference report for the highway
bill represents a bipartisan and bicameral effort to address our aging
national infrastructure and chronic unemployment with a 2-year
authorization.
This long-term transportation bill, agreed to by both Houses and by
both parties in this conference report, provides much-needed certainty.
It provides certainty not only to States and to State governments but
also to the transportation and construction industries and to those
Americans whose livelihoods depend on them. Rather than another short-
term extension measuring mere weeks or months, this bill authorizes
transportation funding for 2 full years and allows businesses to plan
ahead, hire workers, and grow.
The conference report ensures taxpayer dollars are spent on high-
priority infrastructure projects that support jobs and economic
activity. The conference report also contains significant reforms: it
streamlines the lengthy bureaucratic approval process with reforms
aimed at cutting the permitting process in half; it consolidates and
eliminates duplicative Federal programs; and it embraces increased
private sector involvement by leveraging
[[Page H4610]]
Federal, State, and local dollars with private sector funding. As
importantly, it does all of this without any earmarks and without any
spending increases.
The conference report also extends the current student loan rate of
3.4 percent for student loans for another year. This ensures that young
Americans have certainty when it comes to the terms of their student
loans for the coming year; and because it is paid for, the conference
report ensures that no further debt will be heaped upon the American
taxpayer.
Finally, the conference report reforms and reauthorizes for 5
additional years the Federal Flood Insurance Program. This program is
depended upon by so many in times of natural disaster.
House Resolution 717 also provides for an open rule both for the
Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2013 and the Financial
Services and General Government Appropriations Act of 2013.
The Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2013 includes funding
for critical national security needs, and it provides the resources
needed to continue the Nation's military efforts abroad. In addition,
the bill provides essential funding for health and quality-of-life
programs for the brave men and women of our Armed Forces and their
families.
The Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act of
2013 has jurisdiction over agencies responsible for regulating the
financial and telecommunications industries; collecting taxes and
providing taxpayer assistance; supporting the operations of the White
House, the Federal judiciary, and the District of Columbia; managing
Federal buildings; and overseeing Federal workers. The activities of
these agencies impact nearly every American and are an integral part of
the operations of our government.
So, once again, Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and the
underlying bills. I encourage my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the
rule.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend and colleague
for yielding the time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise to express my disappointment, not necessarily in this measure,
but in how it has come about. We are here considering a rule for five
unrelated measures the day before we recess for the 4th of July. Once
again, we are rushing to the floor with vital legislation that most
Members have hardly had the chance to read. This rule is the very
embodiment of congressional dysfunction.
While my colleagues are busy playing political games, our Nation's
infrastructure is crumbling, and we all know that. Tuition costs are
rising, and we all know that. The economy is struggling. Perhaps, if my
Republican friends weren't so preoccupied with appeasing their base, we
wouldn't find ourselves in this position yet again.
We could have taken care of student loans back in March when the
House first considered a measure to keep current rates. However,
instead of paying for it in a way that was amenable to both sides of
the aisle, the Republican leadership chose to pay for it by cutting
much-needed preventative health funding. The President said he would
veto the bill in this form, yet Republicans still chose to waste this
body's time and defer to the Senate to come up with an affordable pay-
for.
The transportation bill we are considering has been an even longer
time in coming--over 3 years to be exact. While the conference report
is not perfect, it is clear that we must pass a long-term
reauthorization so that construction projects all across the country
can move forward with repairing and improving our Nation's aging
transportation system and infrastructure. Yet, once again, we find
ourselves racing against the clock.
Without a long-term bill, opportunities to truly invest in our
Nation's infrastructure and economy will continue passing us by.
Without a long-term bill, construction projects all across the country
could shut down. Without a long-term bill, 3 million Americans will be
faced with not having a job after Saturday. We should not have to pass
nine extensions over 3 years' time to get to this point, and we would
be better served than this 27th-month extension if we did a 4- or a 5-
year bill.
Infrastructure investments are essential to our Nation's economic
growth and prosperity. This reauthorization should never have been held
hostage by political gamesmanship. There is simply too much at stake.
Short-term extensions put millions of jobs and the safety of our Nation
at risk by casting great uncertainty on long-term transportation and
infrastructure projects. This is unacceptable.
{time} 0930
While I'm not happy about every provision in the flood insurance
portion of this conference report, after 10 years since its last
reauthorization and countless short-term extensions, it's about time
that we get a long-term extension.
The National Flood Insurance Program insures 5.6 million properties
across every State in the Nation. Yet, one Senator from Kentucky
refused to allow the bill to go forward on the most specious of
reasons, a vote on abortion. I have yet to hear the Senator explain
what abortion has to do with flood insurance or why he would threaten
the security of the homes of all those Americans just to make a
political point. I guess I shouldn't be too surprised. Last night, I
read where he said just because two or more persons at the Supreme
Court make a decision, that doesn't mean that it's constitutional. I
hope this guy goes back to law school, if he ever went.
Finally, on today's underlying appropriations measures, I can only
say: here we go again. Once again, the Republicans refuse to provide
the necessary funds to reach the hardest-hit Americans. Once again, the
Republicans kowtow to corporate power rather than provide the resources
to keep rampant excesses at bay. And once again, my friends on the
other side of the aisle choose to undermine the long-term priorities of
this Nation in favor of partisan posturing.
I've said before and I maintain again and now that the Republicans
are living in a world of let's pretend. In ``Alice in Wonderland,''
Alice said that ``if she had a world of her own, everything would be
nonsense.'' In the Republican world, as Alice said, ``Nothing is what
it is, because everything is what it isn't.'' In the Republican world,
Mr. Speaker, the best way to rein in the most corrupt practices of Wall
Street is to underfund the SEC; the best way to close a $400 billion
tax gap is to force the IRS to fire thousands of taxpayer support
employees; and the best way to ensure our national defense is to
continue to pump in billions and billions of dollars into nuclear
weapons that serve no earthly purpose but to destroy our Earth. What
part of ``we have enough nuclear weapons to destroy every human being
25 times'' do we not understand?
In this world, increasing unemployment somehow improves our economy;
defunding essential government programs somehow helps the hardest-hit
Americans; and cutting domestic programs in health care, education,
infrastructure, and economic development while increasing Defense
Department funding somehow serves the long-term needs of this country.
Well, it doesn't. For months we've known that student loan rates were
set to rise; for months we've known that the highway bill was going to
expire; and for months we've done nothing but use the House floor as a
political playground.
Mr. Speaker, our country cannot prosper if every major piece of
legislation is held hostage to partisan interests. As Alice said--again
referring to ``Alice in Wonderland''--``of all the silly nonsense, this
is the stupidest tea party I've ever been to in all my life.''
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I'm very pleased at this time
to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Sacramento,
California, a former member of the Rules Committee, my good friend, Ms.
Matsui.
Ms. MATSUI. I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, this conference report includes a transportation bill
that will help put Americans back to work and rebuild our
infrastructure. It will also
[[Page H4611]]
ensure that students will not see an interest rate hike on their loans.
This package also includes a much-needed 5-year extension of the
National Flood Insurance Program. This comes after 17 short-term
extensions.
Mr. Speaker, I represent Sacramento, which is the most at-risk
metropolitan area for major flooding, as it lies at the confluence of
the American and the Sacramento Rivers.
Since Hurricane Katrina, more than 25,000 homeowners in my district
have been remapped, and flood insurance is now mandatory for them. The
average homeowner in Sacramento that has been remapped currently pays
about $350 for a PRP policy. That's a preferred-rate policy. Beginning
in 2013, they were set to pay $1,350 once the PRP rate expired.
However, that is no longer the case.
This bill contains a number of important provisions, including a
flood insurance phase-in amendment offered during debate on the House
NFIP bill last July. Instead of overnight sticker shock for homeowners,
the provision allows for the price of flood insurance to be phased in
at 20 percent per year over 5 years to the full policy price, when
preferred-risk policies are no longer available in their community.
Specifically, it will effectively allow homeowners next year, in
2013, residing in Sacramento and the rest of the country, to pay close
to if not the same amount they're currently paying. Each year after
that, the price of flood insurance will continue to be both affordable
and predictable, only rising by 20 percent until it reaches full price
in year five. This provision will save the average policyholder in a
remapped area hundreds of dollars, if not a few thousand, over the next
5 years.
Mr. Speaker, this provision offers real savings, especially in these
trying economic times, whether it's for a senior citizen on a fixed
income or a family struggling to make ends meet.
Finally, I would like to commend Chairwoman Biggert and Ranking
Member Waters for working with me, for their continuous efforts to
preserve this amendment and work towards achieving this 5-year
extension.
Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to my good friend from
Georgia (Mr. Woodall).
Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Florida for
yielding.
It's not often that I find agreement with both of my friends from
Florida at the same time. When I listened to my friend from Florida, my
Democratic colleague on the Rules Committee, in his opening statement,
he's absolutely right. We're bringing five completely unrelated
provisions to the floor in this conference report today, and we're
bringing it in a rushed fashion so folks can get out of here and go
home for the 4th of July week.
I agree with my friend from the Republican side of the aisle, my
freshman colleague, who says this is just a standard conference report
rule. That's absolutely right. All of these things that the gentleman
from Florida, my Democratic colleague, finds troubling are just part of
the standard conference report process.
I've been watching this process for a long time. I may be a freshman,
but I've been watching it for a long time. And it's just the way things
go around here. We've done better. To be fair to this House leadership,
over the 18 months that I've been here in Congress, we've done better.
We've made a commitment to bring one idea to the floor at a time, and
99 percent of the bills I've voted on have been 10 pages or less, and I
could read them. I didn't have to staff it out. I could do it myself.
But something happens when we get to this conference report time. Mr.
Speaker, the question goes to our colleagues. I suspect if we put the
question to our colleagues--my friend from Florida knows it's true:
Would you rather rush these five unrelated bills to the floor today and
get home for all the commitments you've made over the weekend, or would
you rather stretch this thing out and do it right?
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. WOODALL. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. You can't really believe that it should be
standard procedure for us to do a 600-page bill that CBO has not scored
until 10 minutes ago.
Mr. WOODALL. Reclaiming my time, I absolutely do not believe it
should be standard procedure, but it is. It has been the entire time my
friend from Florida has been serving here in this House.
Again, we've done better. To the credit of my freshmen colleagues,
we've done better over these last 18 months, and we will continue to do
better. But Chief Justice Roberts had it right yesterday: elections
have consequences. The American people are responsible for what goes on
here. Mr. Speaker, we keep this calendar for a reason. We do it out of
a need for service. You and I both have commitments to constituents
starting at dawn tomorrow morning.
{time} 0940
We have commitments to constituents to keep transportation bills
going, to work with student loans, to reauthorize flood insurance, on
and on and on. We have competing commitments to our constituents. I
would just hope, Mr. Speaker, that if you were asking your
constituents, that they would say, You know what; I would rather you
cancel on me this weekend and stay up there and get it right than rush
it through.
Now, with that said, it has not been partisan politics that's kept us
from getting it here until this point. We've been working hard on this.
To the credit of the folks on the transportation conferee committee,
they have been working hard. And this was just the best they could do,
getting it done today, for whatever reason. This town only operates in
crisis.
I say to my friend, if we can work towards regular order, I would
love to see regular order come to this institution. We have done
better. Eighteen months on the job since I have been here, you and I.
We have done better. My colleague from Florida and I. We have done
better. But we can still do better. But we're only going to do better
if the constituents demand it.
The Supreme Court had it right. You can throw out the folks who
aren't doing it right. Mr. Speaker, I encourage you to encourage all
voters to look at what we do, see when we're getting it right and tell
us, and see when we're getting it wrong and ask us to do better. We can
do better. We will do better.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2
minutes to my very good friend from the Virgin Islands, Dr.
Christensen.
Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
After 20 years of being fully and fairly included in the surface
transportation bills, what is being voted on today cuts funding to the
smaller territories by $10 million. And while I am glad our sister
territory of Puerto Rico as well as the States and District of Columbia
are level-funded, it just seems grossly unfair that only the United
States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of
the Marianas are singled out for cuts.
Why cut $10 million? Or it could have been spread out across the
entire bill and not raised a blip in the 50 States, the District, or
Puerto Rico. But for us small economies, it's a big blow.
That being said, it could have been worse. This body would have made
our funding discretionary and, therefore, not secure. So while I decry
the cuts, I have to thank the Senate for hearing our pleas and keeping
our funding in the trust fund.
After all of the time, though, that we have waited for even this 2-
year, 3-month infrastructure and job-creating transportation bill and
knowing the need to keep college affordable and reauthorize flood
insurance, I cannot, in good conscience, oppose the bill before us
today.
But what is being done to the territories is unfair and
discriminatory. And since it makes so little difference in the overall
bill, it seems deliberately and unnecessarily punitive to us loyal
Americans who serve and shed our blood just like every other in the
defense and love of this, our country. Fairness would demand that it be
restored.
Mr. WEBSTER. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased at this time
to yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman, my good friend from
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
[[Page H4612]]
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in permitting
me to speak on this bill.
Mr. Speaker, there's no small amount of irony that we are having this
discussion today. It's on the anniversary of President Eisenhower
signing into law the National Defense Highway Act. This weekend will be
the 150th anniversary of the Transcontinental Railroad Act, signed into
law by Abraham Lincoln. There was an era when Republicans believed in
infrastructure and development.
In fact, for most of our history, actually, infrastructure has not
been partisan. It's been something that people on this House floor
could come together to work on. There would be differences, to be sure.
But for the 20 years that I've been involved with this issue, we've
been working to broaden our view of how to make transportation work
better, involve citizens, more flexibility, make the dollars stretch.
This came crashing to a halt with this Congress.
Now the bill that's going to come before us, I will very reluctantly
vote in favor of it in part because of what's not in it. Remember, our
Republican colleagues tried to force through a bill which, for the
first time in history, had never had bipartisan work that came out of
the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, that came out of Ways
and Means. In fact, it never even had a full committee hearing, rush-
to-work session. Mercifully, it collapsed before it came to the floor.
And one of the reasons I'll vote for this bill is because what the
Republicans wanted has been rejected. Remember, they wanted to take
away all the funding guarantees for transit. Working with the Senate,
we were able to resist that effort. They wanted to gut environmental
protections.
And while you're going to find that there are some problems with this
legislation, at least it's not as bad as what our Republican colleagues
wanted. They wanted to completely eliminate the guarantees for
transportation enhancements, for bikes and pedestrians. They were even
going to eliminate the wildly popular Safe Routes to School bill. Well,
most of that has been retained, although they were successful in
gutting the provisions, for some reason, for Safe Routes to School.
We have a bill that actually is a little higher in terms of the
funding level than what the Republicans wanted, and it is at least
going to be guaranteed for 2 years. It has some provisions that are
important to those of us who have rural schools, Oregon among them.
It's going to make a big difference. Putting this extraneous provision
in is going to help. A little help in terms of student loans. And we
worked in the finance title to be able to have the money come from
something that's actually going to make it more likely that we
stabilize some private pension programs.
So it's not without merit. There are important things here. But the
main reason to vote for it is because we've been able, working with the
Senate, to resist what the Republicans attempted to inflict on the
House and the American people.
But make no mistake, it is not a bill to be proud of. As I mentioned,
it dramatically reduces the funding for the transportation
enhancements. There is no rail title. There will be reductions in
citizen opportunities for environmental protection and participation.
It is, sadly, a missed opportunity that didn't need to happen. They
could have allowed the Senate bill, in its entirety, to be voted on,
and I'm confident that would have passed. Or wonder of wonders, they
actually could have worked, like we used to do, in a bipartisan
fashion. The last transportation bill under Republican control passed
with 412 votes.
Well, we've missed an opportunity. At precisely the time when America
needs more investment in renewing and rebuilding, for transit, for
roads, for rail, for water and sewer, there are a whole range of things
that we should be coming together to work on.
I hope that the American public looks very closely at what was
attempted here in the last 6 months, they look at what we managed to
stagger through, and that it is a wake-up call for people to be
engaged.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I yield the gentleman an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I have worked for 5 years with a broad coalition of
stakeholders that's not partisan, that are committed to working
together on a vision for how we're going to rebuild and renew the
country, how we're going to revitalize the economy, and how we make our
communities more livable, our families safer, healthier, and more
economically secure.
If we're able to use this flawed process and sadly inadequate bill as
a springboard, maybe in some ways it will have been worth it.
Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, I just want to remind everyone again, as I
said in my opening remarks, this bill has no earmarks. Yes, we know how
they did it in the past, with 6,000, 7,000, 8,000 earmarks, and
certainly there would be a lot of support among individual Members if
that were the case. This bill has no earmarks. It's good policy.
{time} 0950
The Federal Government says: We know all. We know everything that's
needed in every single community, and we can stamp out one of our famed
cookie-cutter approaches to funding transportation, as we used to do,
so that every single dollar has a little teeny category and every State
is brought into spending within those little teeny categories.
Yes, we could have done that, but that's the old way of doing it. We
did it a different way. We actually had a conference, no earmarks, and
we gave States flexibility. We sent to the States the opportunity to
decide. Did we take out any of those things that were mentioned?
Absolutely not. They're all options. So every single dollar we send to
the State, the State has an opportunity to say, Maybe we don't want to
do a sound barrier, whatever it is that's there. No, we can take the
flexibility that's given to us, we can use it. We can use it to our
benefit far better to build transportation from the ground up rather
than to build it from the top down, Washington, D.C. cookie-cutter
style.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues today
to support this bipartisan compromise to enact three of our top
economic priorities.
Some people have said, Well, we don't like the bundling; we don't
like putting three bills together. But I think this is the art of
compromise, and this is the art of the possible. Because all three of
these bills are very important to all of us, I think, and to have this
bipartisan way to do this, I think this is the way that we should go.
I started out with the flood insurance bill. And before we even had a
bill, we did a draft so that every group could look at it, so that
every Member could look at it and be a part of it and to have what they
thought was necessary or to talk about what they didn't think was
necessary. So we came up with a bill that came out of my Financial
Services Subcommittee by voice vote, but out of the Financial Services
Committee last June, 54-0. And people said, How did that happen? Well,
it happened because we got together and worked before we really just
said, Vote for my bill. And I think it's so important that we do this
and get back together to be able to work in a bipartisan way. The
gentlelady from California was my cosponsor. And everybody joined
together.
So I think it's really important. Actually, the student loan bill is
also my bill. So I really care about what is going on this morning and
that we can really get together and pass these. And the transportation
bill is so important to all of us. Several of us in Illinois had real
concerns about how the transit part of that bill was going to be in it
and really wanted to do something like what the Senate had done and
include that in the trust fund.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. WEBSTER. I yield the gentlewoman an additional 15 seconds.
Mrs. BIGGERT. So I really thank the gentleman, and I think that it
took a lot of compromise on both sides of the aisle. But this agreement
safeguards the things in all of the bills such as the suburban transit
options and funds critical road and bridge projects. So it's been a
long time, but I encourage
[[Page H4613]]
my colleagues to look at the big picture and lend this agreement their
strong support.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to encourage my colleagues to support this
bipartisan compromise to enact three of our top economic priorities: an
extension of lower student loan rates, reform of the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP), and a long-term transportation bill.
All three face tight statutory deadlines. And this agreement gives us
the momentum to get all three over the finish line.
Reforming the NFIP will restore financial security to the flood
program, which yields savings for taxpayers and stability in the
housing market.
And extending affordable loan rates for our students will ensure that
our young graduates don't have to pay the price for gridlock in
Washington. Already, half of recent graduates are either unemployed or
underemployed, and now is not the time to burden them with more debt
and higher education costs.
Both of these proposals began here in the House with legislation I
sponsored. And both passed in the House with bipartisan support. Today,
we can send them to the President alongside a third critical economic
priority--a long-term transportation bill.
This agreement includes a two-year extension of federal
transportation funding, avoiding the need for another short-term bill.
In my home State of Illinois, transportation managers need a long-
term bill to invest in the road and rail projects that will keep
commerce and traffic moving--not to mention create jobs.
Mr. Speaker, it took a lot of compromise--on both sides of the
aisle--but this agreement safeguards suburban transit options and funds
critical road and bridge projects.
It's been a long, tough fight, but I encourage my colleagues to look
at the big picture and lend this agreement their strong support.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, would you be kind enough to
tell me the time remaining for both sides.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings)
has 13\1/2\ minutes, and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Webster) has
18\3/4\ minutes.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I am very pleased at this time to yield 4 minutes to my good friend,
the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Let me thank the distinguished gentleman
from Florida for his courtesies and his friendship. We've known each
other a long time, and his service has been one of great commendation,
and the manager as well.
We've gathered here on the floor this morning, and I want to
acknowledge that the legislative process is not always pretty, but
there are lives embedded in this legislation today. And though I have
concerns, I am more pointed toward this House doing things to improve
the quality of life for Americans who stand by the wayside and the
highways of despair waiting for us to provide jobs to improve the
conditions of infrastructure and their lives.
Over the past 2 years, we have seen tornadoes. We've even seen an
earthquake here in Washington, D.C. We've seen hurricanes on the
coastline where I come from in Texas. And in Florida, just recently,
Hurricane Debby has pierced the infrastructure. Obviously, this
legislation points to some of those needs.
As I stand here today, I do want to take note of a comment made by a
person in the other body and suggest to Attorney General Holder: Do not
resign. We have better things to do than to speak to a Cabinet officer
who is a commended public servant. So I want to make sure that that
does not occur.
But as I discuss this legislation, I think it is important to note
several things. One, there are young people that are facing the uphill
battle of getting a college education. Now we'll have a refuge. I held
a town hall meeting, and to hear the stories of $37,000, $50,000,
$90,000 in debt that these young people have. And they are first and
second year. They are sophomores and juniors. Or maybe the veteran who
does not fall into the schedule of veterans benefits with college and
that person has an enormous amount of debt.
And so I'm grateful that we have frozen that interest rate; and we
should say loudly to the students who are now studying that America
cares about them and this House will care about them.
Now, I am concerned. And I am reading language that indicates while
there's been significant progress regarding MWBEs--and this bill has
$13 billion in it for surface transportation and highways--there is
concern expressed in this report that we have not really met our goals
to help small businesses and minority-owned businesses and women-owned
businesses. And in actuality, they have an outreach goal of 10 percent.
Do we realize that there are some that are receiving Federal funds that
don't even meet that goal? And I'm going to cite Houston Metro, because
I was proud to have this body provide $900 million to Houston Metro;
but I'm disappointed in their lack of commitment to MWBEs.
And so this is an important statement. As I read the language, it is
adding women to this to create jobs. And we want to work together. We
don't want to be fighting against each other. But we create jobs and we
help small businesses. And that is crucial. Mass transit has been
helped. But I want to note the jobs that President Obama and Democrats
have been speaking of are now focused in this bill. Because as we begin
to fix the crumbling infrastructure and the $13 billion that we've
committed to mass transit, the highways, to the construction of
infrastructure and bridges that are crumbling and those that have now
been the subject of tornadoes, as I indicated, of hurricanes,
deteriorating infrastructure, it can now be revitalized and rebuilt.
So, Mr. Speaker, and to my colleagues, yes, I will be voting on this
conference report and acknowledge the work that has been done. But more
importantly, Mr. Speaker, to acknowledge that legislation sometimes,
when you have to pull things from people who are desperate, may not be
a process that one says is the ordinary process. But I like the fact
that ordinary people have done extraordinary things. And this is an
extraordinary legislative initiative with its problems, but with $13
billion going to the people of the United States and protecting our
young people and doing the business of the American people, as opposed
to other direction. I hope that we will move forward in serving the
American people.
{time} 1000
Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time, and if I
could ask the gentleman how many more speakers he has.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Two more, possibly three, but we're moving
rapidly.
I'm pleased to yield 2 minutes to my good friend and colleague, the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ANDREWS. I thank my friend for yielding.
The seeds of this bipartisan agreement were sown in the other body 3
or 4 months ago; and, frankly, I wish these agreements had been brought
to this floor a lot sooner. They would have done a lot more good, but
I'm glad that these agreements are here today.
This is a bill that will help create jobs in the transportation
sector. It's overdue. It's a bill that will help our real estate
industry by resolving matters about the national flood insurance
program. That is overdue. And it's a bill that will avoid a dramatic
doubling of student loan interest rates on Sunday, which is long
overdue, so it's worth supporting.
I want to commend the negotiators on both sides for another provision
regarding pension law that helps offset and pay for the provisions in
this bill because it, I believe, will represent a significant
investment by businesses around the country in job creation and
purchasing of equipment and capital goods.
Under the terms of the pension pay-for in this bill, American
employers will have about $28 billion for the next year to spend on
something other than pension plan contributions. Now their pensions
will be safe and secure, but this is $28 billion that will be available
to these companies--private money--to hire people, to buy equipment, to
invest in their companies and to help their businesses grow. This is
businesses as large as some of the major companies in our country and
businesses that are quite small.
So one of the reasons to support this legislation is, in fact, it
includes for
[[Page H4614]]
this year alone a $28 billion opportunity for the private sector to
help put Americans back to work. This is a good idea. It was advanced
by both Republicans and Democrats in this body and the other body, and
I hope that we receive a ``yes'' vote for it here today.
Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I'm very pleased at this time
to yield 2 minutes to my good friend, the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Richardson).
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference
report on H.R. 4348, the Surface Transportation Extension Act, which
provides funding for the Federal-aid highway program through fiscal
year 2014 at current funding levels.
Among other things, the conference report makes key investments in
our Nation's infrastructure critical to goods movement, which is
specifically very important to me in my district, and the additional
$500 million that is there for projects of national and regional
significance.
The conference report also calls for a national freight strategic
plan, and it encourages States to develop State freight plans to
incentivize those States to invest in freight projects, policies, and
to make sure that we can make progress in that area that has long
avoided us.
In recent days, some Members have come down and expressed a desire
for the Federal Government to adopt a national freight policy. As a
member of the Transportation Committee representing the 37th
Congressional District, I represent a very transportation-intensive
district, and that's why last March I introduced a bill, H.R. 1122, the
Freight Focus Act. That particular legislation was supported very much
across the aisle and included support of the American Association of
Port Authorities, the American Trucking Association, Operating
Engineers, and many more.
My Freight Focus Act was to establish an office of freight planning
within the office of the new assistant secretary, and many of those
ideas have been incorporated.
As we look forward at this bill, it certainly is not what we had
hoped for. We had hoped for something more like a 5-year
reauthorization. That would be helpful, but at this point, given our
limitations, the key thing I would like to see us focus on is to ensure
that there is a strong freight plan, and I look forward to working with
my colleagues to make sure that's implemented.
Further, my legislation created a goods movement trust fund. That is
something that is not addressed in this legislation but should be
considered as we go forward.
As you can see, there are sound freight policies. I have been a
leader of that in working with Chairman Mica and others, and I look
forward to us bringing forward not only this bill, but many more to
come which will put Americans back to work.
Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time to close.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I yield myself the balance of my time to
close.
Mr. Speaker, it's a shame that we are here today considering this
hodgepodge measure. For too long, my Republican colleagues have used
this House to further their partisan agenda rather than the interests
of the Nation.
So it is no surprise that, once again, we are rushing to the floor to
take care of business that should have been taken care of months ago.
Time and again, when given the choice between reasonable, bipartisan
measures and blatantly partisan policies, Republicans have chosen to
pander to the extreme wing of their conference. They have passed bills
they know will be dead on arrival in the Senate, pursued legislation
with no hope of being signed into law, and attached controversial
measures to otherwise innocuous matters.
While Republicans are busy playing politics, Americans have been
wondering how they're going to get a job, put a roof over their heads,
or afford to pay for college or food.
Though I'm glad these measures are finally being brought to the
floor, our constituents deserve better. On this measure, 600 pages, the
dead of night last night, five measures put together under one, and we
received a CBO score just a few minutes ago. Most Members in this body
don't have any idea what's in this bill or how much it costs.
This Republican tactic of saying ``no'' to everything is dragging
down our Nation, slowing our recovery, and threatening the survival of
important and necessary government programs. There's serious work to do
here in the House of Representatives, and my and your constituents
can't afford to sit around and watch this spectacle.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, as I have said during previous debates on
short-term transportation extensions, our national infrastructure is
aging, stable construction jobs are lacking, unemployment lingers about
8 percent nationally and a little over 9 percent in Florida.
Regrettably, that remains the case today, many short-term extensions
later. However, unlike the past, the House and Senate have come
together to offer a glimmer of certainty to try to address these
problems.
A long-term, multiyear highway reauthorization is critical to
rebuilding our Nation's infrastructure, reforming antiquated and
inefficient transportation programs, strengthening our economy, and
creating jobs. A long-term authorization also provides for certainty
and stability necessary for the transportation industry to contain
costs through long-term planning.
This agreement, while not perfect, is long overdue. It will begin to
chip away at the bloated bureaucracy which defines our Federal
transportation system. It will create jobs and it will promote economic
activity in our local communities, all without adding to the deficit.
For these reasons, I ask my colleagues to join me in favor of this
rule.
I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question
on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and
nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
____________________