[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.

                          ____________________