[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 43 (Monday, March 11, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H1068-H1069]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 ESTABLISHING AN EXPIRATION DATE OF CERTAIN COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS WITH 
                     RESPECT TO LEASES OR PROJECTS

  Mr. PERRY. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 6316) to amend title 40, United States Code, to establish an 
expiration date of certain committee resolutions with respect to leases 
or projects, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 6316

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

     SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AUTHORIZATIONS.

       Section 3307 of title 40, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(i) Expiration of Committee Resolutions.--
       ``(1) In general.--Unless a lease is awarded or a 
     construction, alteration, repair, design, or acquisition 
     project is initiated not later than 5 years after the 
     resolution approvals adopted by the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives or the Committee on Environment and Public 
     Works of the Senate pursuant to subsection (a), such 
     resolutions shall be deemed expired.
       ``(2) Application.--This subsection shall only apply to 
     resolutions approved after the date of enactment of this 
     subsection.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry) and the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Titus) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.


                             General Leave

  Mr. PERRY. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material in the Record on H.R. 6316.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. PERRY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, H.R. 6316 sets an expiration date for committee 
resolutions for the General Services Administration's capital leasing 
and improvements program.
  If the GSA fails to proceed with a project that has been approved by 
both the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the 
Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works within 5 years, the 
bill would require that the authorization expires and the GSA would 
then return to the committees for a new approval.
  I thank my good friend, Ranking Member Titus of the Subcommittee on 
Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management, for 
her leadership and work on H.R. 6316 and for working with me and the 
whole committee on this piece of legislation, which I am proud to 
cosponsor.
  Madam Speaker, I urge support of this legislation, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Ms. TITUS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  As you heard, H.R. 6316 sets a 5-year expiration on resolutions 
approving GSA construction, alteration, repair, design, or acquisition 
projects. This means that if within 5 years of the passage of the 
resolution GSA has not executed the project, then the authorization is 
deemed expired.
  This has been a concern to Members on both sides of the aisle for 
years. Similar provisions were included in former T&I Chairman 
Shuster's Public Buildings Reform and Savings Act of 2016 and former 
Chairman Barletta's

[[Page H1069]]

REAL Reform Act of 2018. Unfortunately, neither of these bills was 
signed into law.
  I hear from the many Federal agencies that I work with that it can be 
difficult to obtain information from GSA on the status of projects 
authorized by Congress, especially the construction of new courthouses. 
Once we authorize an activity, whether it is a leasing activity or 
construction of a new building, we currently have little access to how, 
when, and if the project has been executed.
  This lack of information became apparent after GSA submitted a 
prospectus to build a new courthouse in Los Angeles, California, in 
2000 as part of its FY 2001 capital investment program. Even though 
there were already two courthouses in Los Angeles, the Judicial 
Conference insisted that the L.A. courthouse complex was so short of 
space for judges that it was the number one space emergency in the 
country.
  GSA submitted a prospectus to build a new courthouse totaling 712,102 
gross square feet at a cost of $266 million, and the committee approved 
it. The design of the building, however, exceeded the congressionally 
authorized size by 13 courtrooms, 260,000 square feet, and $100 
million, and the scope of the project changed so often that GSA 
eventually just canceled the project in 2006, despite saying it had 
been an emergency.
  Then, in 2011, the courts and GSA announced that they would move 
forward with a downsized project that would not exceed the size and 
cost originally authorized by Congress more than 10 years earlier, 
without providing any notification to Congress.
  Some members of the T&I Committee were so concerned about GSA's 
actions and lack of transparency on the Los Angeles courthouse project 
that they requested a GAO study of the courthouse construction program 
and held a series of hearings about GSA's construction of Federal 
courthouses.
  Although Chairmen Shuster and Barletta are no longer with us here in 
Congress, their concerns, as well as the longtime concerns of my 
colleague, Congresswoman Norton, are still relevant, and this 
legislation is more necessary than ever.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this 
legislation so we can ensure GSA is being a good steward of taxpayer 
dollars. I thank Chairman Perry for his help in getting this to the 
floor, and I urge Members to vote in favor of it.
  Madam Speaker, I think this is a bill that is worth bragging about. 
It is not very sexy and probably won't get a lot of press, but it is 
one of those things that can really make a difference. It will 
encourage GSA to move forward with needed projects. It will shorten the 
amount of time it takes to get these projects on the ground. No doubt, 
it will also save taxpayer dollars.
  Madam Speaker, I urge support, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. PERRY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I agree with the gentlewoman from Nevada that maybe it is not going 
to get a lot of press, but I think we both agree that it is simply good 
governing. Project proposals can grow stale, and if GSA fails to 
proceed on the authorization within 5 years, the agency should be 
required to resubmit the proposal. A lot of things can change in 5 
years, and we have seen that.
  H.R. 6316 would increase GSA's accountability to Congress and, more 
importantly, to the American people, ultimately aiding in our ability 
to conduct appropriate oversight of these leases and these projects.
  Madam Speaker, I urge support of the bill, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 6316.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________