[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 15]
[House]
[Page 21894]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



               MOTOR CARRIER FUEL COST EQUITY ACT OF 2000

  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 4441) to amend title 49, United States Code, to provide a 
mandatory fuel surcharge for transportation provided by certain motor 
carriers, and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 4441

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Motor Carrier Fuel Cost 
     Equity Act of 2000''.

     SEC. 2. MANDATORY FUEL SURCHARGE.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 137 of title 49, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 13714. Fuel surcharge

       ``(a) Mandatory Fuel Surcharge.--
       ``(1) Assessment of surcharge.--Any motor carrier, broker, 
     or freight forwarder subject to jurisdiction under chapter 
     135 regularly providing truck-load transportation service 
     shall assess under each contract or agreement for such 
     service the payor of transportation charges a surcharge under 
     this section, or a surcharge or other fuel cost adjustment 
     permitted under section 13715, for fuel used in the 
     transportation provided to such payor commencing when an 
     increase in the price of such fuel surpasses the benchmark in 
     paragraph (2). A surcharge assessed under this section by the 
     motor carrier, broker, or freight forwarder shall be 
     calculated on the basis of mileage or percentage of revenue 
     (whichever basis the motor carrier, broker, or freight 
     forwarder elects) and shall be the amount necessary to 
     compensate the motor carrier, broker, or freight forwarder or 
     other person responsible for paying for fuel for the 
     difference in the price of fuel between the Current Fuel 
     Price and the Fuel Price Norm determined under paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Benchmark.--
       ``(A) In general.--The benchmark referred to in paragraph 
     (1) is the difference between the Current Fuel Price and the 
     Fuel Price Norm, when such difference exceeds $0.05.
       ``(B) Current fuel price.--The Current Fuel Price referred 
     to in paragraph (1) and subparagraph (A) shall be determined 
     from the latest weekly Energy Information Administration's 
     Average Retail On-Highway Diesel Prices, National U.S. 
     Average, as published by the Department of Energy.
       ``(C) Fuel price norm.--The Fuel Price Norm referred to in 
     paragraph (1) and subparagraph (A) shall be determined by 
     calculating the latest 52-week average of the Average Retail 
     On-Highway Diesel Prices referred to in subparagraph (B).
       ``(b) Implementation.--The surcharge referred to in 
     subsection (a)(1) shall be--
       ``(1) calculated on the date the shipment is tendered to 
     the motor carrier, broker, or freight forwarder;
       ``(2) itemized separately on the motor carrier, broker, or 
     freight forwarder's invoices; and
       ``(3) paid by the payor of the related transportation 
     charges.
       ``(c) Factors.--For purposes of calculating a surcharge 
     under this section--
       ``(1) average fuel economy is 5 miles per gallon for 
     calendar year 2000 and shall be determined on January 1 of 
     such year thereafter by the Secretary of Transportation; and
       ``(2) mileage means the number of paid miles driven as 
     determined under the Department of Defense, Military Traffic 
     Management Command's `Defense Table of Official Distances'.
       ``(d) Limitation on Authority.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of this part, any action to enforce this section 
     under section 14704 may only be brought by the motor carrier, 
     broker, or freight forwarder that provided the transportation 
     services against the payor of the transportation charges or 
     by the payor of the transportation charges against the motor 
     carrier, broker, of freight forwarder that provided the 
     transportation services. In such action, a court shall only 
     have the authority to determine whether a fuel surcharge 
     assessed under this section has been assessed or paid. A 
     court shall not have the authority in such action to review 
     any other charges imposed by the provider of the 
     transportation services. Neither the Secretary of 
     Transportation nor the Surface Transportation Board shall 
     have regulatory or enforcement authority relating to 
     provisions of this section.
       ``(e) Effective Period.--Subsections (a) through (d) and 
     section 13715 shall be in effect beginning the 60th day 
     following the date of enactment of this section and ending 
     September 30, 2003.

     ``Sec. 13715. Negotiated fuel adjustments

       ``(a) In General.--Nothing in section 13714 shall be 
     construed to abrogate provisions relating to fuel cost 
     adjustments in any transportation contract or agreement in 
     effect on the date of enactment of the Motor Carrier Fuel 
     Cost Equity Act of 2000 and any renewal of such a contract or 
     agreement thereafter. Nothing in this section and sections 
     13714 and 14102 shall be construed to prohibit any motor 
     carrier, broker, or freight forwarder from including any 
     reasonable privately negotiated fuel cost adjustment 
     provision in any contract or agreement to provide 
     transportation.
       ``(b) Continuation of Authority.--Nothing in section 13714 
     shall impair the ability of any person to enter into any 
     contract or agreement after the date of enactment of the 
     Motor Carrier Fuel Cost Equity Act of 2000 that provides for 
     a fuel adjustment under this section or section 13714 during 
     any period in which no fuel surcharge is required under 
     section 13714.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 137 of 
     such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

``13714. Fuel surcharge.
``13715. Negotiated fuel adjustments.''.

     SEC. 3. CONFORMING AMENDMENT.

       Section 14102 of title 49, United States Code, is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Mandatory Pass-Through to Cost Bearer.--
       ``(1) In general.--A motor carrier, broker, or freight 
     forwarder providing transportation or service using motor 
     vehicles not owned by it and using fuel not paid for by it--
       ``(A) shall pass through to the person responsible for 
     paying for fuel any fuel surcharge required pursuant to 
     section 13714, or fuel cost adjustment permitted under 
     section 13715, or provided for in transportation contracts or 
     agreements;
       ``(B) shall disclose in writing to the person responsible 
     for paying for fuel the amount of all freight rates and 
     charges and fuel surcharges under section 13714 and fuel cost 
     adjustments permitted under section 13715 applicable to such 
     transportation or service; and
       ``(C) is prohibited from--
       ``(i) intentionally reducing compensatory transportation 
     costs (other than the fuel surcharge) to the person 
     responsible for paying for fuel for the purpose of adjusting 
     for or avoiding the pass through of the fuel surcharge; and
       ``(ii) intentionally imposing a fuel cost adjustment in 
     accordance with section 13715 for the purpose of avoiding any 
     payment under this section or section 13714.
       ``(2) Limitation on authority.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of this part, the person responsible for paying for 
     fuel may only bring an action to enforce this section under 
     section 14704 against the motor carrier, freight forwarder, 
     or broker providing the transportation services with vehicles 
     not owned by it. Neither the Secretary of Transportation nor 
     the Surface Transportation Board shall have regulatory or 
     enforcement authority relating to provisions of this 
     subsection.
       ``(3) Effective period.--Paragraphs (1) and (2) shall be in 
     effect beginning the 60th day following the date of enactment 
     of this section and ending September 30, 2003.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. 
Rahall) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Today, the House is considering H.R. 4441, the Motor Carrier Fuel 
Cost Equity Act of 2000. Earlier this year, the Subcommittee on Ground 
Transportation held a hearing to examine the price spikes in gasoline 
and diesel markets. At this meeting, a number of options were discussed 
to bring relief to those hardest hit by those spikes, such as enabling 
truckers to negotiate rates that reflect their increased fuel costs. 
Three months later, the subcommittee convened a panel of truck drivers, 
shippers and representatives from motor carriers and other 
transportation intermediaries to hear testimony on the gentleman from 
West Virginia's (Mr. Rahall) bill, H.R. 4441, to require a mandatory 
fuel surcharge.
  The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure then worked for 
several months to address the concerns raised and to craft a bill we 
could all support. The bill we are considering today includes numerous 
changes to the original bill.
  In July, the Subcommittee on Ground Transportation approved a 
substitute amendment by voice vote and later that day the full 
committee approved the subcommittee's amendment unanimously, which is 
generally the way our committee works. H.R. 4441 helps trucking 
companies and particularly independent operators weather the diesel 
fuel price spikes in the same way that the large trucking companies 
have been able to do for years. By including a fuel surcharge as part 
of the total transportation bill, these small business truckers, these 
independent truckers, will not see their already slim margins disappear 
when the price of diesel fuel rises sharply and suddenly.
  This bill, as amended in committee, has my support. I urge its 
passage here today.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I would first like to express my deep appreciation to 
the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) for bringing this piece 
of legislation to the floor. I commend the statesmanlike manner in 
which he has just conducted himself in the statement he made prior to 
consideration of this bill. I have known that to be true through our 
many years of work together on the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure. We have worked in a very gentlemanly manner and in a 
bipartisan manner, I might add, as well. I commend the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the ranking member, for his support of this 
legislation and his help as well.
  It is supported, as the chairman has said, by a bipartisan group of 
Members, including the assistant whip on the majority side the 
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt). This bill seeks to address a real 
and pressing crisis facing an important segment of our trucking 
industry. That problem is twofold: First, owner-operators are being hit 
hard by high diesel fuel prices and simply do not have the market clout 
to negotiate the same sort of arrangement that the larger companies can 
to offset those costs. Unable to cope with high diesel prices, many 
owner-operators are simply unable to continue in business. In fact, 
fuel prices were the primary factor in the 1,365 trucking company 
bankruptcies which occurred during the first 6 months of this year. 
Second, coupled with a national driver shortage, just-in-time 
deliveries are being threatened, fewer transportation alternatives for 
shippers are available, and consumers could face a rise in the price of 
various goods and commodities.
  As such, the pending legislation provides owner-operators, shippers 
and consumers with a safety net by ensuring that any fuel surcharges 
assessed are ultimately passed on to the entity which actually 
purchases the fuel. And just what is a fuel surcharge? It is a long 
established practice in the industry under which a shipper pays to the 
trucking companies the difference between what is deemed to be a 
baseline cost of diesel fuel and any sudden and dramatic increases in 
the cost of that fuel, such as what we are experiencing today. 
Independent owner-operators, however, are not in the position to 
negotiate fuel surcharges or, where they exist, be paid the fuel 
surcharge. And when you consider that two-thirds of the trucking 
operations in the country today operate six or fewer trucks, we are 
talking about a sizable segment of the industry.
  The pending legislation, as originally introduced, would have imposed 
a mandatory fuel surcharge program. It has been modified to fully take 
into account privately negotiated fuel surcharge programs. No existing 
fuel surcharge arrangement would be abrogated and any future privately 
negotiated programs of this nature would not be precluded.
  Let me repeat. Any current and future privately negotiated fuel 
surcharge agreements are fully respected by the pending legislation. 
And I repeat that a third time. Past, current or future privately 
negotiated fuel surcharge agreements are fully respected.
  The essential feature of this bill is that it provides a private 
right of action as a means to ensure that the entity which actually 
pays for the fuel receives the surcharge. No Federal Government 
enforcement. No cost to the taxpayers. Just simply equity and fairness.
  Mr. Speaker, America watched the economies of Britain and France 
thrown into chaos on the issue of diesel fuel prices. I have already 
noted the large number of industry bankruptcies taking place in this 
country.

                              {time}  1745

  Coupled with a shortage of up to 80,000 truck drivers, we have a 
formula for disaster in the making.
  I might add that high fuel prices have also had a devastating effect 
on the Nation's port drivers as well. Their poor working condition has 
come to the attention of the Teamsters Union, which is exploring ways 
to organize these truck drivers and is working to bring public 
attention to their plight.
  In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I say let us strike a blow for the little 
guy, the small businessman, and for the integrity of our economy by 
passing the pending legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Petri), the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee 
on Ground Transportation.
  Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Shuster) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on H.R. 4441, the bill before us today. 
Before I do, I just think I would like to take a minute to point out 
that this may be the last piece of legislation that comes out of the 
subcommittee that I have had the privilege of chairing for the last 6 
years. Under the rules that have been set in the House since 1994, we 
have term limits for chairmen and subcommittee chairmen, so I will not 
be chairing that subcommittee in the next Congress, should I be 
fortunate enough to be reelected.
  During those 6 years I have had the opportunity to work with a 
remarkable ranking Democrat on that subcommittee, and that is my 
colleague from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall). Our committee has been, I 
think, the most productive committee, as a whole, in the Congress of 
the United States over this period of time, and that is something that 
no one person could bring about. Only a group of people working 
cooperatively together were able to accomplish that.
  That means that that is a bipartisan accomplishment, and I think that 
while we clearly do not agree on everything that this committee has to 
deal with or this Congress has to deal with, we all agree, regardless 
of party on our Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, on the 
importance of transportation infrastructure and transportation 
investment and a need to keep up on the public side of the ledger with 
investment and needed infrastructure to keep our economy strong and 
growing; and we have worked together, industry, labor, the safety 
community, the environmental community, in this effort.
  The door has always been open of our chairman, of the gentleman from 
West Virginia (Mr. Rahall), and I hope I can say that of myself, to 
listen to different people with ideas on legislation and to do what we 
could to bring them together to a common productive result.
  This legislation before us today is just one example of that spirit. 
Its prime author is a member of the minority party; but it is before us 
today, and I think it is going to receive bipartisan support. It came 
out of a hearing that our committee had, or perhaps a series of 
hearings on the fuel crisis; meeting with industry groups and the 
Teamsters Union and others to explore different ideas about what we 
could do as a Congress to react to this crisis to help the little guy, 
to help the person who does not have the power in the marketplace to 
impose pass-through clauses and provisions as some of the larger 
truckers do, so that they are not overwhelmed by swings in energy 
prices, but do have an opportunity to adjust and to continue in 
business; and that is the basic purpose of the act before us.
  This reflects, I think, the sensitivity and the concern that my 
colleague, the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall), and that we 
all have to try to do something constructive in this area. I think that 
this crisis continues. I am sure, regardless of what happens in the 
upcoming election, our committee will be eager and responsive to deal 
with the problems that people in the transportation sector have.
  The bill before us, H.R. 4441, as has been mentioned, seeks to ease 
the effect of sudden and dramatic increases in the cost of fuel on the 
trucking industry by ensuring that these added costs can be recovered. 
Under the provisions of the bill, the spike in the price of diesel fuel 
will trigger a mandatory surcharge to be assessed to the party paying 
for the transportation costs of the motor carrier transporting the 
goods. This automatic surcharge is imposed when there is a 5 cent 
disparity between the latest week's national average and the previous 
year's national average for diesel fuel. In this way, those businesses 
hit hardest by surges in the fuel market will be able to recoup 
additional costs by passing them along to the shipper as part of the 
total bill.
  This past July, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
approved a substitute amendment that represents a bipartisan effort to 
perfect the original text of the bill. This substitute permits 
companies to include privately negotiated fuel adjustments; and, 
second, it clarifies the provision and provides the right to sue to 
collect the surcharge; and, third, it includes a sunset provision that 
terminates the mandatory surcharge at the end of budget year 2003. At 
that point, Congress will be able to review the effectiveness of the 
bill before us.
  Mr. Speaker, our committee is the largest committee in the Congress; 
our subcommittee is the largest subcommittee in the Congress. The 
potential for chaos, or at least disorder and delay, was perhaps great; 
but in fact the cooperation and the achievement instead have been 
great. We hear a lot about the decline of civility and an increase of 
partisan bickering in this Congress; and I think the fact of the matter 
is, those who go about their business quietly achieving results 
sometimes are lost among the din but are, in truth, a growing number. 
This committee has prospered in this Congress. Members have sought to 
be on the committee. The fact that people seek to be on this committee 
shows that most Members of this House, when given the chance, want to 
be a part of a productive team.
  So I just want to say that as we conclude the second session of this 
Congress with the passage of this important legislation, H.R. 4441, I 
appreciate the spirit that has enabled us to reach this point; and I 
commend it to some other committees in this Congress.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  Mr. Speaker, I certainly want to commend the gentleman from Wisconsin 
(Mr. Petri) for his excellent statement and say to him as well that it 
has been my pleasure to serve with him for the last 6 years under his 
chairmanship of the Subcommittee on Ground Transportation. It has truly 
been an enjoyable experience, not necessarily the position where my 
chair is; but certainly serving next to the gentleman from Wisconsin 
(Mr. Petri) has been a delight. He has always held comprehensive and 
very timely hearings on not only this issue but other issues. He has 
spoken of the bipartisanship of our committee and the camaraderie, and 
I certainly salute him and wish him Godspeed.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the distinguished ranking 
member of our committee.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from West Virginia 
(Mr. Rahall) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I, first of all, want to congratulate our full committee 
chairman, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), on his superb 
leadership over these 6 years. This may not be the last bill we bring 
to the floor of the House. We certainly have plenty of time for another 
bill on pipeline safety. We could do that yet. But over the years of 
his chairmanship, he has done a superb job reconciling differences; 
bringing people together; building America; investing in the Nation's 
future; strengthening the Nation's infrastructure. It has been an 
extraordinary record of achievement, not only in our field of 
transportation and related issues but also I think, as the gentleman 
from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) alluded to, in a time when politics is rife 
and rancor is rampant both inside and outside this body, the Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure has proceeded in a cooperative, 
bipartisan spirit of understanding and keeping our eye on the objective 
and doing something good for America.
  In addition, in the last Congress this committee handled more than 24 
percent of all the bills enacted into law. So far in this Congress, at 
least in this session of the Congress, nearly a third of all the bills 
that moved through the House moved through this committee and about 25 
percent of all of those were enacted into law. That is an extraordinary 
record. One does not get those just by being good scouts. It is done by 
working together, resolving differences, coming to the floor with a 
unified product that can win the respect and the majority vote in the 
House.
  This bill before us today, the Motor Carrier Fuel Cost Equity Act of 
2000, is an example. I commend the chairman of the subcommittee, the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri), the gentleman from West Virginia 
(Mr. Rahall), the ranking member of the subcommittee, who initiated the 
legislation and whose sensitivity to the problems of this segment of 
the trucking industry has made it possible for us to be here today. He 
listened. He understood the problems. He told the small motor carriers 
who have less influence in transportation markets than the larger motor 
carriers that he would initiate legislation on their behalf; would take 
the action; would first get a hearing and then see if we could draft 
legislation, which he did. Now we are here on this floor today, and I 
hope this bill moves not only through our body but the other body and 
on to the President for signature into law.
  Fuel costs represent a larger proportion of small carriers' operating 
budgets. Assuming that freight rates are based on true costs, it is 
obvious small carriers have greater difficulty passing along price 
increases that represent a larger portion of their operating costs than 
do the large carriers.
  Data provided in 1998 by carriers with $3 million or more in annual 
revenue show that fuel costs represent only 5 to 6 percent of large 
carrier operating budgets. Those percentages may be one or two points 
higher today due to recent price increases. Owner-operators typically 
do not report cost information to the Department of Transportation. We 
understand, however, from our discussions with the industry that fuel 
costs really represent about 30 percent of an owner-operator's 
operating budget. Obviously, those conditions put the smaller carriers 
at a disadvantage in a fuel price inflationary era such as we are now 
experiencing. Seventy percent of owner-operators have lease 
arrangements with larger carriers, and they ought to be treated fairly 
by the carriers they lease to. This bill requires that the fuel 
surcharge paid by shippers be passed on through to whoever is paying 
for fuel under the lease arrangement. Most often, that is the 
independent owner-operator.
  So the gentleman from West Virginia deserves high praise for 
recognizing the very real and personal hardships faced by independent 
truckers and their families, brought on by these higher fuel prices. 
The gentleman has been out in the highways and the byways and listened 
to those who drive the trucks, listened to those who face the financial 
cost price squeeze and recognize that independent truckers should be 
treated fairly when the Nation goes through the kind of fuel price 
spikes that we have been experiencing these last several months.

                              {time}  1800

  This bill goes a long way toward providing the kind of relief that 
those hard-pressed, hard-working men and women need in these difficult 
times. I urge the passage of this legislation.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt).
  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding time to me, 
and thank him and the ranking member for their support of this 
legislation. I certainly am appreciative that the gentleman from West 
Virginia (Mr. Rahall) saw this problem and drafted legislation, and I 
was glad to join him as one of the early cosponsors of this bill, H.R. 
4441.
  This Motor Carrier Fuel Cost Equity Act is a bill that is really 
designed to bring temporary emergency relief to an industry that, maybe 
more than any other industry in the country, has been caught in a 
devastating situation by these rapid increases in fuel prices.
  This is an industry where the cost of fuel is everything, and it is 
an industry where so many trucks are operated by the people who own 
those trucks. Their entire livelihood is dependent on what happens in 
that truck that month. Their entire livelihood is dependent on what the 
repair costs of the trucks are, what the fuel costs, what the tire 
costs are.
  Many of these owner-operators, I see them in my district, are 
husband-and-wife driving teams, sometimes with a child that is not 
ready for school yet riding right along with them and seeing the 
country.
  But their plans were made, their bids were offered, their 
arrangements were entered into anticipating a much lower cost in the 
price of fuel, so we have seen this huge increase in fuel in the last 
several months. Over 70 percent of motor carriers have six or fewer 
trucks. These are men and women who haul almost all of our produce, 
livestock, consumer goods, building materials, raw materials. They are 
the indispensable engine that drives this economy. They fill in the 
gaps where people need a load taken here or taken there, where people 
have not really adequately planned to have everything they needed done 
done, but there is an independent owner-operator there ready to do that 
job.
  As they have seen these fuel prices go up 70 percent, reaching record 
high prices in just the last month, thousands of truckers have gone out 
of business. Fuel prices are only predicted to go even higher in the 
next few months, putting in peril the future of thousands of small 
businessmen and businesswomen.
  Safety is an issue as they are more and more stressed to pay the 
bills with the bids that they have out there. They have many problems. 
This bill helps small businesses at no cost to taxpayers. There is no 
Federal enforcement. It helps truckers cope with the high cost of 
diesel by ensuring that any fuel charge assessed is paid to the person 
who actually purchased the fuel.
  We need to end this series of bankruptcies among small truckers. We 
need to be sure that we keep competition in this marketplace. 
Competition is ultimately what keeps prices down and makes our economy 
work. I am wholeheartedly in support of this bill.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member rises today to express his 
opposition to H.R. 4441, the Motor Carrier Fuel Cost Equity Act. This 
legislation would require any motor carrier, broker or freight 
forwarder regularly providing truckload transportation service, to 
assess the payer of transportation a fuel surcharge whenever an 
increase in the price of fuel surpasses the benchmark difference 
between the current fuel price and the fuel price norm by five cents.
  Most assuredly, this Member is very concerned about truckers, 
especially small and independent trucking firms, regarding the burden 
of high costs of fuel. However, H.R. 4441 is very ill-considered 
legislation because it decreases the pressure on the petroleum industry 
to keep prices down by placing the burden of higher prices on consumers 
across America. This tactic is clearly a mistake. Federal regulations 
requiring companies to forward increased prices to consumers will not 
decrease fuel prices. This Member is committed to helping the small and 
independent truckers who are hurting from higher gasoline prices by 
working to decrease the price of fuel.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Dickey). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 4441, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________