[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 3]
[House]
[Pages 4144-4154]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




              SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EXTENSION ACT OF 2012

  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill 
(H.R. 4239) 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, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 4239

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

[[Page 4145]]



     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; RECONCILIATION OF FUNDS; TABLE OF 
                   CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Surface 
     Transportation Extension Act of 2012''.
       (b) Reconciliation of Funds.--The Secretary of 
     Transportation shall reduce the amount apportioned or 
     allocated for a program, project, or activity under this Act 
     in fiscal year 2012 by amounts apportioned or allocated 
     pursuant to the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2011, 
     Part II (title I of Public Law 112-30) for the period 
     beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on March 31, 2012.
       (c) Table of Contents.--

Sec. 1. Short title; reconciliation of funds; table of contents.

                     TITLE I--FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

Sec. 101. Extension of Federal-aid highway programs.

             TITLE II--EXTENSION OF HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAMS

Sec. 201. Extension of National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 
              highway safety programs.
Sec. 202. Extension of Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 
              programs.
Sec. 203. Additional programs.

               TITLE III--PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS

Sec. 301. Allocation of funds for planning programs.
Sec. 302. Special rule for urbanized area formula grants.
Sec. 303. Allocating amounts for capital investment grants.
Sec. 304. Apportionment of formula grants for other than urbanized 
              areas.
Sec. 305. Apportionment based on fixed guideway factors.
Sec. 306. Authorizations for public transportation.
Sec. 307. Amendments to SAFETEA LU.

                 TITLE IV--HIGHWAY TRUST FUND EXTENSION

Sec. 401. Extension of trust fund expenditure authority.
Sec. 402. Extension of highway-related taxes.

                     TITLE I--FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

     SEC. 101. EXTENSION OF FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAY PROGRAMS.

       (a) In General.--Section 111 of the Surface Transportation 
     Extension Act of 2011, Part II (Public Law 112-30; 125 Stat. 
     343) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``the period beginning on October 1, 2011, 
     and ending on March 31, 2012,'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (2) by striking ``\1/2\'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``\2/3\'' ; and
       (3) in subsection (a) by striking ``March 31, 2012'' and 
     inserting ``June 1, 2012''.
       (b) Use of Funds.--Section 111(c)(3)(B)(ii) of the Surface 
     Transportation Extension Act of 2011, Part II (125 Stat. 343) 
     is amended by striking ``$319,500,000'' and inserting 
     ``$426,000,000''.
       (c) Extension of Authorizations Under Title V of SAFETEA-
     LU.--Section 111(e)(2) of the Surface Transportation 
     Extension Act of 2011, Part II (125 Stat. 343) is amended by 
     striking ``the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012.'' and inserting ``the period 
     beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 2012.''.
       (d) Administrative Expenses.--Section 112(a) of the Surface 
     Transportation Extension Act of 2011, Part II (125 Stat. 346) 
     is amended by striking ``$196,427,625 for the period 
     beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on March 31, 2012.'' 
     and inserting ``$261,903,500 for the period beginning on 
     October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 2012.''.

             TITLE II--EXTENSION OF HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAMS

     SEC. 201. EXTENSION OF NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY 
                   ADMINISTRATION HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAMS.

       (a) Chapter 4 Highway Safety Programs.--Section 2001(a)(1) 
     of SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1519) is amended by striking 
     ``$235,000,000 for fiscal year 2009'' and all that follows 
     through the period at the end and inserting ``$235,000,000 
     for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2011, and $156,666,667 
     for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on 
     June 1, 2012.''.
       (b) Highway Safety Research and Development.--Section 
     2001(a)(2) of SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1519) is amended by 
     striking ``and $54,122,000 for the period beginning on 
     October 1, 2011, and ending on March 31, 2012.'' and 
     inserting ``and $72,162,667 for the period beginning on 
     October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 2012.''.
       (c) Occupant Protection Incentive Grants.--Section 
     2001(a)(3) of SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1519) is amended by 
     striking ``$25,000,000 for fiscal year 2006'' and all that 
     follows through the period at the end and inserting 
     ``$25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2011, and 
     $16,666,667 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on June 1, 2012.''.
       (d) Safety Belt Performance Grants.--Section 2001(a)(4) of 
     SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1519) is amended by striking ``and 
     $24,250,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012.'' and inserting ``and $32,333,334 
     for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on 
     June 1, 2012.''.
       (e) State Traffic Safety Information System Improvements.--
     Section 2001(a)(5) of SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1519) is amended 
     by striking ``for fiscal year 2006'' and all that follows 
     through the period at the end and inserting ``for each of 
     fiscal years 2006 through 2011 and $23,000,000 for the period 
     beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 2012.''.
       (f) Alcohol-Impaired Driving Countermeasures Incentive 
     Grant Program.--Section 2001(a)(6) of SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 
     1519) is amended by striking ``$139,000,000 for fiscal year 
     2009'' and all that follows through the period at the end and 
     inserting ``$139,000,000 for each of fiscal years fiscal 
     years 2009 through 2011, and $92,666,667 for the period 
     beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 2012.''.
       (g) National Driver Register.--Section 2001(a)(7) of 
     SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1520) is amended by striking ``and 
     $2,058,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012.'' and inserting ``and $2,744,000 
     for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on 
     June 1, 2012.''.
       (h) High Visibility Enforcement Program.--Section 
     2001(a)(8) of SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1520) is amended by 
     striking ``for fiscal year 2006'' and all that follows 
     through the period at the end and inserting ``for each of 
     fiscal years 2006 through 2011 and $19,333,334 for the period 
     beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 2012.''.
       (i) Motorcyclist Safety.--Section 2001(a)(9) of SAFETEA-LU 
     (119 Stat. 1520) is amended by striking ``$7,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2009'' and all that follows through the period at 
     the end and inserting ``$7,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
     2009 through 2011, and $4,666,667 for the period beginning on 
     October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 2012.''.
       (j) Child Safety and Child Booster Seat Safety Incentive 
     Grants.--Section 2001(a)(10) of SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1520) 
     is amended by striking ``$7,000,000 for fiscal year 2009'' 
     and all that follows through the period at the end and 
     inserting ``$7,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 
     2011, and $4,666,667 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012.''.
       (k) Administrative Expenses.--Section 2001(a)(11) of 
     SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1520) is amended by striking ``and 
     $12,664,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012.'' and inserting ``and $16,885,334 
     for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on 
     June 1, 2012.''.

     SEC. 202. EXTENSION OF FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY 
                   ADMINISTRATION PROGRAMS.

       (a) Motor Carrier Safety Grants.--Section 31104(a)(8) of 
     title 49, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(8) $141,333,333 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012.''.
       (b) Administrative Expenses.--Section 31104(i)(1)(H) of 
     title 49, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(H) $162,762,667 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012.''.
       (c) Grant Programs.--Section 4101(c) of SAFETEA-LU (119 
     Stat. 1715) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1) by striking ``2011 and $15,000,000 for 
     the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on March 
     31, 2012.'' and inserting ``2011 and $20,000,000 for the 
     period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 
     2012.'';
       (2) in paragraph (2) by striking ``2011 and $16,000,000 for 
     the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on March 
     31, 2012.'' and inserting ``2011 and $21,333,333 for the 
     period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 
     2012.'';
       (3) in paragraph (3) by striking ``2011 and $2,500,000 for 
     the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on March 
     31, 2012.'' and inserting ``2011 and $3,333,333 for the 
     period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 
     2012.'';
       (4) in paragraph (4) by striking ``2011 and $12,500,000 for 
     the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on March 
     31, 2012.'' and inserting ``2011 and $16,666,667 for the 
     period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 
     2012.''; and
       (5) in paragraph (5) by striking ``2011 and $1,500,000 for 
     the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on March 
     31, 2012.'' and inserting ``2011 and $2,000,000 for the 
     period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 
     2012.''.
       (d) High-Priority Activities.--Section 31104(k)(2) of title 
     49, United States Code, is amended by striking ``2011 and 
     $7,500,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``2011 and 
     $10,000,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on June 1, 2012,''.
       (e) New Entrant Audits.--Section 31144(g)(5)(B) of title 
     49, United States Code, is amended by striking ``and up to 
     $14,500,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``and up to 
     $19,333,333 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on June 1, 2012,''.
       (f) Outreach and Education.--Section 4127(e) of SAFETEA-LU 
     (119 Stat. 1741) is amended by striking ``2011 (and $500,000 
     to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, and 
     $1,500,000 to the National Highway Traffic Safety 
     Administration, for the

[[Page 4146]]

     period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on March 31, 
     2012)'' and inserting ``2011 (and $666,667 to the Federal 
     Motor Carrier Safety Administration, and $2,000,000 to the 
     National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, for the 
     period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 
     2012)''.
       (g) Grant Program for Commercial Motor Vehicle Operators.--
     Section 4134(c) of SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1744) is amended by 
     striking ``2011 and $500,000 for the period beginning on 
     October 1, 2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and 
     inserting ``2011 and $666,667 for the period beginning on 
     October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,''.
       (h) Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee.--Section 
     4144(d) of SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1748) is amended by striking 
     ``March 31, 2012'' and inserting ``June 1, 2012''.
       (i) Working Group for Development of Practices and 
     Procedures To Enhance Federal-State Relations.--Section 
     4213(d) of SAFETEA-LU (49 U.S.C. 14710 note; 119 Stat. 1759) 
     is amended by striking ``March 31, 2012'' and inserting 
     ``June 1, 2012''.

     SEC. 203. ADDITIONAL PROGRAMS.

       (a) Hazardous Materials Research Projects.--Section 7131(c) 
     of SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1910) is amended by striking ``2011 
     and $580,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``2011 and $773,333 
     for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on 
     June 1, 2012,''.
       (b) Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act.--Section 4 
     of the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 
     777c) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a) by striking ``2011 and for the period 
     beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' 
     and inserting ``2011 and for the period beginning on October 
     1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,''; and
       (2) in the first sentence of subsection (b)(1)(A) by 
     striking ``2011 and for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``2011 
     and for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending 
     on June 1, 2012,''.

               TITLE III--PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS

     SEC. 301. ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR PLANNING PROGRAMS.

       Section 5305(g) of title 49, United States Code, is amended 
     by striking ``2011 and for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on March 31, 2012'' and inserting ``2011 and 
     for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on 
     June 1, 2012''.

     SEC. 302. SPECIAL RULE FOR URBANIZED AREA FORMULA GRANTS.

       Section 5307(b)(2) of title 49, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking the paragraph heading and inserting 
     ``Special rule for fiscal years 2005 through 2011 and the 
     period beginning on october 1, 2011, and ending on june 1, 
     2012.--'';
       (2) in subparagraph (A) by striking ``2011 and the period 
     beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' 
     and inserting ``2011 and the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,''; and
       (3) in subparagraph (E)--
       (A) by striking the subparagraph heading and inserting 
     ``Maximum amounts in fiscal years 2008 through 2011 and the 
     period beginning on october 1, 2011, and ending on june 1, 
     2012.--''; and
       (B) in the matter preceding clause (i) by striking ``2011 
     and during the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012'' and inserting ``2011 and during 
     the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 
     1, 2012''.

     SEC. 303. ALLOCATING AMOUNTS FOR CAPITAL INVESTMENT GRANTS.

       Section 5309(m) of title 49, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) by striking the paragraph heading and inserting 
     ``Fiscal years 2006 through 2011 and the period beginning on 
     october 1, 2011, and ending on june 1, 2012.--'';
       (B) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) by striking 
     ``2011 and the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``2011 and the 
     period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 
     2012,''; and
       (C) in subparagraph (A)(i) by striking ``2011 and 
     $100,000,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``2011 and 
     $133,333,334 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (2) in paragraph (6)--
       (A) in subparagraph (B) by striking ``2011 and $7,500,000 
     shall be available for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``2011 
     and $10,000,000 shall be available for the period beginning 
     on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (C) by striking ``2011 and $2,500,000 
     shall be available for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``2011 
     and $3,333,333 shall be available for the period beginning on 
     October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,''; and
       (3) in paragraph (7)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A)--
       (i) in the matter preceding clause (i) by striking ``2011 
     and $5,000,000 shall be available for the period beginning on 
     October 1, 2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and 
     inserting ``2011 and $6,666,667 shall be available for the 
     period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 
     2012,'';
       (ii) in clause (i) by striking ``for each fiscal year and 
     $1,250,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``for each fiscal 
     year and $1,666,667 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (iii) in clause (ii) by striking ``for each fiscal year and 
     $1,250,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``for each fiscal 
     year and $1,666,667 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (iv) in clause (iii) by striking ``for each fiscal year and 
     $500,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``for each fiscal 
     year and $666,667 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (v) in clause (iv) by striking ``for each fiscal year and 
     $500,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``for each fiscal 
     year and $666,667 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (vi) in clause (v) by striking ``for each fiscal year and 
     $500,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``for each fiscal 
     year and $666,667 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (vii) in clause (vi) by striking ``for each fiscal year and 
     $500,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``for each fiscal 
     year and $666,667 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (viii) in clause (vii) by striking ``for each fiscal year 
     and $325,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``for each fiscal 
     year and $433,333 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,''; and
       (ix) in clause (viii) by striking ``for each fiscal year 
     and $175,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``for each fiscal 
     year and $233,333 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (B) in subparagraph (B) by striking clause (vii) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(vii) $9,000,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012.'';
       (C) in subparagraph (C) by striking ``and during the period 
     beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' 
     and inserting ``and during the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (D) in subparagraph (D) by striking ``and not less than 
     $17,500,000 shall be available for the period beginning on 
     October 1, 2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and 
     inserting ``and not less than $23,333,333 shall be available 
     for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on 
     June 1, 2012,''; and
       (E) in subparagraph (E) by striking ``and $1,500,000 shall 
     be available for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``and $2,000,000 
     shall be available for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,''.

     SEC. 304. APPORTIONMENT OF FORMULA GRANTS FOR OTHER THAN 
                   URBANIZED AREAS.

       Section 5311(c)(1)(G) of title 49, United States Code, is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(G) $10,000,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012.''.

     SEC. 305. APPORTIONMENT BASED ON FIXED GUIDEWAY FACTORS.

       Section 5337(g) of title 49, United States Code, is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(g) Special Rule for October 1, 2011, Through June 1, 
     2012.--The Secretary shall apportion amounts made available 
     for fixed guideway modernization under section 5309 for the 
     period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 
     2012, in accordance with subsection (a), except that the 
     Secretary shall apportion 67 percent of each dollar amount 
     specified in subsection (a).''.

     SEC. 306. AUTHORIZATIONS FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.

       (a) Formula and Bus Grants.--Section 5338(b) of title 49, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1) by striking subparagraph (G) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(G) $5,573,710,028 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012.''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A) by striking ``$113,500,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $113,500,000 for fiscal year 
     2011, and $56,750,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting 
     ``$113,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2011, 
     and $75,666,667 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, 
     and ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (B) in subparagraph (B) by striking ``$4,160,365,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $4,160,365,000 for fiscal 
     year 2011, and $2,080,182,500 for the period beginning on 
     October 1, 2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and 
     inserting ``$4,160,365,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 
     through 2011, and $2,773,576,681 for the period beginning on 
     October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (C) in subparagraph (C) by striking ``$51,500,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $51,500,000 for fiscal year 
     2011, and

[[Page 4147]]

     $25,750,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``$51,500,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2009 through 2011, and $34,333,334 for 
     the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 
     1, 2012,'';
       (D) in subparagraph (D) by striking ``$1,666,500,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $1,666,500,000 for fiscal 
     year 2011, and $833,250,000 for the period beginning on 
     October 1, 2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and 
     inserting ``$1,666,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 
     through 2011, and $1,111,000,006 for the period beginning on 
     October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (E) in subparagraph (E) by striking ``$984,000,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $984,000,000 for fiscal year 
     2011, and $492,000,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting 
     ``$984,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2011, 
     and $656,000,003 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, 
     and ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (F) in subparagraph (F) by striking ``$133,500,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $133,500,000 for fiscal year 
     2011, and $66,750,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting 
     ``$133,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2011, 
     and $89,000,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, 
     and ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (G) in subparagraph (G) by striking ``$465,000,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $465,000,000 for fiscal year 
     2011, and $232,500,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting 
     ``$465,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2011, 
     and $310,000,002 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, 
     and ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (H) in subparagraph (H) by striking ``$164,500,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $164,500,000 for fiscal year 
     2011, and $82,250,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting 
     ``$164,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2011, 
     and $109,666,667 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, 
     and ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (I) in subparagraph (I) by striking ``$92,500,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $92,500,000 for fiscal year 
     2011, and $46,250,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting 
     ``$92,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2011, and 
     $61,666,667 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (J) in subparagraph (J) by striking ``$26,900,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $26,900,000 for fiscal year 
     2011, and $13,450,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting 
     ``$26,900,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2011, and 
     $17,933,333 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (K) in subparagraph (K) by striking ``in fiscal year 2006'' 
     and all that follows through ``March 31, 2012,'' and 
     inserting ``for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2011 and 
     $2,333,333 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (L) in subparagraph (L) by striking ``in fiscal year 2006'' 
     and all that follows through ``March 31, 2012,'' and 
     inserting ``for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2011 and 
     $16,666,667 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on June 1, 2012,'';
       (M) in subparagraph (M) by striking ``$465,000,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $465,000,000 for fiscal year 
     2011, and $232,500,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting 
     ``$465,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2011, 
     and $310,000,002 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, 
     and ending on June 1, 2012,''; and
       (N) in subparagraph (N) by striking ``$8,800,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2009 and 2010, $8,800,000 for fiscal year 
     2011, and $4,400,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting 
     ``$8,800,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2011, and 
     $5,866,667 for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on June 1, 2012,''.
       (b) Capital Investment Grants.--Section 5338(c)(7) of title 
     49, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(7) $1,303,333,340 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012.''.
       (c) Research and University Research Centers.--Section 
     5338(d) of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), in the matter preceding subparagraph 
     (A), by striking ``and 2010, $69,750,000 for fiscal year 
     2011, and $29,500,000 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``through 
     2011, and $29,333,333 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,''; and
       (2) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
       ``(3) Additional authorizations.--
       ``(A) Research.--Of amounts authorized to be appropriated 
     under paragraph (1) for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012, the Secretary shall 
     allocate for each of the activities and projects described in 
     subparagraphs (A) through (F) of paragraph (1) an amount 
     equal to 42 percent of the amount allocated for fiscal year 
     2009 under each such subparagraph.
       ``(B) University centers program.--
       ``(i) October 1, 2011, through june 1, 2012.--Of the 
     amounts allocated under subparagraph (A)(i) for the 
     university centers program under section 5506 for the period 
     beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 2012, the 
     Secretary shall allocate for each program described in 
     clauses (i) through (iii) and (v) through (viii) of paragraph 
     (2)(A) an amount equal to 42 percent of the amount allocated 
     for fiscal year 2009 under each such clause.
       ``(ii) Funding.--If the Secretary determines that a project 
     or activity described in paragraph (2) received sufficient 
     funds in fiscal year 2011, or a previous fiscal year, to 
     carry out the purpose for which the project or activity was 
     authorized, the Secretary may not allocate any amounts under 
     clause (i) for the project or activity for fiscal year 2012 
     or any subsequent fiscal year.''.
       (d) Administration.--Section 5338(e)(7) of title 49, United 
     States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(7) $65,808,667 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012.''.

     SEC. 307. AMENDMENTS TO SAFETEA-LU.

       (a) Contracted Paratransit Pilot.--Section 3009(i)(1) of 
     SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1572) is amended by striking ``2011 and 
     the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on March 
     31, 2012,'' and inserting ``2011 and the period beginning on 
     October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 2012,''.
       (b) Public-Private Partnership Pilot Program.--Section 3011 
     of SAFETEA-LU (49 U.S.C. 5309 note; 119 Stat. 1588) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)(5) by striking ``2011 and the period 
     beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on March 31, 2012'' 
     and inserting ``2011 and the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012''; and
       (2) in the second sentence of subsection (d) by striking 
     ``2011 and the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``2011 and the 
     period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on June 1, 
     2012,''.
       (c) Elderly Individuals and Individuals With Disabilities 
     Pilot Program.--Section 3012(b)(8) of SAFETEA-LU (49 U.S.C. 
     5310 note; 119 Stat. 1593) is amended by striking ``March 31, 
     2012'' and inserting ``June 1, 2012''.
       (d) Obligation Ceiling.--Section 3040(8) of SAFETEA-LU (119 
     Stat. 1639) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(8) $6,972,185,368 for the period beginning on October 1, 
     2011, and ending on June 1, 2012, of which not more than 
     $5,573,710,028 shall be from the Mass Transit Account.''.
       (e) Project Authorizations for New Fixed Guideway Capital 
     Projects.--Section 3043 of SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1640) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), in the matter preceding paragraph 
     (1), by striking ``2011 and the period beginning on October 
     1, 2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``2011 
     and the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on 
     June 1, 2012,''; and
       (2) in subsection (c), in the matter preceding paragraph 
     (1), by striking ``2011 and the period beginning on October 
     1, 2011, and ending on March 31, 2012,'' and inserting ``2011 
     and the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and ending on 
     June 1, 2012,''.
       (f) Allocations for National Research and Technology 
     Programs.--Section 3046(c)(2) of SAFETEA-LU (49 U.S.C. 5338 
     note; 119 Stat. 1706) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(2) for the period beginning on October 1, 2011, and 
     ending on June 1, 2012, in amounts equal to 42 percent of the 
     amounts allocated for fiscal year 2009 under each of 
     paragraphs (2), (3), (5), and (8) through (25) of subsection 
     (a).''.

                 TITLE IV--HIGHWAY TRUST FUND EXTENSION

     SEC. 401. EXTENSION OF TRUST FUND EXPENDITURE AUTHORITY.

       (a) Highway Trust Fund.--Section 9503 of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
       (1) by striking ``April 1, 2012'' in subsections (b)(6)(B), 
     (c)(1), and (e)(3) and inserting ``June 2, 2012''; and
       (2) by striking ``Surface Transportation Extension Act of 
     2011, Part II'' in subsections (c)(1) and (e)(3) and 
     inserting ``Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2012''.
       (b) Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund.--Section 
     9504 of such Code is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Surface Transportation Extension Act of 
     2011, Part II'' each place it appears in subsection (b)(2) 
     and inserting ``Surface Transportation Extension Act of 
     2012''; and
       (2) by striking ``April 1, 2012'' in subsection (d)(2) and 
     inserting ``June 2, 2012''.
       (c) Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund.--Paragraph 
     (2) of section 9508(e) of such Code is amended by striking 
     ``April 1, 2012'' and inserting ``June 2, 2012''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on April 1, 2012.

     SEC. 402. EXTENSION OF HIGHWAY-RELATED TAXES.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Each of the following provisions of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by

[[Page 4148]]

     striking ``March 31, 2012'' and inserting ``June 1, 2012'':
       (A) Section 4041(a)(1)(C)(iii)(I).
       (B) Section 4041(m)(1)(B).
       (C) Section 4081(d)(1).
       (2) Each of the following provisions of such Code is 
     amended by striking ``April 1, 2012'' and inserting ``June 2, 
     2012'':
       (A) Section 4041(m)(1)(A).
       (B) Section 4051(c).
       (C) Section 4071(d).
       (D) Section 4081(d)(3).
       (b) Extension of Tax, etc., on Use of Certain Heavy 
     Vehicles.--Each of the following provisions of such Code is 
     amended by striking ``2012'' and inserting ``2013'':
       (1) Section 4481(f).
       (2) Subsections (c)(4) and (d) of section 4482.
       (c) Floor Stocks Refunds.--Section 6412(a)(1) of such Code 
     is amended--
       (1) by striking ``April 1, 2012'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``June 2, 2012'';
       (2) by striking ``September 30, 2012'' each place it 
     appears and inserting ``December 31, 2012''; and
       (3) by striking ``July 1, 2012'' and inserting ``October 1, 
     2012''.
       (d) Extension of Certain Exemptions.--Sections 4221(a) and 
     4483(i) of such Code are each amended by striking ``April 1, 
     2012'' and inserting ``June 2, 2012''.
       (e) Extension of Transfers of Certain Taxes.--
       (1) In general.--Section 9503 of such Code is amended--
       (A) in subsection (b)--
       (i) by striking ``April 1, 2012'' each place it appears in 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) and inserting ``June 2, 2012'';
       (ii) by striking ``April 1, 2012'' in the heading of 
     paragraph (2) and inserting ``June 2, 2012'';
       (iii) by striking ``March 31, 2012'' in paragraph (2) and 
     inserting ``June 1, 2012''; and
       (iv) by striking ``January 1, 2013'' in paragraph (2) and 
     inserting ``April 1, 2013''; and
       (B) in subsection (c)(2), by striking ``January 1, 2013'' 
     and inserting ``April 1, 2013''.
       (2) Motorboat and small-engine fuel tax transfers.--
       (A) In general.--Paragraphs (3)(A)(i) and (4)(A) of section 
     9503(c) of such Code are each amended by striking ``April 1, 
     2012'' and inserting ``June 2, 2012''.
       (B) Conforming amendments to land and water conservation 
     fund.--Section 201(b) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund 
     Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 460l-11(b)) is amended--
       (i) by striking ``April 1, 2013'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``June 2, 2013''; and
       (ii) by striking ``April 1, 2012'' and inserting ``June 2, 
     2012''.
       (f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on April 1, 2012.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Mica) and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.


                             General Leave

  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous materials on H.R. 4239, as amended.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  My colleagues and Mr. Speaker, this is a 60-day extension that has 
been agreed to by our leadership and negotiated with the other side of 
the aisle. I believe it will ensure the surface transportation programs 
at the Department of Transportation will continue to function, and that 
we can continue programs across the country, ensuring our men and women 
stay in jobs at such a difficult time with our economy, again, needing 
some reliability in transportation programs from this Federal level.
  So with that, I urge a ``yes'' vote on H.R. 4239, as amended, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.

                                         House of Representatives,


                                  Committee on Ways and Means,

                                   Washington, DC, March 26, 2012.
     Hon. John Mica,
     Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
         Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Mica: I am writing concerning H.R. 4239, the 
     ``Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2012,'' which is 
     scheduled for floor consideration this week.
       As you know, the Committee on Ways and Means has 
     jurisdiction over the Internal Revenue Code. Title IV of this 
     bill amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 by extending 
     the current Highway Trust Fund expenditure authority and the 
     associated Federal excise taxes to June 1, 2012. However, in 
     order to expedite this legislation for floor consideration, 
     the Committee will forgo action on this bill. This is being 
     done with the understanding that it does not in any way 
     prejudice the Committee with respect to the appointment of 
     conferees or its jurisdictional prerogatives on this or 
     similar legislation.
       I would appreciate your response to this letter, confirming 
     this understanding with respect to H.R. 4239, and would ask 
     that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be 
     included in the Congressional Record during floor 
     consideration,
           Sincerely,
                                                        Dave Camp.
     Chairman.
                                  ____

         House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and 
           Infrastructure,
                                   Washington, DC, March 26, 2012.
     Hon. Dave Camp,
     Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, Longworth House Office 
         Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
     4239, the ``Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2012.'' 
     The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure recognizes 
     the Committee on Ways and Means has a jurisdictional interest 
     in H.R. 4239, and I appreciate your effort to facilitate 
     consideration of this bill.
       I also concur with you that forgoing action on this bill 
     does not in any way prejudice the Committee on Ways and Means 
     with respect to its jurisdictional prerogatives on this bill 
     or similar legislation in the future, and I would support 
     your effort to seek appointment of an appropriate number of 
     conferees to any House-Senate conference involving this 
     legislation.
       I will include our letters on H.R. 4239 in the 
     Congressional Record during floor consideration of the bill. 
     Again, I appreciate your cooperation regarding this 
     legislation and I look forward to working with the Committee 
     on Ways and Means as the bill moves through the legislative 
     process.
           Sincerely,
                                                     John L. Mica,
                                                         Chairman.

  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4239. This legislation is 
yet another example of the Republican leadership's ``my way or the 
highway'' approach to legislating. There was no consultation with 
anyone on this side of the aisle prior to this particular measure being 
introduced and scheduled for consideration. The extension is unduly 
long, and it ignores the fact that we do have a solution in hand in the 
form of a bipartisan Senate surface transportation bill which passed 
the other body the week before last.
  With more than 2.7 million construction and manufacturing workers out 
of work, enough with the political games. With tens of millions more 
seeking a better life, it is far past the time to stop the 
brinksmanship.
  As we approach the start of construction season, we need to come 
together to pass a highway bill that will improve our infrastructure 
and, most importantly, create jobs. Instead, Republicans in the House 
continue their ``my way or the highway'' approach that is now leading 
to a kick-the-can-down-the-road extension.
  The other body has shown us the way. They passed an overwhelmingly 
bipartisan bill called MAP-21 with a vote of 74-22, with Senators Boxer 
and Inhofe leading the way across the ideological spectrum. The simple 
solution would be to take up that bill and pass it now. The President 
is prepared to sign it into law.
  Yet, instead, we have before us another extension premised on the 
perverse notion that the Republican leadership will, over the next 60 
days, garner enough votes on their side of the aisle to pass H.R. 7, 
the 5-year bill reported by the Transportation and Infrastructure 
Committee. That committee reported H.R. 7 on February 13. The Rules 
Committee approved a rule governing its consideration on the floor on 
February 15. That was almost 6 weeks ago. During that time, the 
Republican leadership has failed to find the votes among its Members to 
pass that bill. They do not have 218 votes, and they know it.
  So the question is: What difference do they hope to achieve over the 
next 8 weeks that they were unable to achieve over the past 6 weeks? 
Not much, in my view, because the right wing of their party is holding 
H.R. 7 hostage to their ideological jihad that the Federal Government 
has no business in supporting a national transportation system.
  On February 22, 1955, President Dwight Eisenhower stated:


[[Page 4149]]

       Our unity as a Nation is sustained by free communication of 
     thought and by easy transportation of people and goods. The 
     ceaseless flow of information throughout the Republic is 
     matched by individual and commercial movement over a vast 
     system of interconnected highways, crisscrossing the country 
     and joining at our national borders with friendly neighbors 
     to the north and south.

                              {time}  1440

  Promoted by a Republican President and passed by a Democratic-
controlled Congress, America sought greatness as it embarked on the 
construction of the Interstate Highway System of 1956; and America 
achieved it, creating a transportation system that was once the envy of 
the world.
  Yet H.R. 7 represents a full-scale retreat from that dynamic vision 
set forth 56 years ago. It mortgages America's future at subprime 
rates. It bankrupts the highway trust fund and endangers the future 
long-term integrity of transportation programs. It destroys American 
jobs at a time when legions of Americans are desperately seeking work 
and are trying to make ends meet. It is the wrong direction for 
America.
  This day should be a day of glory. It should be a day when this body 
displays the courage and conviction necessary to address the pressing 
transportation needs of this Nation. Instead, it is a day of shame. It 
is a day when we are about to turn back the clock nearly half a century 
on America's greatness and on the incredible work we have done to grow 
our Nation, to build a thriving economy, and to lead the global market.
  Unlike the House bill, which slashes funding and destroys 550,000 
jobs, the other body's bill continues current funding levels, 
sustaining approximately 1.9 million jobs. Under the Senate bill, the 
States will receive $3.8 billion more in highway construction funding 
than the House bill over the course of 2 years.
  The Senate bill eliminates many of the gaping loopholes in current 
law ``Buy America'' requirements--loopholes that are being exploited by 
foreign competitors, like China, who are stealing American jobs. MAP-
21--that's the Senate bill--includes critical elements of my Buy 
America bill and the Invest in American Jobs Act, and it eliminates 
these loopholes in order to give American workers a fair shot. The 
Senate bill also does not contain poison pills like the House bill 
does, such as provisions to strip OSHA protections for hazmat workers 
and efforts to finance highway construction on the backs of middle 
class workers.
  The Senate bill is not the bill I would have written, but it is a 
fair bipartisan compromise--a word some in this body don't like to 
hear, especially on the other side, but it is a word that is necessary 
for legislating. The bill will provide the certainty that States need 
to invest and proceed with their plans long on the books.
  So, again, I call upon the Republican leadership to schedule that 
bill for consideration by this body now. Yet in the spirit of 
compromise--again, a word that's necessary in this body--I would remind 
the Republicans that it is a word in the dictionary, that it is a word 
that Americans use daily, and that I might consider supporting such a 
shorter extension than what is being proposed today, not this lavish 
60-day, 8-week extension, but rather one that keeps our noses to the 
grindstone and that instills the sense of urgency that this matter 
deserves.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MICA. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, let's deal with just a few facts.
  First of all, the fact is that this would be the ninth extension. The 
fact is that the Democrats, who are on the other side of the aisle, 
when they controlled the entire House of Representatives and the United 
States Senate--the other body--in a huge majority and the White House, 
they did six extensions. That's the first fact.
  The second fact is that the folks from the other side of the aisle, 
when they controlled it, they weren't even able to get a bill out from 
subcommittee to full committee. We passed it in committee, and we've 
gotten it this far to the floor with huge majorities. They did not pass 
it.
  Let's just deal with the facts. The facts are, on June 17, 2009, 
after my cooperating with the previous chair on the other side of the 
aisle to go forward with a long-term bill, it was President Obama who 
sent then-Secretary Ray LaHood to tell us that they were going to kill 
a 6-year bill that we had agreed on to move forward, which they 
couldn't even get out of committee, to an 18-month extension.
  These are the facts. The fact is that they had 6,300 earmarks in the 
last bill, and they were open to earmarks in the bill that they were 
about to propose. This bill is being brought forward without tax 
increases. It is responsibly funded with dramatic reforms and, again, 
devolves to the States and local governments, which actually build 
these projects, the streamlining and other financial opportunities that 
they can take advantage of.
  As for the part about bankrupting the trust fund, let's deal again 
with facts. The facts are that the bill that is proposed by the other 
body is a 2-year bill, and the trust fund money expires in 18 months. 
That's not responsible. The bill we brought out has a pay-for.
  With regard to the comments that we're slashing, we are continuing at 
current levels. It's $52 billion for 5 years. Do the math. It's 260. 
The Senate bill is $109 billion. It's 54.9. We are increasing spending 
at a time when we shouldn't be increasing spending, but we're 
maintaining the current level. They count no increase as a cut. That's 
the kind of math that's going on here.
  So I came to the floor because there was a bipartisan agreement 
between the leadership of the House and the Senate to move forward 
because we have to get people to work. This is my third extension. I 
have had the honor and privilege of chairing the committee for--what?--
14 months now. I have cooperated with the other side, including holding 
extensive hearings in the district of the first gentleman who spoke, 
Mr. Rahall--in Beckley, West Virginia--all the way to the west coast. 
I've held dozens of hearings out in the field and here in Washington to 
try to develop legislation that could get the job done and so that we 
could do more with even the same amount of money and put people to work 
at this time in our country's history. So those are the facts.
  Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida has 15 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. MICA. I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. 
Duncan), the chair of the Highway Subcommittee.
  Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, and I thank him for his leadership of the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee.
  H.R. 4239 extends the surface transportation programs through May 31, 
2012, at funding levels consistent with the fiscal year 2012 
transportation appropriations bill passed last November. This extension 
is clean and does not add any policy provisions. Without this 
extension, Mr. Speaker, these programs are set to expire this Saturday. 
This legislation will allow the highway and transit programs to 
continue to operate as the spring construction season kicks off.
  During this 2-month extension, we fully expect the House to pass H.R. 
7, the American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act of 2012, and 
conference this bill with the Senate's 18-month reauthorization bill. 
H.R. 7, as Chairman Mica just noted, is a 5-year reauthorization bill 
that provides the long-term funding at current levels. It provides the 
predictability that States and localities need and have requested in 
order to plan major transportation projects and critical improvements 
to their transportation systems. Additionally, H.R. 7 eliminates, or 
would eliminate, wasteful Federal programs and put important 
decisionmaking power back in the hands of the States. There is no 
reason to have a bureaucrat in Washington dictating which projects 
should be funded in my home State of Tennessee or in other States.

[[Page 4150]]

  Federal aid transportation projects around the Nation are sitting 
idle because of inefficient and unnecessary project review 
requirements. H.R. 7 goes the extra mile by streamlining the project 
review process and by eliminating scores of unnecessary Federal 
requirements. My constituents in the Second District of Tennessee and 
those throughout this Nation want a more efficient and smarter process 
for investing our Federal transportation dollars, and H.R. 7 would 
accomplish this by doing more with less.

                              {time}  1450

  We need to speed up these highway projects. The last two studies by 
the Federal highway officials have estimated that it takes 13 years--
one said 13 years; one said 15 years--from conception to completion. 
All these other developed nations around the world are doing these 
projects in a half or a third of the time that we are. We've got to 
speed things up to become more globally competitive.
  When Congress sends H.R. 7 to the President, it will be considered 
the signature jobs bill that Americans have been waiting for Congress 
to pass. Just this week, Time magazine has a cover which describes our 
recovery as ``wimpy.'' Yesterday, the chairman of the Federal Reserve 
Board, Chairman Bernanke, said that the job market continues to remain 
weak.
  This bill, H.R. 7, if we can pass it, will create millions of jobs 
for hardworking Americans right here in the United States--not in China 
or India--and will leave a lasting impact with tangible improvements to 
our transportation infrastructure. By passing the long-term 
reauthorization bill that the business community and State and local 
officials across this country want, Americans will be able to see their 
tax dollars working to rebuild and strengthen our Nation's highways, 
bridges, and transit systems. In addition, people all over this country 
want us to stop rebuilding other countries and start doing what we 
need, rebuilding our own country and putting our own citizens first 
once again.
  I urge my colleagues to pass this brief 2-month extension so that the 
House can continue its work and then pass H.R. 7, the long-term 
reauthorization reform bill that this country needs.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Oregon, the ranking member on our Subcommittee on 
Highways and Transit.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I thank the gentleman.
  Well, the Republicans have got the wheel hard over, pedal to the 
metal. They are spinning doughnuts. And they want another 90 days or 60 
days--it was 90 days yesterday; 60 days today--to spin doughnuts until 
they run out of fuel on their side of the aisle.
  Look, the Senate, which previous to this leadership was the most 
dysfunctional legislative body in the land, has passed a 2-year bill 
with reforms and streamlining with half of the Republican Senators, 
including some members of the Flat Earth Caucus, voting for it. It 
received 74 votes in the Senate. Nothing gets 74 votes in the Senate. 
But you're refusing to bring that bill up because--we might get 
something done around here. So how about another 60 days to spin our 
wheels?
  Well, let's have a little bit of history here: February 8, 2011, 
Chairman Mica: ``We'll have a surface transportation bill by the August 
recess.'' That was, what, 2011. Oops. Well, then in August of 2011, 
Chairman Mica: ``I will agree to one additional highway program 
extension.'' Oops. He's asking for yet another and another and today 
yet another.
  Well, then, spin forward quickly to November of 2011, Speaker 
Boehner: ``House will pass a highway bill this year.'' That was last 
year. Then we go forward to February 1, 2012. Here's the problem: 
they've got a bunch of people on their side who hate government so much 
that they're willing to destroy the national transportation program to 
kill it. We are not making the claim, Speaker Boehner, that spending 
taxpayer money on transportation projects creates jobs, are we, huh?
  They hate government so much, they will say that investment by the 
government in building a national transportation system and maintaining 
it and rebuilding it with ``Made in America'' requirements does not 
create jobs. Why would he say that? Because they've got 80 people on 
their side of the aisle who do not believe we should have a national 
transportation plan or policy. They're willing to let our roads, 
bridges, and highways crumble.
  This is the pre-Dwight David Eisenhower--a Republican President--
National Highway System program. This is the brand-spiffy-new Kansas 
Turnpike that ended in this farmer's field on the Oklahoma border. This 
went on for years because Oklahoma didn't deliver its section. They 
want to go back to those good old days. No Federal mandates. No Federal 
transportation system. Oh, okay. So the Port of Los Angeles and the 
people of southern California should pay for everything that relates to 
getting freight in and out of L.A. It doesn't affect the rest of the 
United States of America. Or the Port of Portland or the Port of 
Seattle or the ports on the east coast.
  Our competitor nations get it. They're spending. They're investing. 
Even countries with austerity programs, like Britain, they're putting 
people back to work. Despite what the Speaker had to say to the Flat 
Earth Caucus over there, it does create jobs and investments. We need 
to move forward.
  Now they're saying, Oh, no problem, just another temporary delay 
while we get our act together on our side of the aisle. Well, again, we 
already heard the statement, no more, only one more temporary 
extension. That was about 9 months ago. And we're finding now that 
actually the delays are costing jobs, uncertainty costs jobs. States 
can't make commitments for major projects and investments if they don't 
know if there is going to be Federal money there in 90 days. Ninety 
days? Oh, 60 days. I forgot. In 60 days. They're going to plan a long-
term project that can last 60 days? No, I don't think so.
  So in North Carolina, the Secretary of Transportation says: The 
delays have cost 41,000 jobs. That seems a little high to me. But 
Nevada, 4,000 jobs. Maryland, 4,000 jobs. Michigan, 3,500 jobs. Adding 
it up across the country, even if we use the low numbers, we're talking 
tens of thousands of job opportunities lost because they can't get 
their act together.
  Just let us vote on the Senate bill. That's all we're asking. I mean, 
I think there might be a few people on your side of the aisle who would 
agree with their Republican colleagues in the Senate and support it. 
And I can guarantee we would get almost every Democrat on this side of 
the aisle to vote for it.
  You can't even get your own people to vote for your own bill. You are 
wrapped around the axle on your own caucus day after day. You have to 
pretend it won't create jobs. Well, that's not enough for them.
  Paul Ryan has now proposed in the budget, which we're going to vote 
on next, that we should decrease funding in transportation by 35 
percent. But you're saying over there that you want to continue the 
current levels. Well, you'd better get it together because if you're 
going to support the Ryan budget, then you've just voted to cut 
transportation beginning October 1 by 35 percent. That's about 500,000 
jobs. But what the heck.
  You guys hate government so much, you hate America so much that you 
won't do what's necessary to put this country back together, to rebuild 
the infrastructure that was given to us by Democrats and Republicans 
alike for more than half a century, never in a partisan way. This is 
the first experiment, the first attempt to pass a totally partisan 
bill, and you're failing on your own side of the aisle.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will remind Members to address 
their remarks to the Chair.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased at this time to yield 4 minutes 
to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), the chair of our Rail 
Subcommittee.
  Mr. SHUSTER. I thank the chairman.

[[Page 4151]]

  Listening to the last speaker, I believe that the other side of the 
aisle has got a case of amnesia because I was here in 2007 and 2011 
when they had the majority in the House, the majority in the Senate, 
and the Presidency, and they did nothing. Well, that's not true. In 
fact, the last speaker, the gentleman from Oregon, he was the chair of 
the Highway Subcommittee; and we passed a bill by voice vote out of the 
subcommittee, a Democratic version. Voice vote. That means it came out 
of subcommittee in a bipartisan way.
  Now, there was a lot in that bill I didn't like. But it was probably 
what the gentleman from Oregon, the last speaker, and the majority 
party wanted to do was to expand government control of the highway 
system, expand the decision-making process to the bureaucrats in 
Washington instead of allowing the people in the States to make more of 
those decisions.
  So it's startling to me to hear the criticism and insults hurled at 
our side of the aisle. I do take offense to the fact that he said we 
hate America. We love America. We love the American people and the 
wisdom of the American people and the wisdom of those in State 
government to make decisions, also.
  I believe there is a national role in the transportation system in 
this country. It is a national policy. It's based on our founding. It's 
our history. We've always been part of this national system. So I want 
to pass a bill, a 5-year bill. I don't believe my colleagues have gone 
home and listened to their DOT directors and the people that build 
roads and sell equipment and the business people. They want a 5-year 
bill. They do not want a 2-year bill because they won't make decisions 
on expanding their businesses, buying equipment, hiring people on an 
18-month bill.

                              {time}  1500

  And oh, by, the way, by the time we pass--if we pass--the Senate 
bill, it will be a 16-month bill. It's just another extension. It 
doesn't have reforms in it. Our bill does reform. It will allow that 
$260 billion to be spent faster. And anybody that's been in business 
and had to deal with the day in and day out knows that time is money. 
If it takes 14 to 15 years to build a highway versus 7 or 8, that's 
going to cost us a lot more money. That's common sense. That's why this 
5-year bill is a commonsense bill and we need to pass it.
  But I've come here on the floor today to debate not the 5-year bill 
because I believe it's the best way to go; I've come here to support 
the bipartisan agreement--I thought it was a bipartisan agreement; I 
guess we'll find out shortly--a bipartisan agreement for a 60-day clean 
extension that will give us the time to move forward and put a 
commonsense bill on the floor that will encourage growth in America. It 
will encourage people to hire and invest in their businesses when 
they're building roads and bridges in this country.
  Failing to pass this extension is really not an option, so I hope 
that my friends will get behind this extension and pass it so that we 
can work to pass a bill that makes a lot of sense--and that is H.R. 7--
and that will help to create jobs.
  Again, I would remind my colleagues if they're watching this or 
colleagues in the Chamber, from 2007 to 2011 our Democratic colleagues 
that controlled both branches of government, both Houses of Congress, 
did not pass a highway bill. They passed a stimulus bill that didn't 
work. Only 8 percent of it went to highway and infrastructure projects. 
We as Republicans offered an alternative: half of the amount of money 
that the Democrats passed, and half of that money going to rebuilding 
our infrastructure.
  If they truly cared about rebuilding the infrastructure of this 
country, they would have passed a highway bill from 2007 to 2011, but 
they failed to do it; and now they've come to the floor to criticize 
our side. And we've worked very, very hard. Chairman Mica has put 
together a bill that really does do significant reform. And I don't 
know why the other side resists reform when we can spend money quicker 
and we can get that money out there and rebuild the roads and bridges 
we need today.
  Mr. RAHALL. May I inquire of the time remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from West Virginia has 8\1/2\ 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Florida has 7 minutes remaining.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlelady from Florida, the distinguished ranking member of our 
Subcommittee on Railroads.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Rahall, for your leadership on 
this transportation bill.
  You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool 
all of the people all of the time.
  When President Barack Obama came to the floor, he mentioned to the 
House that Republicans used to like to build some roads. Well, it is a 
sad state of affairs in this House of Representatives and a sad day as 
far as the committee is concerned because we used to have a process 
that was bipartisan. We worked together.
  We can't pass a transportation bill. The only thing we passed was a 
new bridge for Minnesota. We had to transfer 30 acres of land in one 
individual congressional district. But the leadership of the 
Transportation Committee of this House of Representatives can't find 
floor time to debate a piece of legislation that would create and 
maintain millions of good-paying jobs for hardworking Americans. 
Republicans refuse to work with Democrats in crafting a transportation 
reauthorization bill that has caused us the opportunity to deliver 
much-needed relief to the States and to the traveling public.
  Certainly, at a time when our Nation's unemployment rate remains at 9 
percent, an adequately funded 6-year surface transportation 
reauthorization bill is critical. What our country needs is a surface 
transportation bill. But let me be clear: we don't need a 5-year bill 
with 2-year money.
  Transportation and infrastructure funding is absolutely critical to 
our Nation. We know for every billion dollars we spend, it generates 
44,000 permanent jobs. We need and deserve a long-term transportation 
bill, but the Tea Party members won't be happy until we are riding 
horses on dirt roads again.
  We need to pass the Senate transportation reauthorization bill and 
add some sanity to this process and send a bill to the President that 
actually helps the traveling public and puts the American people back 
to work.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the balance of time on 
each side?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida has 7 minutes 
remaining, and the gentleman from West Virginia has 6 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop), who has introduced the other 
body's bill in this House. It's labeled H.R. 14 and is twice as good as 
H.R. 7.
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. I thank Mr. Rahall for yielding.
  I rise in opposition to H.R. 4239, the Republican 60-day highway bill 
extension.
  As prime construction season begins, thousands of construction 
workers and their families will continue to struggle because our 
Republican colleagues would rather engage in hyperpartisan politics 
than put Americans back to work. Today's highway extension is yet 
another example of the failed leadership and absent policies of the 
Republican Party.
  Unlike the successful bipartisan efforts of SAFETEA-LU, TEA-21, and 
ISTEA that put millions of Americans to work and made our highways and 
transit systems the envy of the world, today's Republican extension 
merely allows the Nation to limp forward, impeding our ability to 
rejuvenate our economy.
  Let me be clear. This extension does nothing to create jobs or 
provide certainty to States. It does nothing to rebuild our crumbling 
infrastructure, and it does nothing to improve safety on our roadways 
and bridges.
  It's been 6 weeks since the Rules Committee approved the rule for 
H.R.

[[Page 4152]]

7, the Republican highway reauthorization that was drafted in the dark 
of night and was passed out of the Transportation and Infrastructure 
Committee without a single person other than Chairman Mica having read 
the bill. When our Republican colleagues finally did read the bill, 
they, too, were struck by the overwhelmingly negative consequences for 
many of their States. The bill has been in limbo ever since.
  If the priority of the Republican caucus was to create jobs, they 
would immediately take up and pass H.R. 14, the bipartisan Senate 
highway bill that will save 1.8 million jobs and create up to another 
million jobs, supporting over 113,000 jobs in my State of New York 
alone.
  If the priority of the Republican caucus was to reduce the deficit, 
they would take up and pass H.R. 14, the only proposal in town that is 
fully paid for.
  If the priority of the Republican caucus was to provide certainty to 
the markets and the States, then we would take up H.R. 14, the 2-year 
Senate bill, and not the 60-day extension the House Republicans now 
propose.
  H.R. 14 not only passed by an overwhelming bipartisan majority in the 
Senate--74-22--the bill enjoys 114 cosponsors in the House.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. RAHALL. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. As House Republicans continue to isolate 
themselves from the mainstream, Americans continue to wait for much-
needed infrastructure jobs and the thousands of businesses they 
support.
  I urge my colleagues to reject this shortsighted extension of our 
Nation's transportation programs and pass H.R. 14, the bipartisan 
Senate bill.
  Mr. MICA. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield the customary 1 minute 
to our distinguished Democratic leader, the gentlelady from California 
(Ms. Pelosi).
  Ms. PELOSI. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I couldn't resist the opportunity to come to the floor to speak on 
the situation that we have before us.
  I thank the gentleman from West Virginia for his ongoing leadership 
in terms of bipartisanship and constructive legislation to rebuild 
America, which is so important to us. It has been the tradition--Mr. 
Mica will admit--that this has always been a bipartisan effort. That is 
the history. That is the tradition. That has served the country well.

                              {time}  1510

  For the first time, however, the Republicans have chosen to do a 
strictly Republican bill which our very respected Secretary of 
Transportation who served in this House as a Republican, served as a 
Member of Congress as well as served the minority leader, Mr. Mica, as 
a staff person, so he has a long history of knowledge of legislation in 
the Congress, said this was the worst transportation bill he had seen 
in his 35 years of public service--and, again, this is a field in which 
he is an expert.
  He said the bill loses jobs, the bill Republicans want to put forth, 
H.R. 7, and it also diminishes safety. That is not a formula for a good 
transportation bill--less safety, fewer jobs, losing jobs. And so, we 
have an opportunity to support a bipartisan bill that has come from the 
Senate, three-quarters of the Senate in a bipartisan way passed it out. 
March 31 is the deadline when all of this will expire unless Congress 
acts, and Congress is not acting because the Republican majority does 
not have its act together. Their ``our way or the highway'' attitude 
means no highway bill that creates jobs and promotes public safety.
  It's really so sad because in the tradition of our country, from the 
start, from the very start, Thomas Jefferson understood the need for 
building the infrastructure of America. He tasked his Secretary of the 
Treasury, Gallatin, to come up with a project that would expand into 
America, the Louisiana Purchase, and the Lewis and Clark expeditions. 
And out of that initiative came the Cumberland Road, the Erie Canal, 
and other things like that over time, and in that tradition, the 
Transcontinental Railroad and the rest that would come later.
  Then in our century, a Republican President, President Eisenhower, at 
a time of bad economic times, bad economic times, he went forward and 
took the initiative for the interstate highway initiative, which was so 
important to our country. It was a security issue to unite America. It 
was a jobs initiative to build that interstate highway system. And it 
was about promoting commerce, connecting people, and improving the 
quality of life. It was a great initiative, and it, too, was a 
bipartisan initiative. In fact, in the Senate, our friend, Senator 
Gore, Vice President Gore, his father took the lead on that 
legislation, the distinguished gentleman from Tennessee, as we heard 
earlier from the gentlemen from Tennessee.
  So this has all been a bipartisan initiative. It's about rebuilding 
America, which is part of our reigniting the American Dream to build 
ladders of opportunities so people who work hard, play by the rules, 
and take responsibility can have a ladder of success to climb and then 
put down for others to do. And part of that is A, Make It In America so 
that people can make it in America; and B, and I get to this point, 
build America, build America, build the infrastructure of America. And 
that means everything from the highways with mass transit, rapid 
transit, high-speed rail, and all kinds of technological infrastructure 
that we need with broadband and the rest.
  It doesn't have any political or partisan cast to it at all. It never 
has--until now. And until now, for reasons that are very hard to 
explain to the American people, while we have a solution, we have a 
challenge. The authorization expires March 31. We have a bill that can 
be sent to the President in a matter of hours from this House of 
Representatives this day. And instead of smoothing the way, the road to 
jobs, we have the Republicans putting up, yet again, another obstacle 
because they have not been able to get unity in their caucus on a bill 
that promotes commerce, builds America, promotes safety, and creates 
jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs.
  So what are we doing wasting the public's time with a 60-day 
extension? I support the leadership of our ranking member, Mr. Rahall, 
when he talks about why we have to do something better, something more 
important, something more worthy of the concerns of the American people 
than a parliamentary maneuver that isn't going to produce anything. It 
doesn't even have anything attached to it that says, let's do this now 
so that we can do something better later. It has a bill that they 
cannot even pass on the House floor, their own H.R. 7. If they could 
pass that, they would. Their own caucus doesn't support what they're 
putting forth. So they expect the rest of us to cover for them.
  Well, that is a real disservice to the American people. It is a real 
disservice to the hundreds of thousands of construction workers who are 
out of work. This job in its totality, and the jobs it would save and 
the jobs it would create, over 2 million jobs, and yet instead of doing 
that, we have a tactical maneuver for God knows what reason.
  Everything we do is about time. It's about time, shortening the time 
in which people have to wait for jobs, shortening the times in which 
people get to and from their jobs. And it's about time that we put the 
American people back to work by passing the biggest jobs bill that 
Congress can ever pass, and that is a transportation bill. We have it 
right at our disposal. Mr. Bishop introduced it as H.R. 14, we brought 
it up earlier today, and the Republicans resoundingly voted against the 
Senate bill. And I understand it was a procedural vote.
  Now in a substantive vote, why don't you bring that bill to the 
floor? Why don't you bring that bill to the floor? And I ask the 
question again to my Republican colleagues: Why don't you bring the 
bill to the floor that three-quarters of the United States Senate in a 
bipartisan way passed out? We all

[[Page 4153]]

want a longer bill. This is the bill they can pass. This is the bill we 
should pass so that the President can sign it into law. Anything else 
is just a conversation. Taking action, taking the votes, that is what 
the American people expect us to do. So we can talk all we want. What 
the American people want us to do is to act. And so I reject 60 days 
when we can do something much better for the American people.
  Mr. MICA. I yield 2 minutes to Mr. Shuster, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SHUSTER. I thank the gentleman from Florida, and I appreciate the 
opportunity to be able to ask my Democratic colleagues, following up on 
the distinguished leader's question but with a little twist to it, why 
didn't your side, when you had control of both Houses of Congress and 
the Presidency, why didn't you pass a bill, a highway bill? You had the 
votes. You could have done anything you wanted to.
  In fact, the former distinguished Speaker that just spoke said that 
this is going to be the biggest jobs bill we pass. I thought your 
stimulus was supposed to be the biggest jobs bill we ever passed. It's 
amazing to me to come down here on the floor--and I have so much 
respect for my colleagues on the other side of the aisle--but to hear 
this argument going round and round, and as I said earlier, there's 
amnesia on the other side of the aisle. You had control of Congress. 
The bill expired in 2009. You still had control of both Houses and the 
Presidency. You didn't pass a bill.
  I also would like to make note, if you look back in the history of 
the highway bill, we've never been in the financial situation that we 
are today. We've never faced the kind of debt that we face today. And 
what this bill does is it lives within our means. But it does more than 
just that, living within our means, which we should do, and I would 
add, Thomas Jefferson would be appalled if he saw the kind of debt 
we've racked up today. He would be appalled by that.
  So we're living within our means, and we're streamlining the process. 
We are saying we can do more with less if we change the process. The 
Senate bill doesn't have the kind of reforms. What the Senate bill does 
is it bankrupts the highway trust fund. It bankrupts the highway trust 
fund. And then we even have a bigger problem 2 years down the road, 
actually maybe 18 months, maybe 17 months, probably 16 months by the 
time we get it passed. The Senate bill requires States to incorporate 
livability and smart growth policies, as if the States aren't smart 
enough to do it themselves? As if the States and cities in this country 
can't figure out how they want to improve the livability of their 
cities? No. The Federal Government has to do it. The Federal Government 
has to insist that they do that.
  Look, I think that Members of Congress ought to have the ability to 
direct where some of these funds go, but the Senate bill, what it 
allows are the bureaucrats.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. MICA. I yield the gentleman from Pennsylvania an additional 30 
seconds.
  Mr. SHUSTER. The bureaucrats in Washington will decide how the money 
is spent, not even the folks back in the States. The Senate fails to 
streamline the project delivery process which we do. That will allow us 
to build roads faster, and time is money. Anybody that's been in 
business knows time is money. And that is extremely important to this. 
The Senate bill discourages private sector investment, and it increases 
the regulation. Like I said, this bill is a good bill, it's a solid 
bill, it's one that the people out there want to see, a 5-year bill, 
not a 17- or 16-month extension.

                              {time}  1520


                Announcement By the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All Members are advised to refrain from 
referring to one another in the second person.
  Mr. RAHALL. Can you give us the time remaining, please, Mr. Speaker?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from West Virginia has 2\1/2\ 
minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Florida has 4\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Massachusetts, a member of the House Appropriations 
Committee, Mr. Olver.
  Mr. OLVER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, America's whole economy depends upon the efficient 
movement of people and goods. A modern, well-maintained transportation 
network is absolutely necessary for our economy to grow and the country 
to prosper, and its influence on the economy is staggering.
  Our auto manufacturing industry and its enormous parts-supplier base, 
the national network of gas stations and its complex distribution 
system, and the oil industry itself all thrive because we have an 
efficient highway system that people need to use.
  The physical construction of roads and railroads requires aggregate 
materials processed locally, steel trusses and rebar made by American 
companies and crews manned by American workers.
  Our transit system supports the domestic manufacturing of buses, 
streetcars, and trains, while providing businesses with cost-effective 
access to the labor pool.
  Furthermore, every good product produced or consumed in the U.S. must 
be transported via our network of roads, rails, and ports. As a result, 
the efficiency with which our system operates determines whether 
American goods can compete in the global marketplace.
  Unfortunately, the 60-day extension Republicans offer on the floor 
today keeps our transportation system bogged down in a state of 
uncertainty. It slows down ongoing projects by only providing partial 
funding; it jeopardizes a major part of this construction season in 
northern States by hindering and delaying their ability to determine 
how many projects can be funded; and it shuts down the planning and 
design pipeline for future projects because they don't know what 
resources will be available.
  Consequently, this being the ninth extension since 2009, State 
transportation programs are being forced to move forward only with 
projects that meet the lowest common denominator.
  Mr. Speaker, if the Republican goal is to slow economic growth and 
keep unemployment high into the fall, this 60-day extension will 
accomplish that spectacularly.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. RAHALL. I yield the gentleman 15 more seconds.
  Mr. OLVER. I can think of nothing that would be more effective at 
slowing economic growth and keeping unemployment high.
  Mr. Speaker, there is a better option. Bring it to the floor and let 
us vote on the Senate's multiyear bipartisan bill that was passed by a 
vote of 74-22, with majority support from both parties.
  Mr. MICA. I have no further speakers, and I would reserve my time to 
close.
  Mr. RAHALL. I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, to respond to the other side of the aisle about which 
party was in control when nothing was done or vice versa, whatever, as 
that side of the aisle knows, it takes so much to get the other body to 
agree on anything these days, to get the 60 votes necessary. It doesn't 
matter which party controls the other body; to get them to agree on 
something is difficult.
  So I conclude by saying vote against these delays and pass the Senate 
bill.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MICA. I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Unfortunately, this has turned into, I guess, sort of a political 
``gotcha'' game. If this was a sporting event right now, the umpire 
would probably come out, throw down the flag, and say a foul has been 
committed.
  It's kind of sad that bipartisanship has become a one-way street. No 
one has worked harder than I have to try to accommodate the other side 
of the aisle.
  Mr. Speaker, one of the former speakers said we had refused to work

[[Page 4154]]

with the Democrats. That's not true. We took 60 percent of their 
recommendations. And one reason we took longer than I had hoped was to 
make certain that everybody had a fair and open opportunity. The 
process was completely open by going to the ranking member's district 
for the first hearing and all the way to the west coast.
  In the amendment process, I told Members that everyone would be heard 
and everyone would have an opportunity to offer an amendment. Yes, we 
sat for 18 hours. We took over 100 amendments from the other side of 
the aisle, and each of them was considered with the respect and dignity 
that every Member of this body should have before everybody.
  This is not true. Again, I just don't think it's fair.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop) came to the 
floor and said that I was the only one that had a copy of the bill. In 
fact, the irony of it is that Mr. Bishop and his staff, everyone--in 
fact, all the Members were given a copy beforehand, which is twice the 
period of time in the past; and copies of the bill were distributed 
from his office, which he also admitted to in committee long before the 
bill came to the committee.
  The Secretary said this is the worst bill he has seen, and it is for 
bureaucrats and for people in those tall buildings in Washington, 
because we're consolidating programs. We went from six core programs to 
130. We have offices that we don't need, duplicate programs. Someone is 
trying to actually do reform.
  Yes, we do substantial reform. They throw money at problems. We, at 
least, keep it level and we responsibly pay for it. But even when they 
threw money at things, like the stimulus that Mr. Shuster brought 
forward, 35 percent of the money and 2\1/2\ years later, that money was 
still sitting in the Federal Treasury because shovel-ready became a 
national joke; and it is a national joke because of the red tape, the 
bureaucracy, all by those people who may lose their jobs in those glass 
buildings right here in our Nation's Capital.
  Again, I don't think it's fair. I'm disappointed. We tried to do a 
90-day bill. The House and the Senate are going to be out for 2 weeks 
for Easter. Then they come back, and one body is out and the other body 
is out and nobody is here. They weren't happy with 90 days, and we 
tried to accommodate the 60 days.
  This is a political game of ``gotcha,'' and it's unfortunate because 
there are many Americans who are counting on us for jobs and many 
people who have lost their home, particularly in the construction 
industry. They don't want rhetoric. They want action from this 
Congress. If we just had a cooperative effort on this, and true 
bipartisanship, we could get so much done for the American people.
  I'm saddened in a way, but I tell you I've done everything I can to 
move this forward. For some of those people I've talked to that don't 
have a job, that have lost their homes and their life savings, we need 
to put a few of them to work. And we can if people would stop the 
nonsense and move forward in a responsible fashion.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) that the House suspend the rules and 
pass the bill, H.R. 4239, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. RAHALL. 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.

                          ____________________