[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 8]
[House]
[Pages 11983-11984]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          OPERATION OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN WISCONSIN HIGHWAYS

  Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill

[[Page 11984]]

(H.R. 2353) to amend title 23, United States Code, with respect to the 
operation of vehicles on certain Wisconsin highways, and for other 
purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 2353

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

     SECTION 1. OPERATION OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN WISCONSIN 
                   HIGHWAYS.

       Section 127 of title 23, United States Code, is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(j) Operation of Vehicles on Certain Wisconsin 
     Highways.--If any segment of the United States Route 41 
     corridor, as described in section 1105(c)(57) of the 
     Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, is 
     designated as a route on the Interstate System, a vehicle 
     that could operate legally on that segment before the date of 
     such designation may continue to operate on that segment, 
     without regard to any requirement under subsection (a).''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman intend that the motion 
apply to the bill, as amended?
  Mr. PETRI. Yes.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, is pending.
  Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) and 
the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall) each will control 20 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.


                             General Leave

  Mr. PETRI. 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 material on the bill before us.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  U.S. Highway 41 between Milwaukee and Green Bay is slated to become 
part of the U.S. interstate system early next year. H.R. 2353 would 
simply allow trucks that exceed Federal weight limits but are currently 
authorized to operate on this road to continue to operate after the 
interstate designation.

                              {time}  1700

  This primarily involves agricultural crops during harvest season, 
milk, timber, scrap metal, and garbage. No new trucks in excess of 
Federal weight limits would be allowed on the new I-41. This would just 
maintain the status quo and not disrupt the current flow of commerce.
  This is not unprecedented, as other roads which have become part of 
the interstate system have received this grandfather, including I-39 in 
Wisconsin, with no ill effect. In fact, the Wisconsin State Patrol, 
which is responsible for truck safety enforcement, has issued a 
statement in support of this bill, and is noting the safety benefits of 
not forcing these trucks off the safer interstate and onto State and 
local roads which are not designated to carry such traffic.
  The bill before us is also supported by Republican and Democratic 
members of the Wisconsin House delegation, our two U.S. Senators, the 
Wisconsin Department of Transportation, and many State and local 
officials and organizations. I ask my House colleagues to approve this 
bill, which is so important to my State.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair wishes to again clarify with the 
gentleman whether the bill is with or without an amendment.
  Mr. PETRI. It is without an amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would announce that the pending 
motion is that the House suspend the rules and pass the Union Calendar 
version of the bill, which is without amendment.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Congress has previously grandfathered truck weights on roads that 
obtained interstate designation, including Interstate 99 in 
Pennsylvania, Interstate 39 in Wisconsin and Interstate 68 in Maryland. 
I point that out to note that what is being proposed in the pending 
legislation is not without precedent or justification.
  While I support this legislation, consideration by the House of this 
bill should not be construed as an indicator of movement on the broader 
debate of whether to increase truck weights generally. This is a 
limited extension of current standards on one road in one State, and I 
am evaluating it as such. I support this bill, and I urge its adoption.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to my 
colleague from Wisconsin (Mr. Ribble).
  Mr. RIBBLE. Thank you, Chairman Petri.
  I also want to thank the ranking member, Mr. Rahall, for working with 
us. We advanced this bill through committee, and it passed our 
committee by voice vote.
  Mr. Speaker, the bill is very simple. Chairman Petri mentioned it 
maintains the status quo on a single highway in Wisconsin that is being 
changed from a U.S. highway to a U.S. interstate. Highway 41, from 
Green Bay, Wisconsin, to Milwaukee, is slated to become an interstate 
next year. To do that without any disruption to safety, it's important 
that we grandfather the current weight limits that are currently on the 
road, and this bill does exactly that.
  It ensures that any trucks that drive on the road today will be able 
to drive on the road after the conversion. Without this bill, shippers 
would simply have two options, and neither would be good for safety. 
One option would be to move these trucks onto side roads, which, in 
Wisconsin, are often rural or through small towns that are not suited 
for truck traffic. The other option would be to put more trucks on the 
highway in order to comply with the lower weight limits. Neither option 
is good for safety, and neither option is good for Wisconsin.
  As Chairman Petri mentioned, it is supported by the Wisconsin State 
Patrol; it is supported by the Governor of Wisconsin; it is supported 
by the Wisconsin State Assembly, including the majority and ranking 
members; it is supported by the Wisconsin State Senate; and it is 
supported by the Wisconsin DOT.
  As the ranking member mentioned, this is not a precedent-setting 
piece of legislation. In fact, it has happened in other parts of the 
country. I am in support of this legislation, and I urge my colleagues 
to support it.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the 
legislation before us, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 2353.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________