[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 8554-8618]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2016


                             General Leave

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their 
remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill, H.R. 2577, and 
that I may include tabular material on the same.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 287 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 2577.
  The Chair appoints the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) to preside 
over the Committee of the Whole.

                              {time}  1908


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 2577) making appropriations for the Departments of 
Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies 
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, and for other purposes, 
with Mr. Bishop of Utah in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart) and the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Price) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to present to the House today for 
consideration H.R. 2577, the Transportation, Housing and Urban 
Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for fiscal year 
2016.
  The committee has put forth a bill that conforms to our 302(b) 
allocation of $55.3 billion in budget authority and is in line with the 
budget cap of 1.016, ``ten sixteen.''
  Under such an allocation, we prioritized programs and spending to 
achieve, really, three very important basic goals: first, we continue 
the ob lim funding levels of MAP-21 contingent upon reauthorization; we 
keep the commercial airspace running smoothly; and also we preserve the 
housing option for all current HUD-assisted families.
  Mr. Chairman, I think this is a balanced bill with the allocation 
that has been given to us by the chairman. The Department of 
Transportation is funded at $17.2 billion in budget authority and $70.6 
billion in total budgetary resources to ensure, Mr. Chairman, the safe 
and effective transportation of goods and people in America.
  The Department of Housing and Urban Development is funded at $42 
billion to provide housing opportunities and assistance to the most 
vulnerable in both cities and rural areas across our great Nation.
  Mr. Chairman, as you know, we are a diverse body and this is a very 
diverse bill, and I know some Members will speak for increased funding. 
I would like to remind my colleagues that if you are going to be voting 
against this bill, you are voting against the commercial airspace 
system and our air traffic controllers and control system; against 
housing programs for the most vulnerable, including the elderly and 
families; and frankly, you would also be voting against community 
development block grants that are vital to the cities and counties that 
we all represent.
  Some, however, Mr. Chairman, will speak for lower spending. Here it 
is also important to remember that the House passed a budget 
resolution, which this bill adheres to, Mr. Chairman, and the Congress 
and the President are currently bound by the Budget Control Act, which 
does include sequester. So this bill takes the responsible steps of 
setting funding priorities for the next fiscal year, many of which are 
shared, frankly, between both parties, and again, very important, 
without doing it with across-the-board cuts or across-the-board 
sequester.
  The whole House of Representatives now has the opportunity for full 
consideration of this legislation. It is imperative that we move this 
bill to final passage reflecting the amendments obviously adopted by 
the House, and we move this bill to conference in time for the new 
fiscal year.

[[Page 8555]]

  I really need to first thank my friend, the gentleman from North 
Carolina and the ranking member of this subcommittee, Mr. Price, for 
his ideas and his support in drafting this piece of legislation. The 
gentleman, as anyone who has dealt with him knows, gives a lot of 
thought and careful consideration to the many programs under our 
jurisdiction, and I appreciate his willingness to collaborate on this 
bill that is now before us.
  I would also like to thank, in particular, Chairman Rogers and also 
Ranking Member Lowey plus the members of the committee, and yes, I must 
say, especially the members of the subcommittee for the hours and hours 
spent in hearings, markups, and meetings, working together in a 
cooperative effort to bring this bill to the floor and eventually 
signed into law. Finally, as we can never do enough, I want to thank 
the staff on both sides of the aisle for their incredible hard work.
  I urge the expeditious adoption of this bill, Mr. Chairman, and at 
this time, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page 8556]]





[[Page 8557]]



[[Page 8558]]



[[Page 8559]]



[[Page 8560]]



[[Page 8561]]



[[Page 8562]]



[[Page 8563]]



[[Page 8564]]


  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, as we begin consideration of H.R. 2577, the fiscal year 
2016 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related 
Agencies Appropriations bill, I want to start by thanking our chairman, 
Chairman Diaz-Balart, for the hard work he has put in on this bill. He 
has been open and accessible throughout this year's process, and he has 
been receptive to my concerns and the concerns that other subcommittee 
members and other colleagues have raised. It has been a pleasure 
working with him, and I look forward to continuing to do that 
throughout this process.
  I also want to echo the thanks he just expressed to our hardworking 
staff, to Dena Baron and her colleagues in the majority, to Kate 
Hallahan and Joe Carlile on our side of the aisle, as well as Laura 
Thrift and Kate Roetzer from my personal staff.
  Now, unfortunately, I have to add that there is going to be a lot of 
further work to do. It is necessary, and it is going to be difficult. 
That is not the chairman's fault. He was dealt an impossible hand in 
the Republican budget and an allocation that is simply unworkable.
  At first glance, it might appear that this bill is a relative winner 
when compared to other appropriations bills, as Chairman Rogers did 
increase the subcommittee's allocation by $1.5 million. However, the 
reality is that once you factor in declining Federal Housing 
Administration receipts, increased Section 8 renewal costs, and other 
inflationary adjustments, this bill is actually $1.5 billion below last 
year's funding level, resulting in fewer services and less capital 
investment than last year.
  Mr. Chairman, the programs under the jurisdiction of this 
subcommittee are critical to our Nation's economic and social well-
being: providing necessary funding to improve housing and 
transportation options, creating infrastructure jobs for hardworking 
American families, and ensuring safe and adequate transportation 
networks for goods, commuters, and travelers. But our Nation's 
transportation and housing systems face daunting challenges, and on 
almost every count, this bill falls short.

                              {time}  1915

  The President requested a robust increase for this bill for fiscal 
2016, calling on Congress to provide the critical investments necessary 
to accelerate and sustain economic growth. Unfortunately, the bill 
before us would not even begin to address our infrastructure needs.
  In transportation, the bill levies deep cuts to capital programs. As 
we learned from the Amtrak derailment last month in Philadelphia, these 
cuts can have clear, direct consequences for the safety of our 
transportation system. The bill before us cuts Amtrak by 18 percent--18 
percent--below last year. There is no funding for the expansion of 
safety mechanisms, including Positive Train Control, which regulates 
the excessive speeds that caused the Philadelphia derailment.
  Now, no one can say whether Positive Train Control would have 
prevented the tragedy in Philadelphia, but cutting funding certainly 
isn't making our transportation system any safer. How many train 
derailments, how many bridge collapses is it going to take before the 
majority agrees that we must invest in our crumbling transportation 
infrastructure?
  The bill before us would also reduce funding for the New Starts 
program in the Federal Transit Administration by 8 percent below this 
year, 40 percent below the President's request. It would cut DOT's 
enormously popular TIGER program by 80 percent. It cuts the Federal 
Aviation Administration's capital program by $355 million below the 
President's request, $100 million below last year. That will hamper 
FAA's ability to maintain and improve aging facilities and will slow 
down progress on the critical NextGen program.
  The bill doesn't just provide insufficient funding for critical 
investments; it also contains toxic provisions completely unrelated to 
the appropriations process. For instance, riders on truck length and 
weight have no place in this bill. They should be left to the 
authorizing committees. The bill also continues to delay full 
implementation of the Department of Transportation's hours-of-service 
rule for driver safety by including additional, unmanageable study 
requirements. These riders, I regret to say, value the bottom line of 
the trucking industry over driver safety. They will actually make our 
roads more dangerous.
  The bill also attempts to undermine President Obama's new policy 
related to the United States' relationship with Cuba. Some of the 
riders aim to prevent scheduled air services and cruise ship travel to 
Cuban ports of entry.
  On the housing side, the bill fails to adequately address the capital 
needs of public housing. For example, the bill provides only the token 
amount of $20 million for the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development's Choice Neighborhoods Initiative. At such a low funding 
level, the program won't be able to fulfill its mission--transforming 
clusters of poverty into functioning, sustainable mixed-income 
neighborhoods and allowing the children who live there to have the 
opportunities that all Americans deserve.
  The bill contains $1.68 billion for the Public Housing Capital Fund, 
which is a $194 million cut from last year. If enacted, this level 
would be about the same as the funding level in 1989. That is 26 years 
ago! Given that new maintenance needs accrue at $3.4 billion per year, 
this level of funding would cover less than half the need while doing 
nothing to address a backlog that now amounts to $25 billion.
  The majority's bill transforms--or, more accurately, devolves--the 
Housing for the Elderly and Housing for the Disabled programs into 
purely rental renewal programs. Without capital funding, the supply of 
safe, decent, and affordable housing for the elderly and for the 
disabled will not keep up with the demand.
  Mr. Chairman, for centuries, our country's economic competitiveness 
has been built upon a world-class infrastructure that enabled 
innovation and ingenuity to flourish. This bill and the budgetary 
levels it reflects undermine the continued viability of our Nation's 
infrastructure and our economic vitality. We simply cannot write a 
credible bill until we have a new budget agreement.
  This bill clearly illustrates the folly of dogmatically insisting on 
domestic appropriations cuts as the sole focus of deficit reduction--
that is the majority's strategy--while leaving the main drivers of the 
deficit unaddressed. Under sequestration funding levels, any 
advancement of appropriations bills is simply delaying the day of 
reckoning. So let's stop this charade now. Let's not wait for 
Presidential vetoes or for governmental shutdowns. Let's confront it 
now! Let's begin serious, broad budget negotiations.
  I know we can responsibly chart a course to fiscal balance; we have 
done it before, as recently as the 1990s. We achieved budget surpluses 
as the result of a concerted, bipartisan effort to balance the budget 
through a comprehensive approach. And I mean comprehensive. Revenues, 
entitlements, military and domestic appropriations, everything was on 
the table. We balanced the budget 4 years in a row. We paid off more 
than $400 billion of this Nation's debt. Why is that lesson so hard to 
recollect?
  By contrast, the current Republican budget gives us the worst of both 
worlds. It fails as fiscal policy, and it decimates the investments a 
great country must make.
  In its current form, Mr. Chairman, I cannot support the fiscal 2016 
T-HUD Appropriations bill. I do remain hopeful, however, that this bill 
could be improved as it goes through the appropriations process. I will 
continue working with the chairman as we move forward. I am confident 
that a new agreement on funding levels can give this bill and America's 
transportation and housing infrastructure the resources that our 
national interest requires.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield as much time as 
he

[[Page 8565]]

may use to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), a friend, a 
leader, a teacher, and the chairman of the full Appropriations 
Committee.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I thank the chairman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this bill, obviously, the fiscal 
2016 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Appropriations bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I am proud that we have this piece of legislation. It 
is our fifth appropriations bill of this year on the floor today. It is 
the next step in our ongoing effort to fully fund the government before 
the end of the fiscal year, as is our congressional duty.
  This bill, as the chairman has said, funds a wide range of Federal 
programs that affect every citizen of every district of every State. 
From the transportation infrastructure that moves goods, people, and 
businesses around the country to the housing options that help most 
those in need, the benefits of the programs in this bill are felt far 
and wide.
  In total, the bill provides $55.3 billion in discretionary spending 
due to reduced offsets, including lower FHA receipts. The bill 
represents a $25 million increase above the current year.
  This is a tight budget, Mr. Chairman. Yet the bill targets funds to 
provide adequate investments in critical infrastructure and much-
relied-upon housing programs.
  Of the total, $17.2 billion goes toward discretionary funding for 
DOT, prioritizing projects that have great benefits to our Nation as a 
whole and that will help make this Nation's transportation systems 
safer and more efficient.
  This includes $15.9 billion for the Federal Aviation Administration. 
A portion of that money will go to what is called the NextGen program 
to improve efficiency in our airways and reduce congestion and delays.
  The Federal highway program gets $40.2 billion from the highway trust 
fund, an amount equal to last year, but that is subject to continued 
authorization. This funding will ensure our roadways, bridges, and 
tunnels can safely and smoothly facilitate the flow of American 
commerce.
  The Federal Railroad Administration is funded at $1.4 billion. That 
includes $289 million for Amtrak operations, the same as last year, and 
$850 million for capital grants, as well as $187 million for critical 
safety and research programs. Total FRA funding is reduced by $262 
million, but rail safety, which is so important, is held harmless from 
any reductions.
  In fact, safety was a priority throughout the bill, and that is 
evident in the funding levels. For instance, the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration received $6.5 million more than last 
year, and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 
receives a $6.9 million bump up to help address safety concerns 
regarding the transport of energy products.
  Beyond these important infrastructure investments, the bill also 
includes a total of $42 billion for the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development. This level will guarantee that all individuals and 
families currently receiving housing assistance will continue to be 
served by this program, and it ensures that the 77,000 VASH vouchers 
which support our veterans remain in circulation.
  Important housing programs for some of our most vulnerable citizens, 
the elderly and persons with disabilities, also receive targeted 
increases. To help bolster economic growth in local communities, the 
bill provides $6.4 billion in grant funding for economic development. 
Investing in our communities through programs like Community 
Development Block Grants will allow funds to be targeted to local areas 
to meet their unique needs.
  Now, as with all appropriations bills, particularly in these tight 
budget times, we had to take a close look at what was mission critical 
and what was lower on the priority list. Some tough choices had to be 
made and some programs had to be reduced. Overall, I believe this bill 
puts everything in its proper place and does the very best within its 
allotted resources.
  I want to thank the chairman of the subcommittee, Congressman Diaz-
Balart. This is his maiden voyage as a cardinal, a chairman of a 
subcommittee, his first voyage at sea. We hope it is a safe and smooth 
one. And I am proud to say to him, ``Job well done so far.'' So we wish 
for you the very best.
  Thanks to David Price and the members of the committee, subcommittee, 
all the staff; my counterpart Mrs. Lowey. I thank all of you for 
working hard on this bill.
  I am proud to support this bill, and I ask my colleagues to do the 
same.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), our distinguished ranking 
member of the full committee.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I, too, would like to congratulate Chairman 
Diaz-Balart and Ranking Member Price in their new roles on the 
subcommittee. You have worked so hard, you have worked together, and I 
really do want to express my appreciation. And to Chairman Rogers, 
thank you for your work. I would particularly like to thank the 
chairman for his support of my grade crossing safety requests.
  However, the Republican bill to fund transportation and housing 
priorities drastically shortchanges job-creating investments critical 
to hard-working American families, like roads, bridges, rail systems, 
and access to safe and affordable housing. At the same time, it 
includes special interest giveaways for the trucking industry and other 
policy riders that make our roads less safe and our rail system less 
competitive and meddles foolishly in foreign policy.
  Despite the fact that our infrastructure needs are increasing, the 
bill before us takes a giant step backward. We cannot meet tomorrow's 
challenges by slashing investments in TIGER, transit, and air traffic 
modernization.
  Even though the bill was considered in full committee the morning 
after last month's tragic Amtrak crash in Philadelphia, the majority 
voted down amendments to increase funds for Amtrak capital investments 
and positive train control, which the NTSB has said would have 
prevented the derailment. Yet it does not receive any funding in the 
bill.

                              {time}  1930

  While we do not yet have all of the answers to the horrific accident 
in Philadelphia, we do know that starving Amtrak of funding will 
inhibit safety upgrades, track, and capital improvements. Our continued 
failure to invest in road and rail infrastructure is not just unwise; 
it is plainly a public safety hazard.
  Before I turn to housing, it is important to mention the plentiful 
legislative riders. Christmas came early for the trucking industry: 
longer, heavier trucks; the stalled enforcement of hours-of-service 
rules; and inadequate insurance requirements.
  Controversial riders have no place in an already difficult 
appropriations process. At a time when roads and bridges are crumbling 
and when there is a national crisis of affordable housing, it makes no 
sense to use this critical bill to meddle in foreign policy by 
including riders on Cuba.
  With regard to housing, adequate funding to renew existing vouchers 
is provided, but it isn't sufficient to meet our country's actual 
housing needs.
  Significantly cutting Lead Hazard Control will slow the progress on 
eliminating household toxins despite the fact that the successful 
program has resulted in lower lead poisoning and in better educational 
and behavioral outcomes.
  Slashing Choice Neighborhoods by $230 million, or 92 percent below 
the President's request, guts resources to transform clusters of 
poverty into functioning, sustainable mixed-income neighborhoods; and 
it prevents the children who live there from having the opportunities 
that all Americans deserve.
  Employing gimmicks to fund HOME through the housing trust fund 
perpetuates another gap in the spectrum of affordable housing.
  Democrats are more than willing to support bills that make 
investments to

[[Page 8566]]

grow our economy and create opportunity for hard-working Americans. 
Unfortunately, this bill falls far short of that goal.
  Again, in conclusion, I want to thank the chairman, the ranking 
member, and all of the hard-working staff. Although I urge my 
colleagues to vote ``no,'' I do hope we can move forward and get to 
real bills so we can work together and complete this process on 
especially this very important piece of legislation.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman 
from Kansas (Mr. Yoder), an indispensable member of the subcommittee.
  Mr. YODER. I appreciate the chairman for yielding time in this 
debate.
  I want to thank Chairman Diaz-Balart, Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member 
Price, and Ranking Member Lowey for their work in putting together what 
is, I think, one of the best bills to come through Congress as we 
debate how to balance our challenges with our budget and how to make 
sure we enhance safety and improve our economy all at the same time.
  Mr. Chairman, this is one of the earliest opportunities we have had 
to debate this piece of legislation in the appropriations process since 
1974, which is a commendable achievement. I want to thank Chairman 
Diaz-Balart for his leadership, and I ask for the body to support this 
good piece of legislation.
  There are really three great reasons to support this bill.
  First of all, it is great for the economy as we invest in our 
Nation's critical transportation projects and programs and invest in 
housing projects to help America's poverty families all across our 
districts.
  It helps to promote safety enhancement on our infrastructure by 
ensuring that our roads, rails, and airways are safe for all Americans. 
It increases funding for the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration; it increases funding for the Federal Motor Carrier 
Safety Administration, and it increases funding for the Pipeline and 
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration--all to help protect the 
safety of Americans.
  It works to enhance the responsible efforts to spend money in this 
capital. Most Americans know Washington is spending too much money, and 
our budget is not in balance. It is a tough job, and I commend the 
committee for doing the hard work to ensure that we are good stewards 
of taxpayer dollars, so as to keep to the balanced budget agreement 
that the House and Senate passed for the first time since 2001.
  The bill also works towards needed policy achievements that would 
help farmers in my State of Kansas or that would help keep the cost of 
goods down for hard-working Americans because the prices at the grocery 
stores are too high.
  In Kansas, for example, the bill helps to ensure that Kansas laws are 
in parity with States like Nebraska and Oklahoma when it comes to the 
length of a trailer that custom harvesters can use. This is a provision 
that is supported by the Kansas Highway Patrol, the Kansas Department 
of Transportation, the Kansas Department of Agriculture.
  I would ask my colleagues from across the aisle to listen to the 
leaders in Kansas. The leaders of public safety in Kansas and those 
within the highway patrol support this provision. Let's not subject the 
will of Washington over the will of people in Kansas when it comes to 
helping farmers with truck length for custom harvesters.
  It works to eliminate the number of trucks that are on the road. This 
bill's actually extending the trailer length will eliminate 6.6 million 
truck trips; it will save 1.3 billion miles driven; it will reduce 
carbon emissions by 4.4 billion pounds annually, and it will eliminate 
the need for every ninth truck in our economy. Truck tonnage is 
projected to grow by 23 percent over the next 12 years, so it makes 
sense to move freight in fewer trucks.
  The bill also works to enhance a program we started last year for 
short line rail safety, which would help short line rail companies 
across this country have the ability to have a stronger and sustainable 
safety culture as they move more and more of our goods.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a good bill. It promotes safety; it promotes 
our economy, and it creates jobs.
  I urge the bipartisan support of this legislation to help the 
American economy.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield 2 
minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), our colleague who 
is the ranking member of the Transportation and Infrastructure 
Committee.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, we have all heard about America and American 
exceptionalism, and tonight, we see here a great new example for the 
21st century the Republican majority version of American 
exceptionalism. A country that used to be the envy of the world with 
its infrastructure has now become a laughingstock of the industrial 
world because it is falling apart.
  There are 150,000 bridges on the National Highway System that need 
repair or replacement, and with this bill, next year, it will be 
160,000 that will need repair or replacement. There is 40 percent of 
the road surface on the National Highway System that needs not just 
resurfacing; it is so bad that it has to be dug up. Next year, there 
will be more miles that are deficient.
  And our transit? There is an $80 billion backlog just to bring our 
existing transit systems up to a state of good repair. It is so bad 
that we are killing people unnecessarily here in the Nation's Capital 
on the mass transit system; and what does the Republican budget do? It 
cuts the allocation to the Metro system here in D.C. In the greatest 
country on Earth, it will be dangerous to ride on the Metro system 
because we can't afford to fix it.
  They failed to distinguish between investment--investment in moving 
our people and our goods more efficiently--and spending. They rail 
about spending, but they cut indiscriminately, and they add money in 
places we don't need it.
  Let's go down the list.
  In aviation, we want to build a 21st century air traffic control 
system, but they cut that budget $100 million.
  The Coast Guard is spread so thin it can't meet its own criteria for 
search and rescue, but they are $17 million below what the President 
proposed, and there is no money in here for a new Coast Guard 
icebreaker. We are a great maritime nation. We are down to one 50-year-
old, decrepit icebreaker. That is not going to serve our country too 
well.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman an 
additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Then Amtrak, they cut Amtrak by $251 million in its 
capital accounts. On the day that we had the Amtrak crash, they cut the 
capital acquisition account for Amtrak by $251 million, despite the 
fact that Amtrak has a $20 billion backlog.
  There are 140-year-old tunnels that are near collapse, which will 
paralyze the East Coast. There are bridges that are 100, 110, 120 years 
old--and, yes, we do not yet have the positive train control system on 
all of Amtrak's routes.
  That has been something that has only been recommended for 25 years 
by the National Transportation Safety Board. This is pretty pathetic.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from North Carolina (Mr. Rouzer).
  Mr. ROUZER. I thank the chairman.
  I am proud to lend my full support to the chairman's bill to fund our 
transportation systems that are so vital to moving this country 
forward.
  Mr. Chairman, important needs of our industries and countless 
businesses in North Carolina are addressed by this legislation.
  First, a marginal increase in the length of twin trailers carrying 
freight over North Carolina's roads will allow more freight to be 
carried per trip, thus decreasing the number of trucks on the road. 
This modest change to 33 feet in length has a large impact on 
productivity. Slightly longer trailers improve stability because you 
have a longer wheelbase.
  More productivity means a slower growth rate of truck trips on our 
roads.

[[Page 8567]]

With this change, there would be 6.6 million fewer truck trips per 
year; and, according to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Administration's data, it would prevent at least 912 highway accidents 
every year.
  Mr. Chairman, I think it is important to note that the North Carolina 
Troopers Association is focused on supporting policies that promote 
safety and improve law enforcement in the State of North Carolina and 
across this country. They support modernizing freight transportation 
regulations to allow for 33 feet in length.
  Mr. Chairman, I submit for the Record their letter in support of this 
change.

                                                      May 6, 2015.
     Secretary Anthony Foxx,
     Department of Transportation,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Secretary Foxx: The North Carolina Troopers 
     Association, founded in 1977, is focused on supporting 
     policies that promote safety and improve law enforcement in 
     the state of North Carolina and the United States of America. 
     We are grateful for your leadership on policies at the 
     intersection of safety, law enforcement and transportation. 
     From the Charlotte City Council and Mayor's Office to the 
     Department of Transportation and the President's Cabinet, the 
     central questions remain the same. Which policy choices will 
     do the most to keep people safe?
       We often work alongside the North Carolina Trucking 
     Association on matters concerning the transportation of 
     freight on the national highway system as well as the 
     extensive network of North Carolina highways and roads. From 
     Murphy to Manteo, we partner with professional drivers to 
     keep everyone safe on the roads.
       We support truck safety advances such as lane departure 
     technologies and adaptive speed controls and encourage the 
     continued adoption of modern technology and training 
     techniques.
       The less than truckload (LTL) market has a significant 
     footprint in North Carolina not least in the areas around 
     Greensboro and Charlotte. We understand the American Trucking 
     Associations along with other leading LTL companies, the 
     United States Chamber of Commerce, and the National 
     Association of Manufacturers, back a proposal to increase the 
     length of twin trailers in the LTL freight market by five 
     feet with no change to federal weight limits. We support the 
     proposal for several reasons.
       First, a marginal increase to the length of twin trailers 
     carrying freight on North Carolina's roads will result in an 
     increase in cubic capacity allowing more freight to be 
     carried per trip, thus decreasing the number of trucks on the 
     road. A modest change in length has a large impact on 
     productivity. More productivity makes it easier to slow the 
     growth rate of truck trips on our road system.
       Modernizing freight transportation regulations to allow for 
     33-ft. doubles means 6.6 million fewer truck trips per year 
     and according to Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 
     data it would prevent at least 912 highway accidents every 
     year.
       Second, studies from the experts at the University of 
     Michigan and the federal Department of Transportation show 
     that an increase to the length of the wheel base without an 
     increase to weight limitations creates a more stable truck 
     for both straight line driving and cornering. Indeed, the 
     proposal for five more feet on twin trailers came from a 2002 
     analysis from the Transportation Research Board (Special 
     Report 267, 2002).
       In addition, fewer trucks on the road will inevitably lead 
     to much needed relief for North Carolina's infrastructure. In 
     2013, some 9.7 billion tons of freight was carried by truck. 
     The proposal for twin 33s would shift a portion of that 
     freight--the LTL market--into trailers with a slightly longer 
     wheelbase providing benefit for North Carolina bridges.
       We are encouraged by your advocacy for better, smarter, 
     safer transportation policies. When the proposal for a five 
     foot extension--with no change in weight limits for twin 
     trailers--comes before Congress we ask you to provide the 
     full support of your office.
           Sincerely,
                                           Daniel S. Jenkins, Jr.,
                   President, North Carolina Troopers Association.

  Mr. ROUZER. I am also pleased to support the committee's language 
that would continue to prohibit the use of funds to enforce the restart 
provisions of hours-of-service rules for our truck drivers. The 
trucking industry does not need more regulations imposed upon them in 
the name of safety.
  Safety is an absolute priority for their industry. Trucking companies 
know that, without good safety records, they will not be the carriers 
of choice for businesses that need to move freight.
  Mr. Chairman, each of these provisions will help spur economic growth 
throughout our Nation and enable us to better compete and thrive 
globally. My constituents in the manufacturing and agricultural 
industries are interested in making Federal transportation policies 
more conducive to the productive and efficient movement of the goods, 
and these provisions will help facilitate that.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how 
much time both sides have remaining?
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina has 14 minutes 
remaining, and the gentleman from Florida has 15 minutes remaining.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  As for the ideas that are being thrown back and forth here tonight 
about highway safety and driver safety, the advocates for highway and 
auto safety who are looking at this bill and evaluating this bill 
include the Teamsters and the Short Line Railroad Association.
  My own highway patrol in North Carolina came to see me; they came on 
their own volition, and they had pictures, Mr. Chairman, of carnage on 
our highways. It left no doubt that they were not interested in seeing 
heavier and longer trucks and relaxed rules on our highways.
  I suggest that Members might want to check in with safety advocates 
and with law enforcement in their own States and see what kind of 
assessments they get of this highly irregular effort that is going on 
here tonight of writing into appropriations bills provisions that 
haven't had hearings, that haven't had thorough evaluations.
  In some cases, they overturn evaluations that are already in the 
process--evaluations that this body has ordered up--prejudging the 
consequences and the conclusions of those studies and are moving ahead 
with ill-advised relaxations in truck and auto safety.
  I suggest that Members will want to take a critical look at that.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1945

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), one of those additional 
speakers, a member of the Committee on Appropriations.
  Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding but 
also for his very thoughtful leadership on the subcommittee as our 
ranking member.
  I rise to express my grave concerns regarding the funding levels for 
our transportation and housing programs provided in this bill. Once 
again, the majority has brought a bill to the floor that includes 
drastic and misguided sequester cuts to programs that are critical to 
the American economy and to the lives of the most vulnerable and to 
creating jobs.
  Under the transportation title, the bill funds TIGER grants $1.15 
billion below the President's request. Similarly, Small Starts and New 
Starts are underfunded from the President's request by over $1 billion. 
These are programs that create jobs and create economic growth. It is 
completely nonsensical to starve our communities of the proven Federal 
investments in transportation that we so desperately need.
  The bill before us drastically underfunds our critical housing 
programs, including $25 million less than the President's request for 
elderly and disabled housing. Yes, that is elderly and disabled 
housing. It zeroes out the housing trust fund, which helps the lowest 
income Americans, and it is $320 million less than the request for 
Choice Neighborhoods. These cuts keep people living on the margins and 
push more people into poverty and homelessness.
  Before I conclude, let me just say how inappropriate it is in this 
bill, like all these bills that we are seeing, they contain language 
that would turn, now, this bill, the Treasury-HUD bill, into an 
ideological and wrongheaded foreign policy document by restricting 
travel to Cuba. I introduced an amendment to strike this language and 
will be introducing a bipartisan amendment with

[[Page 8568]]

my friend Representative Mark Sanford to do the same on this bill. We 
need a 21st century approach to our relations with the nation that is 
90 miles from our shores, not to cling to cold war era policies.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I yield an additional 1 minute to my 
colleague.
  Ms. LEE. Americans deserve the right to travel to wherever they would 
so desire. They travel to China and Vietnam; Americans have that right. 
Why shouldn't they have the right to travel to a country 90 miles off 
of our shores? Cold war era policies are just that, 50-year-old 
policies that have failed. They are wrong, first of all. They are very 
ridiculous at this point, and they don't make any sense. So to keep 
trying to put these amendments into nongermane bills where it makes no 
sense is mind-boggling to me. I hope that we can get that amendment 
out.
  I just want to thank the ranking member for his efforts, given the 
tremendous constraints allotted by Republican austerity budgeting.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cuellar), a distinguished member of our 
Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and 
Related Agencies.
  Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I want to thank the ranking 
member, Mr. Price, for the leadership that he has provided in this 
committee, and also, thank you to his staff.
  I also want to thank my friend Chairman Mario Diaz-Balart for his 
leadership in working on this bill in a bipartisan way. There are a 
couple things I just want to point out that are important to the State 
of Texas. First of all, one of the issues that we worked on together 
was to make sure that we direct the Federal highway authority to 
continue to develop a freight network that connects to our high-volume 
land ports of entry.
  Some of the maps that I have seen show that they don't connect to the 
land ports; but just to give you an idea, in my hometown of Laredo, the 
largest inland port, if you look at the trucks that come in, those are 
12,000 trailers every single day. This is why this particular language 
got added: to make sure that the freight is connected to land ports of 
entry and will make sure that American communities are able to get 
products that are coming into the United States.
  The other thing I do want to emphasize that was put in in this 
particular bill has to do with encouraging the standardization of 
passenger rail standards between the U.S. and Mexico, which means 
basically from the San Antonio area to the Laredo area to the Monterrey 
area, and this is something that will be one of the first. I want to 
thank the chairman and the ranking member for putting in that language.
  Finally, the last thing I want to bring up is the language that helps 
HUD pay a little bit more attention to colonias. As you know, colonias 
are third-world communities that have no water and no sewage. Putting 
in this type of language will help thousands of people that live in 
third-world conditions. After speaking to Secretary Castro and speaking 
to the chairman and the ranking member, Mr. Price, this will put a 
focus on that.
  I want to thank the ranking member for his good work. I also thank my 
friend, the chairman, so much for working with me on this language.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I have no further 
speakers, so I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I also yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this bill for many 
reasons, but one short-sited cut stands out. This bill cuts HUD's 
Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes by $35 million. Let me 
explain in the simplest terms I can what a $35 million cut would mean: 
thousands of children in the United States will be poisoned.
  Thousands of housing units identified as containing lead paint 
hazards will not be made safe for the children who live there. 
Thousands of children will be needlessly subjected to decreased IQ and 
cognitive function across their entire lifespan, developmental delays, 
behavior problems, learning disabilities, seizures, coma, and even 
death. Lead poisoning impacts the decision making center of the brain. 
Children with lead poisoning are 7 times more likely to drop out of 
school, more likely to engage in risk-taking behaviors, and more likely 
to engage in criminal activity.
  Lead poisoning is entirely preventable--but to save a few dollars, 
this Majority will let them suffer. And it doesn't even save a few 
dollars. The total annual costs of lead poisoning to society are over 
$50 billion. Every dollar spent on lead hazard control activities has a 
benefit of $17 to $220 in medical, educational, and criminal justice 
costs. A $35 million cut will create a minimum of $600 million, and 
possibly nearly $8 billion in additional costs to society.
  In my district in Rochester, NY, 200 children were confirmed with 
lead poisoning in 2014. Two hundred children. That's ten kindergarten 
classrooms full of kids. That is simply not acceptable. This $35 
million cut would let another 119 children be poisoned in my district 
alone. When lead poisoning is entirely preventable, I do not know how 
we can stand to have the lifelong negative impacts on those children's 
lives on our conscience.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chair, I rise today to oppose this appropriations 
measure--and to oppose the policies that it embodies.
  The THUD bill before us, like all of the non-defense appropriations 
measures being drafted by my Republican colleagues, adheres to the 
budget caps set under sequestration, which require cuts in BOTH non-
defense and defense discretionary programs.
  My Republican colleagues have decided that applying these caps to the 
defense side of the ledger, where the budget authority appropriated by 
Congress for discretionary programs topped $560 billion in fiscal year 
2015, is intolerable.
  However, they have decided that these cuts are not only acceptable on 
the non-defense side of the ledger, they are inadequate, and so the 
Republicans' budget plan would impose additional cuts over and above 
those required under sequestration.
  Mr. Chair, what is intolerable is failing to invest in our own 
nation.
  The Republicans' unmistakable budget priority is to disinvest in the 
United States, and that objective is clearly reflected in the THUD bill 
before us.
  Let me tell you about the people who are suffering the consequences 
of this disinvestment.
  They are people just like Freddie Gray.
  Mr. Chair, the eyes of this nation saw Freddie Gray only after he was 
dead.
  They didn't see him when he was reading from text books that were 30 
years old.
  They didn't see him when he was suffering from asthma because of 
exposure to lead paint in his home.
  And they didn't see him when he couldn't find a job.
  There are tens of millions of Americans who are facing the same deep 
and systemic economic challenges today in cities and towns across this 
nation.
  These Americans have watched employers leave their communities and 
have been left with substandard schools, few job training options, and 
no path to the better future they want for themselves and their 
families.
  They have been intentionally targeted by leading banks to receive 
subprime mortgages, or have been left to obtain financial services from 
liquor stores and pawn shops when banks closed in their neighborhoods 
because their communities were deemed ``unprofitable.''
  They are people who are working full-time jobs at the minimum wage--
but are still left below the poverty line.
  They are the millions who are tired of being tired.
  Anyone who sees these people should find the bill before us today 
intolerable.
  This bill does nothing to restore the funding cut in past years from 
the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program.
  As a result of these cuts, the CDBG award amount to Baltimore has 
fallen from $27 million in federal program year 2005 to just $18.8 
million in federal program year 2014. Baltimore officials have 
indicated to me that they will be unable to fund any new non-profit 
social service activities in calendar year 2016.
  City officials indicated to me that among the requests they cannot 
fund was a request for $187,000 to help provide legal assistance for 
300 households facing foreclosure.
  This is particularly devastating in my state, which continues to have 
one of the highest foreclosure rates in the nation, and where

[[Page 8569]]

many of the people now facing foreclosure are the very people illegally 
targeted by banks to receive subprime loans.
  The bill before us also cuts funding for the maintenance and repair 
of public housing, cuts the Choice Neighborhoods program, and fails to 
provide the funding requested by the President to restore the more than 
60,000 housing vouchers lost due to sequestration.
  According to the Baltimore City housing authority, there are tens of 
thousands of people waiting for housing assistance in our city. And 
that's just one city in this nation.
  This bill even cuts funding--by 30%--for lead hazard abatement. 
Baltimore City has one of the highest rates of children testing 
positive for elevated lead levels among urban centers in the United 
States, and the highest rates are in the lowest income neighborhoods.
  As I've walked Baltimore's streets in the weeks since Freddie Gray's 
death, I have met countless young people who want exactly what every 
child in this nation wants.
  They want a safe place to live. They want a good school. They want a 
way to fulfill the promise they feel in themselves.
  And they want to know their lives matter--a right deserved by every 
American, not just the privileged few.
  The President has already indicated he would veto this bill--so 
rather than wasting time on it, why don't we craft a new budget 
framework that will ensure every American has the chance to succeed?
  Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Chair, I rise today to speak 
in opposition of the proposed cuts to the Transportation Infrastructure 
Generating Economic Recovery Program (TIGER) under the Fiscal Year 2016 
Transportation Housing and Urban Development (THUD) Appropriations 
bill.
  Since 2009, the Department of Transportation has provided state and 
local governments with grants to complete infrastructure projects. Many 
communities have profited from these investments, providing 
neighborhoods with safer pedestrian pathways, revitalizing economically 
distressed areas, and reducing congestion from traffic.
  TIGER grants are meant to provide eligibility to infrastructure 
projects that do not qualify for restrictive formula based federal 
funding. Freight, port, and bridge projects across the country have 
benefited from financial support from TIGER. Reducing accessibility to 
TIGER grants will prolong infrastructure projects and increase traffic 
in our communities.
  The House FY16 THUD appropriations bill includes $100 million for 
TIGER grants. This is a $400 million reduction from the 2015 enacted 
level, cutting the Department of Transportation's budget by 80%.
  Severe cuts to TIGER are troubling, and substantial funding for the 
program is crucial to my District. For example, the Durfee Avenue grade 
separation proposal in Pico Rivera would reduce an estimated 15.3 hours 
of vehicle delays on a daily basis. Rosemead Boulevard/Lakewood 
Boulevard in my District carries tens of thousands of cars every day, 
providing goods movement to the Gateway cities. The Del Amo Boulevard 
bridge is structurally deficient, outdated, and in need of maintenance 
to improve lane capacity problems.
  I ask that my colleagues join me in opposing the 80% cuts to TIGER 
grants and language restricting TIGER eligibility in the HOUSE FY16 
THUD bill. Providing funding for these and other TIGER projects are 
about providing services that communities deserve.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chair, I rise today in 
opposition to the FY16 Transportation and Housing and Urban Development 
Appropriations bill.
  In short, this bill is shortsighted and fraught with handouts to 
special interests at the expense of the safety of the American people.
  Once again, the Majority in this body has squandered an opportunity 
to invest in our nation's crumbling roads and infrastructure, and it 
has squandered an opportunity to combat homelessness and provide access 
to safer, affordable housing for millions.
  Our future prosperity and economic growth depend on the investments 
we make now to ensure America remains the most competitive nation in an 
increasingly global economy.
  Instead of investing in safer rail to prevent accidents like the 
recent and fatal derailment of Amtrak in Philadelphia, this bill cuts 
Amtrak's budget by nearly $290 million and subsequently hampers its 
ability to implement proven technologies that would have prevented this 
tragedy and countless others.
  Instead of supporting the Federal Aviation Administration's efforts 
to implement NextGen technologies to keep our skies the safest in the 
world, this bill cuts the agency's capital investment program by $100 
million from the FY15 enacted level and $355 million below the 
President's budget request.
  This bill cuts funding to programs like Choice Neighborhoods and the 
Community Development Block Grants that would revitalize our 
communities, the Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes programs that 
would keep our families safe from harmful materials, and programs such 
as Housing for the Elderly that helps deliver the dignity and 
assistance for our most vulnerable populations.
  This is just a bad bill, Mr. Chair, and these are just a few of the 
reasons why this is a terrible bill, and one that will surely be vetoed 
by the President.
  I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and bring this legislation 
back to the drawing board.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chair, I rise today to express my strong 
opposition to H.R. 2577, the Transportation, Housing, and Urban 
Development Appropriations Act.
  This legislation is severely underfunded. Considering declining 
Federal Housing Administration receipts and increased Section 8 renewal 
costs, this year's THUD bill is funded at $1.5 billion below last 
year's level. The overall appropriations levels for all domestic 
discretionary programs and priorities is lower than at any point in 
more than a decade. That is the root cause of the problem, and until 
the reckless budget sequester is lifted, the priorities that Americans 
care about will not get the support they need. We must end 
sequestration now.
  But the specific cuts in this bill are also a concern. H.R. 2577 
imposes devastating cuts on housing priorities. It would impose a more 
than 10 percent cut in public housing management. It would also 
significantly underfund supportive housing for seniors, with that 
funding below last year's level and almost 10 percent below the 
President's request. Those cuts will have devastating impacts on 
Americans struggling to make ends meet.
  As has been highlighted by many of my colleagues, this bill also 
fails to make rail infrastructure, high speed rail, and positive train 
control a priority. Experts say that positive train control could have 
prevented the tragic Amtrak train derailment north of Philadelphia, but 
Congress continues to shirk its obligation to adequately support it. 
That failure is inexcusable.
  Finally, H.R. 2577 does not make the investment in auto safety 
oversight that the last year has proven we need. 2014 was the year of 
the recall, almost doubling the previous record. We're on pace to break 
the record again this year. Yet, this bill funds the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration--the agency responsible for monitoring 
and improving auto safety--just 1 percent above last year's level. That 
is less than inflation. While I supported the amendment my colleague, 
Rep. Michael Burgess, successfully added to increase NHTSA funding by 
$4 million, that is just a drop in the bucket in terms of what is 
needed. It is also unfortunate that this bill cuts the Office of the 
Secretary of Transportation--4 percent below last year's level and more 
than 10 percent below the President's request--in order to slightly 
increase NHTSA funding. We need to consider legislation like H.R. 1811, 
the Vehicle Safety Improvement Act, which would more than double NHTSA 
funding for its important work through a new $3 fee on new vehicles. We 
need to ramp up resources, authority, and other support for NHTSA in 
order to significantly improve auto safety and save lives. I will 
continue to work with Mr. Burgess and others to get that done.
  These are just a handful of the overwhelming number of reasons I 
oppose H.R. 2577. I am glad that the President has issued a veto threat 
on the bill, and I will continue to work to ensure that it is never 
enacted.
  The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  During consideration of the bill for amendment each amendment shall 
be debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the 
proponent and an opponent and shall not be subject to amendment. No pro 
forma amendment shall be in order except that the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective 
designees may offer up to 10 pro forma amendments each at any point for 
the purpose of debate. The chair of the Committee of the Whole may 
accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the Member 
offering an amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion of the 
Congressional Record designated for that purpose. Amendments so printed 
shall be considered read.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 2577

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America

[[Page 8570]]

     in Congress assembled, That the following sums are 
     appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise 
     appropriated, for the Departments of Transportation, and 
     Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies for the 
     fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, and for other 
     purposes, namely:

                                TITLE I

                      DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                        Office of the Secretary

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of the Secretary, 
     $105,000,000, of which not to exceed $2,734,000 shall be 
     available for the immediate Office of the Secretary; not to 
     exceed $1,025,000 shall be available for the immediate Office 
     of the Deputy Secretary; not to exceed $20,066,000 shall be 
     available for the Office of the General Counsel; not to 
     exceed $9,310,000 shall be available for the Office of the 
     Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy; not to exceed 
     $12,808,000 shall be available for the Office of the 
     Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs; not to exceed 
     $2,500,000 shall be available for the Office of the Assistant 
     Secretary for Governmental Affairs; not to exceed $26,029,000 
     shall be available for the Office of the Assistant Secretary 
     for Administration; not to exceed $2,029,000 shall be 
     available for the Office of Public Affairs; not to exceed 
     $1,769,000 shall be available for the Office of the Executive 
     Secretariat; not to exceed $10,793,000 shall be available for 
     the Office of Intelligence, Security, and Emergency Response; 
     and not to exceed $15,937,000 shall be available for the 
     Office of the Chief Information Officer: Provided, That the 
     Secretary of Transportation is authorized to transfer funds 
     appropriated for any office of the Office of the Secretary to 
     any other office of the Office of the Secretary: Provided 
     further, That no appropriation for any office shall be 
     increased or decreased by more than 5 percent by all such 
     transfers: Provided further, That notice of any change in 
     funding greater than 5 percent shall be submitted for 
     approval to the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations: Provided further, That not to exceed $60,000 
     shall be for allocation within the Department for official 
     reception and representation expenses as the Secretary may 
     determine: Provided further, That notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, excluding fees authorized in Public Law 
     107-71, there may be credited to this appropriation up to 
     $2,500,000 in funds received in user fees: Provided further, 
     That none of the funds provided in this Act shall be 
     available for the position of Assistant Secretary for Public 
     Affairs.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Dent

  Mr. DENT. I have an amendment at the desk I would like to offer.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 2, line 13, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 2, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 2, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 47, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $9,000,000)''.
       Page 50, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 56, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.

  Mr. DENT (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent 
to dispense with the reading of the amendment.
  The CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer this amendment to increase 
Amtrak's capital account by $9 million, which is the amount that we are 
told it will cost to equip all of Amtrak trains with inward-facing 
cameras in their engine cars.
  It has been over 3 weeks since Amtrak Northeast Regional number 188 
derailed just north of Philadelphia, killing at least eight people and 
injuring over 200. We still do not know exactly what caused this tragic 
accident, but had the train been equipped with an inward-facing camera, 
we very well might.
  This is a simple and relatively inexpensive reform that the National 
Transportation Safety Board has been advocating for years, and it is 
past time that we act. Like the infamous black boxes on airplanes, 
inward-facing cameras on trains would provide inspectors with critical 
information after an accident.
  Northeast Regional 188 was traveling over twice the posted speed 
limit on the stretch of track where it derailed. I should also let you 
know, I rode on that same regional train that morning, from Wilmington, 
Delaware, down to Washington, so I know this particular line, the 
Northeast corridor. I travel it regularly, so I am very much personally 
interested, as are so many of my constituents and friends in the 
northeastern part of the United States.
  Had an inward-facing camera been installed on that train, we might 
now know whether that was due to some mechanical failure, negligence on 
the engineer's part, or perhaps some medical incident beyond his 
control. With that information in hand, we would be that much closer to 
taking the appropriate steps to ensure that this never happens again.
  Our thoughts and prayers remain with the victims of this tragedy and 
their loved ones, and we owe it to them to do everything we can to 
prevent future incidents like the one we saw in Philadelphia. The 
installation of inward-facing cameras in all Amtrak trains is an 
important step in that direction.
  I would like to thank Chairman Diaz-Balart and his staff for their 
support and for working with me to identify an acceptable offset, 
especially given the extremely tight constraints under which this bill 
was drafted. I urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment.
  I also would like to say, I know that the offsets are of some concern 
to some of the Members. We are going to do our best to try to work with 
them on that matter.
  At this time, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in 
opposition so as to raise objections about the offsets proposed in this 
amendment.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, my friend Mr. Dent has 
proposed an increase in an appropriation for a worthy purpose, to 
install inward-facing cameras on Amtrak locomotives, but his amendment 
offers another example of why the overall allocation in this T-HUD bill 
is completely inadequate.
  The offsets may represent relatively small reductions in DOT's 
administrative accounts, each of these accounts: the DOT Secretary's 
salaries and expenses, the Federal Transit Administration's 
administrative expenses account, the Saint Lawrence Seaway. All of 
these would be cut below last year's level.
  At this point, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from 
Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), my colleague from the full committee.
  Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment, respectfully, 
and I implore the majority to take a close look at where they have 
obtained the money for this important Amtrak investment. Amtrak is 
important to Ohio, to the Pennsylvania-Ohio corridor, and there would 
be nothing I would do to hurt Amtrak. I have been one of Amtrak's 
greatest advocates.
  Of the $9 million to fix this problem for Amtrak, you don't take the 
majority of it, $3 million, from the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development 
Administration, the Great Lakes-Saint Lawrence Seaway Development 
Corporation. In effect, what they have done is they have taken $3 
million of the $9 million they need for Amtrak out of the Saint 
Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, which is, in effect, a 10 
percent cut to the smallest entity inside of the Department of 
Transportation.
  Why is the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation important? 
First of all, the current funding level is the smallest budget within 
the Department of Transportation. Our amendment inside the full 
Committee on Appropriations allowed that budget not to be cut any 
further.
  The seaway is the only binational instrumentality between Canada and 
the United States. It connects an entire region of the country from 
Duluth to Massena, New York, to global markets. They have threatened 
problems within

[[Page 8571]]

the seaway, such as locks collapsing and inadequate areas for our ships 
to pass through. Sailing on the Great Lakes can be very, very 
dangerous, as many of our sailors know.
  That corridor is the shortest distance between Europe and the United 
States, and last year, the seaway had an 8 percent increase in its 
shipping growth. It serves a part of America that has been battered 
economically. Manufacturing has been fighting its way back. This really 
isn't the time to tamper with the seaway's budget.
  I understand the problems of Amtrak, and I know that it needs 
funding, but I am just asking the majority to please look at the budget 
you have offered. Your offsets in the case of the Saint Lawrence Seaway 
Development Corporation are truly unacceptable, and in doing so, the 
seaway will be harmed. It will harm ports like Erie, Pennsylvania; 
Massena, New York; Duluth, Minnesota; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Gary, 
Indiana; Toledo, Ohio; Detroit, Michigan. The list is a very, very long 
list.
  We have an aging infrastructure in the Great Lakes as well. We don't 
have the power of the Intracoastal. We wish we did. But I have to raise 
my voice in strong objection to the offset related to the Saint 
Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation.
  I respect very much the gentleman from Pennsylvania. I know what you 
are trying to do for Amtrak. I want to help you in that effort, but not 
at the expense of the seaway.

                              {time}  2000

  I am hoping that the respective staffs can work together as this bill 
moves forward to find a more reasonable offset. I have many more ideas 
about that, but the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation 
should be allowed to remain functional and not be harmed by a 10 
percent cut.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I certainly appreciate the comments of the 
gentlewoman from Ohio, and I understand the difficult choices here. I 
do intend to work with her and any other concerned Members about these 
offsets and maybe find a way to alter them at some point, but I just 
didn't have time to do it tonight.
  Again, I believe this is a reasonable amendment and it will do what 
we need to at least help with respect to the inward-facing cameras on 
Amtrak trains.
  At this time I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Lance), my friend, who is a frequent Amtrak rider himself.
  Mr. LANCE. Mr. Chairman, 3 weeks ago, the tragic Amtrak accident in 
north Philadelphia led to deaths, injuries, and destruction. Those who 
were injured included two of my constituents with whom I had been 
meeting with earlier in the day here in Washington.
  While the circumstances surrounding the incident remain under 
investigation, we do know that certain measures can be taken to ensure 
safety and preparedness, and changes can be implemented moving forward 
for public safety.
  Inward-facing cameras are an appropriate step in modernizing train 
transportation safety. The National Transportation Safety Board has 
been advocating for this simple and relatively inexpensive reform for 
years.
  I urge support of Mr. Dent's amendment to bring this reform to 
fruition.
  Mr. DENT. Again, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment that 
would provide $9 million for inward-facing cameras on Amtrak trains. 
This is absolutely essential, I believe, to helping us hopefully 
prevent and--certainly, after the fact--determine the causes of these 
types of tragedies when they occur.
  I wish we weren't at this point, but we need to do this. It is 
important. Amtrak wants to move in this direction. The National 
Transportation Safety Board has urged this for some time. And it is now 
time that Congress act.
  So, again, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen). The question is on the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Dent).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Amendment Offered by Mrs. Bustos

  Mrs. BUSTOS. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 2, line 13, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $500,000)''.
       Page 2, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $500,000)''.
       Page 60, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $500,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentlewoman 
from Illinois and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Illinois.
  Mrs. BUSTOS. Madam Chairman, I would like to thank Chairman Diaz-
Balart and Ranking Member Price for their hard work on this 
legislation.
  I rise today to urge my colleagues to join with me in improving rail 
and pipeline safety by supporting my amendment to increase funding by 
$500,000 to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. 
This important agency's mission is to protect our communities from the 
risks of hazardous materials transportation, including moving crude oil 
by rail and pipeline.
  Until just a few years ago, our Nation's railroads transported very 
little crude oil. Now, in part due to the boom in oil production from 
the Bakken formation in North Dakota and in other areas, approximately 
1.1 billion barrels are transported by rail in the United States every 
single day.
  The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration conducted 
tests on Bakken crude and found it to have a higher degree of 
volatility than most other U.S. crudes.
  Last year, railroads carried almost 650,000 carloads of oil, compared 
to only 9,500 carloads in 2008. This impact is especially felt in 
Illinois, my home State, where we have the second-most number of miles 
of rail track in the entire country. In fact, about 25 percent of all 
U.S. rail traffic passes through Chicago, Illinois.
  Improving rail safety is extremely important to our region, our 
State, and to our entire country. This issue is especially personal to 
me and the people I serve in my congressional district. That is because 
in March, earlier this year, a train carrying crude oil derailed near 
Galena, Illinois. It is in the northwest corner of my State and is one 
of the most beautiful regions of not only my congressional district but 
the entire State of Illinois--and I think in the entire country.
  While we were lucky that no one was harmed, several tanker cars 
exploded and the Bakken crude spilled just a few feet from a slough 
that flows straight into the Mississippi River, which is the drinking 
water supply for millions of people.
  Because of the bravery and the dedication of first responders and 
local, State, and Federal cleanup crews, no water was contaminated. We 
were also lucky that the derailment took place in a largely rural and 
uninhabited area. Imagine what would have happened if a derailment like 
this were to occur in Chicago, Los Angeles, or New York, or any more 
populated area.
  In light of several other high-profile train derailments, including 
those in West Virginia and North Dakota, involving cars carrying crude 
oil, communities across the country are becoming increasingly concerned 
about the safe movement of crude oil--and with very good reason.
  While I am encouraged that Federal agencies and industry leaders are 
working together to make transportation of hazardous material safer, 
Congress must also do its job and step up and provide adequate 
resources to keep our energy transport system safe and secure.
  That is why I ask today for your support for my effort to ensure this 
appropriations bill includes additional funding for the agency that 
helps ensure the safe transportation of energy products, including the 
shipment of crude oil by pipeline and rail.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Bustos).

[[Page 8572]]

  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Meehan

  Mr. MEEHAN. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 2, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $4,000,000)''.
       Page 2, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $4,000,000)''.
       Page 44, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,500,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. MEEHAN. Madam Chairman, I want to thank my good friend and 
colleague from Florida for his indulgence and working with me on this 
amendment.
  We have benefited here across the United States in recent times with 
a boom in energy and moving towards energy self-sufficiency. Much of 
this has been due to the ability to take advantage of our natural 
resources, including crude oil, which is increasingly being developed 
from the Western parts of our country. In fact, more than 33 million 
barrels of crude oil are shipped by rail each month in the United 
States, and that is a fifty-fold increase from more than 5 years ago.
  Shipments from the Bakken region have brightened the future of oil 
workers and refineries in my own Seventh District of Pennsylvania, and 
indeed the entire Philadelphia area, and in fact they have created 
energy opportunities throughout our Nation.
  But now, despite the fact that nearly all of the shipments reach 
their destinations safely, accidents, sadly, are on the rise. Recent 
incidents in Ontario, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania call to mind the 
need for improved safety measures.
  Madam Chairman, my amendment seeks to transfer funding from the 
Office of the Secretary salaries and expense account and puts $3.5 
million into the Federal Railroad Administration to fund additional 
cars to inspect the more than 14,000 miles of crude oil rail routes 
nationwide.
  This funding would also expedite the use of remote automated track 
inspection capability, which will increase inspection mileage while 
reducing costs.
  For more than 30 years, the FRA's automated track inspection program, 
called ATIP, has provided accurate track geometry and performance data 
to assess compliance with the Federal Track Safety Standards.
  Collected data is used by the FRA, railroad inspectors, and railroads 
to ensure that track safety is being maintained. Immediately following 
ATIP track surveys, the railroads use the data to help locate and 
correct problems. Often railroads use the ATIP data as a quality 
assurance check on their own track inspection and maintenance programs.
  Madam Chairman, America's energy boom has brightened communities 
across the country, and as crude oil by rail grows, I want to help 
protect those communities. My amendment would enable the FRA to 
increase its ATIP capability to meet this challenge.
  Madam Chairman, I thank the chairman and Ranking Member Price for 
their willingness to work with me on this issue. I urge the amendment's 
adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meehan).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Burgess

  Mr. BURGESS. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 2, line 13, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``($4,000,000)''.
       Page 2, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $500,000)''.
       Page 2, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 2, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $250,000)''.
       Page 2, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 3, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $250,000)''.
       Page 40, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $4,000,000)''.

  Mr. BURGESS (during the reading). Madam Chair, I ask unanimous 
consent the amendment be considered read.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Texas and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. BURGESS. Madam Chairman, this is an amendment to add an 
additional $4 million to the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration's operations and research.
  Madam Chair, at the beginning of this Congress, I took the gavel of 
the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and 
Trade. This was the gavel previously held by our good friend, Chairman 
Lee Terry.
  There was some unfinished business as this Congress started, and one 
of the biggest issues left over from the previous Congress was the 
issue of airbag energetic deployments and ruptures, and the subsequent 
recall of those airbags.
  There was a hearing done in December right at the end of the last 
Congress, and it seemed like there was no activity from the National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration. But just 2 weeks ago, they 
announced a recall of 34 million vehicles. The recall massively 
expanded. And the manufacturer of the airbags, Takata, finally admitted 
that six of their manufacturing designs were indeed defective. Takata 
has identified 11 auto manufacturers that use the defective air bag 
inflators.
  Again, 34 million vehicles have been subject to this recall. And this 
may not be the end.
  The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Takata have 
not identified what is the cause of these energetic disruptions of the 
air bag inflators.
  Yesterday, the Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Subcommittee held a 
hearing to receive an update on the situation. Among the witnesses was 
the Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, Dr. Mark Rosekind. Dr. Rosekind took over the 
Administration just weeks after the subcommittee's Takata hearing in 
December.
  During yesterday's hearing, one of the themes we heard repeatedly 
from Administrator Rosekind was that NHTSA would have been better able 
to identify and mandate recalls had they had more resources. It is a 
refrain we are used to hearing here in Congress. His argument was that 
with more money, the agency could save more lives. I will take him at 
his word on that.
  For fiscal year 2016, Congress is proposing funding the National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration operations and research, the 
account responsible for the policing of the safety of auto 
manufacturers' products, at $150 million. This indeed is an increase of 
$20 million from fiscal year 2015, and for that I am extremely 
grateful.
  In the interest of good faith, however, from the new chairman of the 
subcommittee to the new Administrator of NHTSA, I want to take one more 
step and offer an additional $4 million to this account to provide 
NHTSA with the resources it needs to ensure that more lives are not 
disrupted by these defects.

                              {time}  2015

  It is my hope that NHTSA can use this additional funding to find a 
permanent solution to the problem.
  The Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Subcommittee is closely 
watching and awaiting the release of a report by NHTSA's inspector 
general on their Office of Defects Investigation. We hope it will be 
released soon.
  The offset comes from the Department of Transportation Office of the 
Secretary for salaries and expenses. This seems like an extremely 
worthwhile investment, and I urge the subcommittee's adoption of my 
amendment.

[[Page 8573]]

  Again, I want to thank the subcommittee for hearing my amendment. I 
certainly want to congratulate the chairman and ranking member of the 
subcommittee. I think they have done good work on this. I urge adoption 
of the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                        research and technology

       For necessary expenses related to the Office of the 
     Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, $11,386,000, 
     of which $8,218,000 shall remain available until September 
     30, 2018: Provided, That there may be credited to this 
     appropriation, to be available until expended, funds received 
     from States, counties, municipalities, other public 
     authorities, and private sources for expenses incurred for 
     training: Provided further, That any reference in law, 
     regulation, judicial proceedings, or elsewhere to the 
     Research and Innovative Technology Administration shall 
     continue to be deemed to be a reference to the Office of the 
     Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology of the 
     Department of Transportation.

                  national infrastructure investments

                     (including transfer of funds)

        For capital investments in surface transportation 
     infrastructure, $100,000,000, to remain available through 
     September 30, 2018: Provided, That the Secretary of 
     Transportation shall distribute funds provided under this 
     heading as discretionary grants to be awarded to a State, 
     local government, transit agency, or a collaboration among 
     such entities on a competitive basis for projects that will 
     have a significant impact on the Nation, a metropolitan area, 
     or a region: Provided further, That projects eligible for 
     funding provided under this heading shall include, but not be 
     limited to, highway or bridge projects eligible under title 
     23, United States Code; public transportation projects 
     eligible under chapter 53 of title 49, United States Code; 
     passenger and freight rail transportation projects; and port 
     infrastructure investments (including inland port 
     infrastructure and land ports of entry): Provided further, 
     That the Secretary may use up to 20 percent of the funds made 
     available under this heading for the purpose of paying the 
     subsidy and administrative costs of projects eligible for 
     Federal credit assistance under chapter 6 of title 23, United 
     States Code, if the Secretary finds that such use of the 
     funds would advance the purposes of this paragraph: Provided 
     further, That in distributing funds provided under this 
     heading, the Secretary shall take such measures so as to 
     ensure an equitable geographic distribution of funds, an 
     appropriate balance in addressing the needs of urban and 
     rural areas, and the investment in a variety of 
     transportation modes: Provided further, That a grant funded 
     under this heading shall be not less than $2,000,000 and not 
     greater than $15,000,000: Provided further, That not more 
     than 20 percent of the funds made available under this 
     heading may be awarded to projects in a single State: 
     Provided further, That the Federal share of the costs for 
     which an expenditure is made under this heading shall be, at 
     the option of the recipient, up to 50 percent: Provided 
     further, That the Secretary shall give priority to projects 
     that require a contribution of Federal funds in order to 
     complete an overall financing package: Provided further, That 
     not less than 10 percent of the funds provided under this 
     heading shall be for projects located in rural areas: 
     Provided further, That for projects located in rural areas, 
     the minimum grant size shall be $1,000,000 and the Secretary 
     may increase the Federal share of costs above 80 percent: 
     Provided further, That projects conducted using funds 
     provided under this heading must comply with the requirements 
     of subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40, United States 
     Code: Provided further, That the Secretary shall conduct a 
     new competition to select the grants and credit assistance 
     awarded under this heading: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary may retain up to $5,000,000 of the funds provided 
     under this heading, and may transfer portions of those funds 
     to the Administrators of the Federal Highway Administration, 
     the Federal Transit Administration, the Federal Railroad 
     Administration and the Maritime Administration, to fund the 
     award and oversight of grants and credit assistance made 
     under the National Infrastructure Investments program.


          Amendment Offered by Ms. Maxine Waters of California

  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at 
the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 4, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,150,000,000)''.

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentlewoman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentlewoman from California and 
a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Madam Chair, I rise to offer an 
amendment to invest in transportation infrastructure for the 21st 
century.
  The transportation funding in this bill is woefully insufficient to 
meet our country's infrastructure needs. The cuts to the TIGER program 
are particularly egregious.
  TIGER, formally known as Transportation Investment Generating 
Economic Recovery, is a competitive grant program that creates jobs by 
funding investments in transportation infrastructure. This bill cuts 
TIGER from the 2015 level of $500 million down to a mere $100 million 
in 2016.
  America needs new infrastructure for the 21st century. The American 
Society of Civil Engineers gave the public infrastructure of the United 
States a grade of D-plus in 2013 and estimated that we will need to 
invest $3.6 trillion by 2020 in order to improve the conditions of our 
infrastructure.
  Indeed, TIGER needs to be expanded, not cut. The President requested 
$1.25 billion for TIGER in the coming fiscal year, as part of an 
expanded TIGER program that will create jobs, encourage innovation, and 
modernize transportation infrastructure for the 21st century.
  Earlier this year, I sent a letter to the Appropriations Committee 
urging support for the President's request, and 144 Members of Congress 
signed my letter.
  Our economy is still struggling to recover from the recession. 
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our Nation's unemployment 
rate stands at 5.4 percent. Furthermore, unemployment among Hispanics 
is 6.9 percent. Among African Americans, it is 9.6 percent, and among 
teenagers, it is 17.1 percent.
  An expanded TIGER program will create meaningful employment building 
safe roads, bridges, and public transit systems in communities 
throughout the United States.
  My amendment increases TIGER funding to $1.25 billion in order to 
fully fund the President's request for this critical program.
  Madam Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from North Carolina (Mr. Price).
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I want to commend my 
colleague, who does such distinguished work in housing and financial 
services on her committee, for coming in to this debate today and 
calling attention to the importance of the TIGER program, and I would 
just like to ask her to respond.
  I am looking at the figures for this year. There is a $500 million 
appropriation for that program in the current year. Is the gentlewoman 
aware that the Department of Transportation has already received 950 
preapplications, totaling $14.5 billion? That is 29 times the amount 
available.
  What does that suggest about the need for this program?
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Well, you have accurately and 
appropriately identified the need for the program, based on those 
applications. Not only is it a very popular program, it is a program 
that creates jobs, and our local communities need this very much, and 
they are strong advocates for it.
  I would hope that my colleagues here in the Congress, on both sides 
of the aisle, who have benefitted from the TIGER program, would see the 
need and remove all obstacles, support this program, and let us move 
forward with getting the infrastructure repairs and the building that 
we need to do.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank my colleague for offering this 
amendment. It calls attention to the gross underfunding in this bill, 
not just of TIGER, but of virtually every HUD and transportation 
program so that it is very hard, of course, to find offsets. There is 
very little money in this bill.

[[Page 8574]]

  We should be breaking out of that mold. We should be going after a 
budget agreement that will let us write a decent bill and meet this 
country's needs. Her amendment, better than anything we have heard thus 
far tonight, underscores that need.
  I thank the gentlewoman.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. I thank the gentleman from North 
Carolina, and I yield back the balance of my time.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, the amendment proposes a net increase 
in budget authority in the bill.
  The amendment is not in order under section 3(d)3 of House Resolution 
5 of the 114th Congress, which states the following:
  ``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general 
appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the 
bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments 
proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority 
pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''
  The amendment does propose a net increase in budget authority in the 
bill in violation of such section.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order? If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.
  The gentleman from Florida makes a point of order that the amendment 
offered by the gentlewoman from California violates section 3(d)3 of 
House Resolution 5.
  Section 3(d)3 establishes a point of order against an amendment 
proposing a net increase in budget authority in the pending bill.
  As persuasively asserted by the gentleman from Florida, the amendment 
proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill. Therefore, the 
point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.


          Amendment Offered by Ms. Maxine Waters of California

  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at 
the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 4, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $400,000,000)''.

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentlewoman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentlewoman from California and 
a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Madam Chair, I rise to offer an 
amendment to restore some of the transportation funding that was cut 
drastically in this bill.
  This is my second of two amendments to increase funds for the 
innovative TIGER transportation grant program. This amendment increases 
fiscal year 2016 TIGER funding to $500 million, thereby restoring TIGER 
to the 2015 level.
  States, local governments, and transit agencies depend upon the TIGER 
program to finance projects to repair aging infrastructure and develop 
new highway and transit systems. A safe, efficient, modern, and 
accessible transportation system is vital for a growing economy.
  Madam Chair, we cannot afford to cut TIGER below the current funding 
level, and I am here this evening to urge my colleagues to vote for my 
amendment and invest in infrastructure for the 21st century.
  I recognize that a point of order has been raised on this issue, but 
I also recognize that what I am advocating is vital for this economy 
and for this country. I would hope that somehow we would be wise 
enough, creative enough, and caring enough to dispense with the rule, 
as it has been identified on my first amendment, and move forward in a 
very creative way to do what is necessary to help our failing 
infrastructure in this country.
  The stories about the failing bridges, the stories about the unsafe 
highways, the stories about the need for transit system improvements 
are stories that we hear, day in and day out.
  Given the information that has been made available to us about the 
needs for infrastructure repairs, I would hope that we would not simply 
treat this in such an ordinary fashion and apply the rule that 
basically says: Well, if I did not find the money to fund it, then 
somehow it cannot be in order.
  Certainly, this amount of money is not easy to locate; certainly, I 
do not have an answer to where this money would necessarily come from, 
but I would hope that my colleagues would take into consideration again 
the desperate need of our economy and our communities and not rule this 
out of order.
  I yield back the balance of my time.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, this amendment proposes a net increase 
in budget authority in the bill.
  The amendment is not in order under section 3(d)3 of House Resolution 
5 of the 114th Congress which states the following:
  ``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general 
appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the 
bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments 
proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority 
pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''
  The amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill 
in violation of such section.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order? If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.
  The gentleman from Florida makes a point of order that the amendment 
offered by the gentlewoman from California violates section 3(d)3 of 
House Resolution 5.
  For the reasons stated in the previous ruling, and as persuasively 
asserted by the gentleman from Florida, the amendment proposes a net 
increase in budget authority in the bill. Therefore, the point of order 
is sustained. The amendment is not in order.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Dold

  Mr. DOLD. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 6, line 9, strike ``and the Secretary'' and all that 
     follows through ``percent'' on line 10.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Illinois and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. DOLD. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of this amendment 
to change a provision in the bill relating to TIGER grants.
  Put simply, this amendment would put all transportation projects on 
an even playing field and allow all qualified projects to fairly 
compete for these grants, regardless of whether they take place in an 
urban area or a rural area.

                              {time}  2030

  Madam Chair, my district is heavily reliant on all forms of 
transportation. The Chicagoland area is the hub for the Nation's 
transportation network. Over 925 million tons of freight move in and 
out of Chicago each and every year, and each workday, tens of thousands 
of citizens of the 10th Congressional District use commuter rail.
  The Chicago Regional Transportation Authority estimates that it needs 
to find $13.4 billion over the next decade just to maintain the system 
in its current condition. That is why it is more important than ever to 
find the funds to pay to maintain and rebuild our Nation's 
transportation system.
  In the Transportation Appropriations funding bill, there is a 
provision which discriminates against urban districts, like Illinois' 
10th Congressional District. TIGER grants, which are competitive grants 
to fund capital investments in surface transportation projects, can be 
awarded to projects across the entire Nation.
  However, the bill also provides that projects in urban areas receive 
a Federal match of 50 percent of the project

[[Page 8575]]

funding, while projects in rural areas can receive up to 80 percent of 
the project's funding.
  Madam Chair, this is unfair and unjust. The TIGER grants are 
competitive, discretionary grants that should be awarded to the most 
deserving projects. The bill's language allows rural areas to leverage 
local dollars at a 4 to 1 ratio, allowing them to put up just $2 out of 
every $10 needed for a project. Urban areas may only leverage at a 1 to 
1 ratio.
  This language harms urban areas and makes it more difficult to secure 
the funding needed to complete these projects. My amendment is a 
commonsense and just solution to this problem and would place all 
projects, no matter where they occur, on an even playing field.
  Madam Chair, it is time to bring equity back to transportation 
funding, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and put all 
qualified projects on an even playing field.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I respectfully oppose the gentleman's 
well-intentioned amendment.
  TIGER is a national program, and we support cities of all sizes 
having a chance to get a grant, and we work to ensure there is a 
balance between urban and rural areas. I am afraid that the well-
intentioned amendment from the gentleman seeks to undo that delicate 
balance at this time.
  Madam Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from North Carolina (Mr. Price).
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I, too, want to reluctantly express my opposition to this amendment.
  Madam Chair, I take second place to no one in this body as the 
champion of the TIGER program, as I hope was evident in my support for 
the gentlewoman from California's (Ms. Maxine Waters) amendments just 
now; but we are underscoring in this amendment, while it is worthy in 
its intent--and I would love to be able to add a lot more money than 
this to the TIGER program--its offset is very worrisome and one that I 
think should lead us to oppose this amendment.
  It comes out of the Federal Aviation Administration's operations 
account, $100 million out of that account.
  Now, the bill provides a slight increase for FAA operations, but it 
is still $67 million below the President's request. This is the account 
that provides the funds needed to ensure aviation safety and security, 
so cutting this account is ill advised.
  Mr. DOLD. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. DOLD. I think the gentleman is talking about a different 
amendment. My amendment doesn't take anything out of any account. This 
is talking about simply changing the percentages between urban and 
rural to allow competitive grants so that it competes at a level 
playing field.
  I just respectfully think you have got a different amendment, which I 
appreciate, but it is not the one that I think that we are talking 
about right now.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. The gentleman does have an amendment 
that fits my description; is that true?
  Mr. DOLD. Yes, but we have withdrawn that one, but I do appreciate 
the gentleman talking about that one.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank the gentleman for that 
clarification. My remarks will await the proper amendment.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DOLD. Madam Chair, as we talk about transportation and 
infrastructure, it is so critically important, critically important for 
our economy, critically important certainly for our urban areas, and if 
you look at a map of the city of Chicago in the center of our country, 
we have got six of seven major rail lines that go through there.
  It used to be that a third of all the freight in the country would go 
through Chicago. Now, it is about a quarter, but it is still a 
tremendous amount, and it really impacts the Nation's economy.
  We can get a railcar from Los Angeles to Chicago in 2 days. It takes 
nearly 2 days to go from one side of Chicago to the other side of 
Chicago. This does have an impact.
  The same rail that we are talking about here also has commuter rails 
on it, and we are dealing with infrastructure that goes back to the 
Roosevelt administration. I don't mean FDR; I mean Teddy Roosevelt. We 
need to make sure that there is some additional funding going here.
  This amendment that we are talking about is not talking about moving 
dollars around. It is talking about trying to provide equity so that 
urban projects, which I would argue we desperately need, are on the 
same level as the rural projects.
  If we were to lose mass transit or some of these other projects in 
the city of Chicago, we are talking about a 50 percent increase in 
congestion on our roadways.
  This is an amendment that I hope that my colleagues on the other side 
of the aisle would embrace--at least let's talk about a level playing 
field, where we are not giving preference to the rural areas versus the 
urban areas, urban areas which I would argue use the rail a pretty 
significant amount in terms of how we are moving people around, not to 
mention our goods and services.
  This is an amendment that I think is a commonsense amendment, and I 
would hope that I would get some support from my good friend from 
Florida and maybe we could get him to even reconsider, but I hope I am 
not tilting at windmills on that one, Madam Chair.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Dold).
  The amendment was rejected.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                      financial management capital

       For necessary expenses for upgrading and enhancing the 
     Department of Transportation's financial systems and re-
     engineering business processes, $1,000,000, to remain 
     available through September 30, 2017.

                       cyber security initiatives

       For necessary expenses for cyber security initiatives, 
     including necessary upgrades to wide area network and 
     information technology infrastructure, improvement of network 
     perimeter controls and identity management, testing and 
     assessment of information technology against business, 
     security, and other requirements, implementation of Federal 
     cyber security initiatives and information infrastructure 
     enhancements, implementation of enhanced security controls on 
     network devices, and enhancement of cyber security workforce 
     training tools, $7,000,000 to remain available through 
     September 30, 2017.

                         office of civil rights

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Civil Rights, 
     $9,600,000.

           transportation planning, research, and development

       For necessary expenses for conducting transportation 
     planning, research, systems development, development 
     activities, and making grants, to remain available until 
     expended, $5,976,000.

                          working capital fund

       For necessary expenses for operating costs and capital 
     outlays of the Working Capital Fund, not to exceed 
     $181,500,000 shall be paid from appropriations made available 
     to the Department of Transportation: Provided, That such 
     services shall be provided on a competitive basis to entities 
     within the Department of Transportation: Provided further, 
     That the above limitation on operating expenses shall not 
     apply to non-DOT entities: Provided further, That no funds 
     appropriated in this Act to an agency of the Department shall 
     be transferred to the Working Capital Fund without majority 
     approval of the Working Capital Fund Steering Committee and 
     approval of the Secretary: Provided further, That no 
     assessments may be levied against any program, budget 
     activity, subactivity or project funded by this Act unless 
     notice of such assessments and the basis therefor are 
     presented to the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations and are approved by such Committees.

               minority business resource center program

       For the cost of guaranteed loans, $336,000, as authorized 
     by 49 U.S.C. 332: Provided, That such costs, including the 
     cost of modifying such loans, shall be as defined in section 
     502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided 
     further, That these funds are available to subsidize total 
     loan principal, any part of

[[Page 8576]]

     which is to be guaranteed, not to exceed $18,367,000.
       In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the 
     guaranteed loan program, $597,000.

       small and disadvantaged business utilization and outreach

       For necessary expenses for small and disadvantaged business 
     utilization and outreach activities, $4,518,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2017: Provided, That 
     notwithstanding 49 U.S.C. 332, these funds may be used for 
     business opportunities related to any mode of transportation.

                        payments to air carriers

                    (airport and airway trust fund)

       In addition to funds made available from any other source 
     to carry out the essential air service program under 49 
     U.S.C. 41731 through 41742, $155,000,000, to be derived from 
     the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That in determining between or among 
     carriers competing to provide service to a community, the 
     Secretary may consider the relative subsidy requirements of 
     the carriers:  Provided further, That basic essential air 
     service minimum requirements shall not include the 15-
     passenger capacity requirement under subsection 41732(b)(3) 
     of title 49, United States Code: Provided further, That none 
     of the funds in this Act or any other Act shall be used to 
     enter into a new contract with a community located less than 
     40 miles from the nearest small hub airport before the 
     Secretary has negotiated with the community over a local cost 
     share: Provided further, That amounts authorized to be 
     distributed for the essential air service program under 
     subsection 41742(b) of title 49, United States Code, shall be 
     made available immediately from amounts otherwise provided to 
     the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration: 
     Provided further, That the Administrator may reimburse such 
     amounts from fees credited to the account established under 
     section 45303 of title 49, United States Code.


                  Amendment Offered by Mr. McClintock

  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 9, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     to $0)''.
       Page 156, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $155,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from California and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Chair, this amendment eliminates the $155 
million of discretionary spending that is wasted on one of the least 
essential programs in the entire United States Government, the so-
called Essential Air Service. That is the program that subsidizes empty 
and near-empty planes to fly from small airports to regional hubs just 
a few hours or less away by car.
  This was supposed to be a temporary program to allow local 
communities and airports to readjust to airline deregulation in 1978. 
Not only is it still going on today, but it has doubled in cost in the 
last 4 years, from $130 million in 2011 to roughly $260 million in 
2015, and $155 million of that is in our control. This amendment zeros 
it out and puts it toward deficit reduction.
  Now, we are often told: Well, don't worry. We have enacted all of 
these reforms. We have caps on subsidies.
  All those caps, $200 per ticket, are only for flights under 210 
miles. It continues unlimited subsidies over that distance. Actual 
subsidies per passenger can be as high as $980 per ticket, paid by 
hard-working taxpayers. Year after year, we are promised reform; and 
year after year, the cost goes up and up.
  By the way, Essential Air Service flights are flown out of Merced and 
Visalia airports, serving my district in the Sierra. Trust me, a tiny 
number of people actually use it. The alternative is hardly 
catastrophic; it is typically an extra hour's drive to a regional 
airport. I guarantee you that everybody who hears about this waste of 
their money is outraged by it.
  It is true there are a few tiny communities in Alaska, like Kake's 
700 citizens, that have no highway connections to hub airports, but 
they have plenty of alternatives. In the case of Kake, they enjoy year-
round ferry service to Juneau. In addition, Alaska is well served by a 
thriving general aviation market and the ubiquitous bush pilot.
  Rural life has great advantages. It also has some disadvantages, but 
it is not the job of hard-working taxpayers who choose to live 
elsewhere to level out the differences.
  Now, apologists for this wasteful spending tell us it is an important 
economic driver for these small airports and airlines, and I am sure 
that is so. Whenever you give away money, the folks you are giving it 
to are always better off, but the folks you are taking it from are 
always worse off to exactly the same extent. Indeed, it's economic 
drivers like this that have driven Europe's economy right off a cliff.
  Two years ago, one Member rushed to the microphone to suggest that 
this was essential for emergency medical evacuations. It has nothing to 
do with that. This program subsidizes regularly scheduled commercial 
service that practically nobody uses. If it actually had a passenger 
base, it wouldn't need, in effect, to hand out $100 bills to the few 
passengers who use it.
  An airline so reckless with its funds would quickly bankrupt itself. 
Well, the same principle holds true of governments.
  The Washington Post is not known as a bastion of fiscal conservatism, 
but I cannot improve upon an editorial a few years ago when it said, 
``Ideally, EAS would be zeroed out, and the $200 million we waste on it 
devoted to a truly national purpose: perhaps deficit reduction, 
military readiness, or the social safety net.''
  The Washington Post goes on to write, ``Alas, if Congress and the 
White House were capable of making such choices, we probably never 
would have had sequestration in the first place.''
  Madam Chair, there are many tough calls in setting fiscal priorities, 
but this isn't one of them. If the House of Representatives--where all 
appropriations begin, where the Republican majority pledged to stop 
wasting money--can't even agree to cut this useless program off from 
the trough, how does it expect to be taken seriously on the much 
tougher choices that lie ahead?
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I claim the time in 
opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, this amendment that the 
gentleman from California has offered is about as indiscriminate as it 
gets. He apparently has ideas, and those ideas ought to be heard to 
reform this program, to make it more efficient and more effective and 
more targeted. The place to do that is in the authorizing committee. We 
have forums where we can discuss those ideas and act on them.
  To come in tonight and offer this indiscriminate amendment which, by 
the way, not only cuts this overall program by more than half, but also 
cuts the allocation for this bill, which is already so inadequate, it 
is not an approach that this body should endorse.

                              {time}  2045

  The program we are talking about, Essential Air Services, was created 
after deregulation. It has remained essential to keep service going to 
many, many small communities in this country, including Crescent City, 
El Centro, Merced, and Visalia in California. It is funded through 
annual appropriations, and also funded through overflight fees that are 
collected when foreign air carriers traverse through U.S. airspace. If 
this amendment were adopted, many small communities would lose air 
service.
  Madam Chair, this isn't the way to reform the program, so I urge my 
colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Chair, this is the kindest cut of all. It is a 
temporary program that was established 37 years ago and has become a 
poster child for wasteful Federal spending, and I believe the 
authorization ran out years ago. Our national debt has doubled in 8 
years. American taxpayers pay $230 billion a year just in interest 
costs on that debt. That means if you are an average family paying 
average taxes, $2,000 of those taxes did nothing more than rent the 
money that we have already spent.

[[Page 8577]]

  Continuing to pay for this obsolete and wasteful program with money 
we don't have is obscene and makes a mockery of any claim that we have 
cut spending to the bone, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
will be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                       administrative provisions

       Sec. 101.  None of the funds made available in this Act to 
     the Department of Transportation may be obligated for the 
     Office of the Secretary of Transportation to approve 
     assessments or reimbursable agreements pertaining to funds 
     appropriated to the modal administrations in this Act, except 
     for activities underway on the date of enactment of this Act, 
     unless such assessments or agreements have completed the 
     normal reprogramming process for Congressional notification.
       Sec. 102.  The Secretary or his designee may engage in 
     activities with States and State legislators to consider 
     proposals related to the reduction of motorcycle fatalities.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Walberg

  Mr. WALBERG. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 11, strike lines 1 through 3.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Michigan and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. WALBERG. I want to begin by thanking Chairman Diaz-Balart and his 
staff for their hard work on this legislation before us.
  Madam Chair, I rise today to offer a commonsense amendment with Mr. 
Sensenbrenner and Mr. Ribble of Wisconsin which makes it clear that 
Federal Government agencies should not be in the business--again, I say 
should not be--in the business of lobbying State and local legislators 
with Federal taxpayers' money. Federal law already prohibits Federal 
agencies from lobbying Congress in support of or against legislation.
  Thanks in part to the leadership of Mr. Sensenbrenner in 1998, 
Congress passed similar antilobbying language to prohibit the 
Department of Transportation from lobbying State and local elected 
officials.
  At that time, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration was 
sending staff to State capitols at taxpayers' expense to lobby in favor 
of motorcycle helmet laws. At the cost of tens of thousands of taxpayer 
dollars, these officials traveled across the country to testify before 
State legislative committees, participate in conferences, and produce 
videotapes and other printed materials with the goal of advancing 
mandatory motorcycle helmet laws.
  As the co-chairman of the Congressional Motorcycle Caucus and a rider 
myself who wears a helmet, I believe the most effective way to reduce 
motorcycle injuries and fatalities is to prevent these crashes from 
occurring in the first place. Madam Chair, that means putting between 
the ears as opposed to simply putting on the head.
  I believe the NHTSA has an appropriate role in promoting vehicle and 
highway safety, whether that is focusing on efforts on crash prevention 
or rider education. Unfortunately, language pushed by the 
administration has made it into the recent omnibus legislation to 
reverse the lobby ban, and that provision is carried over into this 
bill.
  Whether you ride or not, I would hope all my colleagues agree that 
this is an inappropriate use of taxpayer dollars. It violates the 
rights of States and local communities we represent to make their own 
decisions on helmet laws.
  Madam Chair, I ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, we have an amendment before 
us that would strike a provision that has been carried in every 
transportation appropriations bill since 2009. The section simply 
grants the Secretary or his representatives the authority to engage in 
activities with States and State legislators to consider proposals 
related to the reduction of motorcycle fatalities. This consultation is 
entirely voluntary.
  Madam Chair, in 2013, we had 5,000 motorcycle fatalities in this 
country. That is the last year for which we have data.
  The research and expertise of the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration can be extremely helpful--helpful to State highway 
traffic safety agencies as they consider measures they might want to 
undertake to improve motorcycle safety. Why wouldn't we want to be in 
partnership with the States as they address this important safety 
issue?
  Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WALBERG. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. WALBERG. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan 
will be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Sec. 103.  Notwithstanding section 3324 of title 31, United 
     States Code, in addition to authority provided by section 327 
     of title 49, United States Code, the Department's Working 
     Capital Fund is hereby authorized to provide payments in 
     advance to vendors that are necessary to carry out the 
     Federal transit pass transportation fringe benefit program 
     under Executive Order 13150 and section 3049 of Public Law 
     109-59: Provided, That the Department shall include adequate 
     safeguards in the contract with the vendors to ensure timely 
     and high-quality performance under the contract.
       Sec. 104.  The Secretary shall post on the Web site of the 
     Department of Transportation a schedule of all meetings of 
     the Credit Council, including the agenda for each meeting, 
     and require the Credit Council to record the decisions and 
     actions of each meeting.
       Sec. 105.  In addition to authority provided by section 327 
     of title 49, United States Code, the Department's Working 
     Capital Fund is hereby authorized to provide partial or full 
     payments in advance and accept subsequent reimbursements from 
     all Federal agencies for transit benefit distribution 
     services that are necessary to carry out the Federal transit 
     pass transportation fringe benefit program under Executive 
     Order 13150 and section 3049 of Public Law 109-59: Provided, 
     That the Department shall maintain a reasonable operating 
     reserve in the Working Capital Fund, to be expended in 
     advance to provide uninterrupted transit benefits to 
     Government employees, provided that such reserve will not 
     exceed one month of benefits payable: Provided further, that 
     such reserve may be used only for the purpose of providing 
     for the continuation of transit benefits, provided that the 
     Working Capital Fund will be fully reimbursed by each 
     customer agency for the actual cost of the transit benefit.

                    Federal Aviation Administration

                               operations

                    (airport and airway trust fund)

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration, not otherwise provided for, including 
     operations and research activities related to commercial 
     space transportation, administrative expenses for research 
     and development, establishment of air navigation facilities, 
     the operation (including leasing) and maintenance of 
     aircraft, subsidizing the cost of aeronautical charts and 
     maps sold to the public, lease or purchase of passenger motor 
     vehicles for replacement only, in addition to amounts made 
     available by Public Law 112-95, $9,847,700,000 of which 
     $8,831,250,000 shall be

[[Page 8578]]

     derived from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, of which not 
     to exceed $7,505,293,000 shall be available for air traffic 
     organization activities; not to exceed $1,258,411,000 shall 
     be available for aviation safety activities; not to exceed 
     $16,605,000 shall be available for commercial space 
     transportation activities; not to exceed $725,000,000 shall 
     be available for finance and management activities; not to 
     exceed $60,089,000 shall be available for NextGen and 
     operations planning activities; and not to exceed 
     $282,302,000 shall be available for staff offices: Provided, 
     That not to exceed 2 percent of any budget activity, except 
     for aviation safety budget activity, may be transferred to 
     any budget activity under this heading: Provided further, 
     That no transfer may increase or decrease any appropriation 
     by more than 2 percent: Provided further, That any transfer 
     in excess of 2 percent shall be treated as a reprogramming of 
     funds under section 405 of this Act and shall not be 
     available for obligation or expenditure except in compliance 
     with the procedures set forth in that section: Provided 
     further, That not later than March 31 of each fiscal year 
     hereafter, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration shall transmit to Congress an annual update to 
     the report submitted to Congress in December 2004 pursuant to 
     section 221 of Public Law 108-176: Provided further, That the 
     amount herein appropriated shall be reduced by $100,000 for 
     each day after March 31 that such report has not been 
     submitted to the Congress: Provided further, That not later 
     than March 31 of each fiscal year hereafter, the 
     Administrator shall transmit to Congress a companion report 
     that describes a comprehensive strategy for staffing, hiring, 
     and training flight standards and aircraft certification 
     staff in a format similar to the one utilized for the 
     controller staffing plan, including stated attrition 
     estimates and numerical hiring goals by fiscal year: Provided 
     further, That the amount herein appropriated shall be reduced 
     by $100,000 per day for each day after March 31 that such 
     report has not been submitted to Congress: Provided further, 
     That funds may be used to enter into a grant agreement with a 
     nonprofit standard-setting organization to assist in the 
     development of aviation safety standards: Provided further, 
     That none of the funds in this Act shall be available for new 
     applicants for the second career training program: Provided 
     further, That none of the funds in this Act shall be 
     available for the Federal Aviation Administration to finalize 
     or implement any regulation that would promulgate new 
     aviation user fees not specifically authorized by law after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act: Provided further, That 
     there may be credited to this appropriation as offsetting 
     collections funds received from States, counties, 
     municipalities, foreign authorities, other public 
     authorities, and private sources for expenses incurred in the 
     provision of agency services, including receipts for the 
     maintenance and operation of air navigation facilities, and 
     for issuance, renewal or modification of certificates, 
     including airman, aircraft, and repair station certificates, 
     or for tests related thereto, or for processing major repair 
     or alteration forms: Provided further, That of the funds 
     appropriated under this heading, not less than $154,400,000 
     shall be for the contract tower program, including the 
     contract tower cost share program: Provided further, That 
     none of the funds in this Act for aeronautical charting and 
     cartography are available for activities conducted by, or 
     coordinated through, the Working Capital Fund.


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. LoBiondo

  Mr. LoBIONDO. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 12, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 13, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 16, line 9, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 16, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from New Jersey and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. LoBIONDO. Madam Chair, I would like to start by thanking Chairman 
Diaz-Balart for cooperating with this amendment.
  Madam Chair, the Federal Aviation Administration is dealing with an 
increasing threat of cyberattacks against the National Airspace System. 
This critical threat was recently detailed in a GAO report as well as 
identified in news reports of a reported attempt to hack into the 
flight control system of a U.S. airliner through the plane's in-flight 
entertainment system.
  The FAA must protect the safety of our citizens and prevent negative 
impact to the U.S. economy by developing a comprehensive and 
multilayered approach to mitigating new and emerging cybersecurity 
threats.
  My amendment will transfer $3 million within the FAA to develop an 
integrated cybersecurity testbed to evaluate and certify all NextGen 
and National Airspace systems. The FAA currently possesses the 
capability to establish such a testbed at its existing integrated 
testing environment at the FAA Tech Center in southern New Jersey. The 
Tech Center presents a natural host for FAA partnership with industry 
and academia to leverage the best ideas and technology to continually 
mitigate evolving cybersecurity threats.
  Madam Chair, increasing FAA capability for creating, identifying, 
defending, and solving cybersecurity-related problems for existing 
National Airspace System and future NextGen systems is vital to the 
future safety and proposals of our American airspace.
  Once again, Madam Chair, I thank Chairman Mario Diaz-Balart. I thank 
Ranking Member Price. I urge adoption of this amendment, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                     Amendment Offered by Ms. Esty

  Ms. ESTY. I have an amendment at the desk, Madam Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 12, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 13, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 44, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentlewoman 
from Connecticut and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Connecticut.
  Ms. ESTY. Madam Chair, I come to the floor once again to urge this 
House to invest in rail safety. My amendment adds $3 million to the 
Federal Railroad Administration for safety and operations to fund vital 
rail safety education programs, like Operation Lifesaver.
  Railroads move the goods that fuel our economy, and thousands of 
commuters in my district rely on passenger rail lines every day. In 
fact, over 11\1/2\ million Americans took the trains along the 
Northeast corridor last year, a record high ridership.
  Freight rail traffic is also increasing, reflecting a growing economy 
and a booming energy sector. However, as we have seen in the news 
almost monthly, there have been a disturbing number of rail accidents 
in the last few years, many of them preventable train derailments and 
collisions. We in this House stood in silence a few weeks ago to mourn 
the loss of the eight passengers killed in last month's Amtrak 
derailment near Philadelphia. Those deaths were tragic and completely 
avoidable. We must do more to promote safe and reliable rail travel.
  I have worked hard on the Transportation Committee and advocated in 
this House to implement positive train control and other innovative 
technologies that can protect passengers against the most dangerous 
rail accidents. But technologies like positive train control cannot 
prevent all train-related accidents.
  On February 3, 2015, six people died when a northbound Metro-North 
Railroad commuter train collided with an SUV that was stopped at a 
highway rail crossing. Aditya Tomar, a resident of Danbury, 
Connecticut, and one of my constituents, was one of those passengers 
killed.

                              {time}  2100

  According to the Federal Railroad Administration, these sorts of 
highway-rail grade crossing accidents lead to 270 deaths every year.
  Just this morning, media outlets were featuring a viral video from an 
Amtrak Silver Star train colliding with a car and slicing it in half 
after the driver drove around the lowered gate at a rail crossing in 
Jacksonville, Florida. Miraculously, every passenger survived with only 
minor injuries.

[[Page 8579]]

  This video demonstrates that even when crossings are equipped with 
gates and warning lights, human error and miscalculation can have 
devastating consequences.
  That is why we need to educate drivers, passengers, and pedestrians 
on how to avoid accidents along railroad tracks and at highway-rail 
grade crossings.
  Technological safety advances are essential, make no mistake, but 
they are not enough. We must educate people about the dangers of 
walking along railroads or ignoring rail crossing warning signals.
  The Operation Lifesaver program is an effective public safety 
campaign that encourages drivers and pedestrians to ``stop, look, and 
listen'' at highway-rail grade crossings and increases awareness in all 
50 States.
  Congress authorized Operation Lifesaver in 2008, but has failed to 
provide adequate funding.
  My amendment to increase funding for the Operation Lifesaver rail 
safety program is also fiscally responsible and does not increase 
spending. Instead, this investment is offset by a very small reduction 
in Federal Government staff offices for the Federal Aviation 
Administration, an account that will still receive $75 million above 
the administration's request.
  Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, just moments ago we increased the FRA 
safety and operations by $3.5 million.
  This amendment, however, would result in, really, an unsustainable 
cut to FAA's operations account. Air traffic control facilities would 
have to close and communities would lose service. Frankly, critical 
operational support staff would have to be furloughed or even laid off. 
Safety could be compromised for flights, and flights could be 
potentially canceled.
  Therefore, I cannot support this well-intentioned offset and, 
therefore, I cannot support this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. ESTY. Madam Chair, I urge passage of this commonsense amendment, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. Esty).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. ESTY. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut will be postponed.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Dold

  Mr. DOLD. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:
       Page 12, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $290,000,000)''.
       Page 13, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $81,203,000)''.
       Page 13, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $208,797,000)''.
       Page 47, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $290,000,000)''.

  Mr. DOLD (during the reading). Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent 
that the amendment be considered as read.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Illinois?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Illinois and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. DOLD. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of an amendment to 
increase funding for Amtrak's capital account. The bill as is cuts $290 
million from Amtrak's capital account, which is used to upgrade or 
replace the infrastructure that Amtrak owns, along with the acquisition 
and maintenance of Amtrak's fleet of locomotives, passenger cars, and 
other equipment.
  Madam Chair, the Chicago area, which I represent, is the hub of our 
Nation's transportation network. Over 30 million people ride Amtrak 
every year nationwide, and many of those passengers ride through the 
city of Chicago. However, in the Chicago area, Amtrak trains are 
running on infrastructure that has not been updated in decades, 
including switches that date back to the administration of Teddy 
Roosevelt.
  As we have seen in recent months, safety concerns on Amtrak are at a 
premium. Now is not the time to reduce the amount of money that we have 
made available for Amtrak and for our needed infrastructure upgrades. 
We need to make investments in our tracks, our trains, our stations, 
and the rest of our transportation system.
  My amendment would take a step towards addressing that problem. All 
it does is restore capital investment grants to the level at which they 
were appropriated last year. This is a small step but one that will 
help rebuild our crumbling infrastructure and will help improve the 
mass transit systems that so many of our citizens use each and every 
day.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, this amendment would result in a deep 
and, frankly, unsustainable reduction to FAA's operations account. FAA 
would have to suspend contracts that run the information technology 
systems that keep our air traffic control flowing.
  Air traffic control facilities would have to be closed and 
communities, frankly, would lose service. Critical operational support 
staff would be furloughed or, again, laid off. Safety could be 
compromised. Flights, again, would be canceled.
  Therefore, I cannot support this offset and, respectfully, cannot 
support the gentleman's amendment.
  At this time, I would like to yield to the gentleman from North 
Carolina.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  I, too, reluctantly oppose this amendment. The discussion we had 
earlier about this offset certainly pertains here. We really cannot 
afford to make this kind of cut--safety-related cut, I might say--to 
the Federal Aviation Administration's funding.
  The amendment is worthy in purpose. Again, funding for Amtrak's 
capital accounts is woefully inadequate in this bill. But this is 
simply not the way to make it up. In fact, there is no way to make it 
up within the confines of this bill. We are robbing Peter to pay Paul. 
This is what is wrong with this bill--an inadequate allocation. That 
means there is no way to get adequate funding for things we care about 
without doing equivalent damage somewhere else. It is an impossible 
dilemma.
  What we need to do is do the responsible thing: get a budget 
agreement, get numbers we can work with, and write a decent bill. In 
the meantime, this amendment, while well-intentioned, really is not 
acceptable, and I urge rejection.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DOLD. Madam Chair, as we look at our transportation and 
infrastructure system, we know that investment is needed.
  I urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Dold).
  The amendment was rejected.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Lynch

  Mr. LYNCH. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 12, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $25,000,000)''.

[[Page 8580]]

       Page 13, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $25,000,000)''.
       Page 44, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $25,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Massachusetts and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. LYNCH. Madam Chair, what I am trying to do in this amendment is 
to really address a wider problem in my congressional district. My 
district surrounds the Logan International Airport in Boston.
  What this amendment would do is remove $25 million from the FAA 
budget and transfer it to rail. The reason for that is because the FAA 
has steadfastly refused to do part of their job in my district. I have 
tried to get them to come to the town of Milton, Massachusetts, to 
address the overflights in that area. The new NextGen RNAV system 
concentrates flight after flight, thousands of flights a month, over 
the town of Milton, Massachusetts.
  I requested the FAA to come out and meet with my neighbors--the 
people that I represent--just like everybody else represents people in 
their districts, and the FAA has flatly refused. So since they have 
refused to do part of the job that we fund them for, I figured I would 
take $25 million out of their budget because they are not doing their 
job.
  All I am looking for is a meeting with the FAA in my district, and 
I've got to resort to this. It is shameful. I would say that their 
attitude towards my constituents--the people I work for--has been utter 
contempt and disrespectful. So here I am trying to cut their budget to 
get their attention. It is a sad statement of the way the FAA operates.
  But my real issue is getting the FAA to respond to my constituents, 
not about cutting their budgets. I know the chair and the ranking 
member have worked wonderfully, and I give you great credit for the 
work you have done.
  What I am wondering is, would the chair and the ranking member help 
me just get the FAA to respond by having a meeting in my district in 
the town of Milton? I would withdraw my amendment and leave the money 
that you have wisely appropriated where it is. I am just looking to get 
this agency, this bureaucracy, to respond to the people I represent. It 
is as simple as that, Mr. Chairman.
  I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I will tell the gentleman that one of the responsibilities that we 
have is to make sure that we hold government accountable. I don't think 
it is acceptable to not get answers. So I look forward to working with 
the gentleman to make sure that we move to address those concerns of 
your community. I don't want to speak for the ranking member, but I 
know that I look forward to working with you to make sure that we get 
answers that you need to get.
  Mr. LYNCH. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LYNCH. I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I appreciate the chairman's 
response.
  I, too, will work with you. This isn't acceptable. We will do our 
best to help you get the kind of response you need.
  Mr. LYNCH. Madam Chair, I want to thank the chairman, and I want to 
thank the ranking member for the courtesy, not only to me, but to my 
constituents as well.
  I yield back the balance of my time, and I ask unanimous consent to 
withdraw my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Dold

  Mr. DOLD. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 12, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $200,000,000)''.
       Page 13, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $200,000,000)''.
       Page 52, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $200,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Illinois and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. DOLD. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of an amendment to 
increase funding for capital investment grants to help our Nation's 
mass transit rail systems. The bill as is cuts $200 million from the 
account, and my amendment would restore that funding.
  While I recognize, and as we have heard from the chairman and the 
ranking member, there is not really a good spot to be able to take some 
of these additional funds from, I do think it is important though, 
Madam Chair, that we talk about our infrastructure system, especially 
our rail system. And as we look specifically in the greater Chicago 
area, the Chicago Transit Authority's rail system, the El, serves 
around 725,000 riders each and every day, and the Metra, which serves 
the suburban areas like the 10th District in Illinois, serves over 
300,000 riders each and every day. Over a million people are using 
these rail systems.

                              {time}  2115

  Again, as we talked about before, Metra estimates that it needs to 
find roughly $13.4 billion over the next decade just to maintain the 
system in its current condition. That is why it is more important than 
ever before to find the funds to pay to maintain and rebuild our 
Nation's transportation infrastructure system.
  Madam Chair, we hear all the time from our constituents that we need 
good, high-paying jobs. Frankly, a transportation infrastructure system 
for manufacturers--how do we get raw material and a finished product 
out? How do we get people around?--is absolutely critical to our 
economy.
  I saw an estimate from UPS that read that every additional 5 minutes 
of idling time costs them $100 million. We have switches in the Chicago 
area that delay rail up to 15 minutes one way. That is 30 minutes a 
day; and, if you are a regular commuter, that is 10\1/2\ hours in a 
given month, 10\1/2\ hours that you could be more productive or could 
be spending time with your family or spending time doing homework with 
your children.
  If we as a country want to be more productive, if we want to 
encourage more good, high-paying jobs, we have to find a way to make 
sure that we invest in our transportation infrastructure system.
  When we use this transportation infrastructure system and if it goes 
away, we are talking about an increase in congestion--at least I can 
tell you in the Chicago area--of an additional 50 percent. In talking 
to the rail, we would need an additional 29 lanes of traffic.
  What is the cost of that? We just don't have it. If we don't have 
this type of funding, the car in front of you could have been somebody 
who was sitting on the rail, who could have been using mass transit.
  Madam Chair, this bill is a step backward for our Nation's mass 
transit systems, not a step forward. Instead of providing funds to 
maintain and improve world-class mass transit systems, we are, instead, 
taking money away and making it harder and harder for the public to 
find the funds needed to keep their systems operational, much less to 
improve them. A reliable and consistent stream of capital funding is 
essential for these systems, but this bill does not meet that need.
  My amendment would take a step toward addressing that problem. I 
recognize it is just a step, but I am anxious to work with the chairman 
and the ranking member, and I am anxious to work with those on the 
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee to make sure that we are 
coming up with outside-the-box thinking in how we can improve our mass 
transit systems.
  It is vitally important for our urban areas, and it is certainly 
important for

[[Page 8581]]

the Nation's transportation hub, which, I would argue, is in the 
heartland, in the Chicago area.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, one has to frankly respect and admire 
Mr. Dold's knowledge and passion in these amendments that he is doing. 
I am sensitive to that, and I look forward to working with him. I know 
that he will make sure that we work with him on these issues that he 
brings up and that he is very passionate about, which I think are very 
important.
  Respectfully, I have to oppose this amendment. This amendment would 
result in deep reductions to the FAA's operations account and would 
result in breaches of contract for air traffic control information 
technology systems. In addition, it would result in staff layoffs, 
which would again compromise safety.
  I look forward to continuing to work with the gentleman. He brings 
up, obviously, some very important points; but again, respectfully, I 
must object to this amendment at this time.
  Madam Chair, I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. 
Price), the ranking member of the subcommittee.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I appreciate the chairman's 
yielding.
  I want to echo his opposition to this amendment, and I want to echo 
his praise for the reality check that the gentleman from Illinois has 
provided us tonight. At various times in the course of the evening, we 
have talked about TIGER grants; we have talked about Amtrak; we have 
talked about transit investments--all of which are underfunded in this 
bill.
  I am also pleased that the chairman has expressed the willingness to 
cooperate in going forward. I want to echo that on my part, too, 
because we do believe a better day will come and, hopefully, not only 
at the end of the fiscal year but soon, where we get a budget 
agreement, where we get better numbers, and where we are able to 
address each of these accounts that the gentleman has highlighted.
  He is exactly right about the need in all of these areas. The offset 
is not acceptable. It is even dangerous.
  For that reason, I oppose the amendment, but the larger message is we 
have got to get a better budget number, and we have got to revisit many 
of the accounts in this bill.
  Mr. DOLD. Madam Chair, may I inquire as to how much time I have 
remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Illinois has 1\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. DOLD. I certainly want to thank the chairman and the ranking 
member for their thoughts.
  Madam Chair, there is no question as we look at the debt that we 
have--we have an $18 trillion debt in our country--that it is 
jeopardizing our children's opportunity for the American Dream. One of 
the things that I talk about in terms of how we get out of it is by 
talking about: How do we grow, Madam Chair?
  We grow, I think, by creating this opportunity and environment so 
people want to come and put their businesses here, becoming globally 
competitive. When entrepreneurs look at where to go to place their 
businesses, one of the things they are going to look at is our 
transportation infrastructure system. We need to know how we are going 
to get our raw materials in and our finished product out if we want to 
be globally competitive and if we want to manufacture. I would argue 
that we do.
  I recognize where the committee is. I also appreciate the chairman's 
and the ranking member's willingness to work with us in going forward, 
but we have to, each and every one of us, come together and put our 
differences aside and invest in our infrastructure system so that we 
can grow our economy and have greater dollars coming into the Federal 
Treasury so that we can have these resources.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Dold).
  The amendment was rejected.


                  Amendment Offered by Mr. Bridenstine

  Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 13, line 5, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $250,000)''.
       Page 13, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(decreased by $250,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Oklahoma and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma.
  Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Madam Chair, the Bridenstine-Rohrabacher-Posey 
amendment, which is supported by the Commercial Spaceflight Federation, 
transfers $250,000 from the FAA's finance and management activities to 
the Office of Commercial Space Transportation. This is a small amount, 
but it is extremely important if we are to support the booming 
commercial spaceflight industry.
  The FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation's mission is as 
follows: ``to ensure protection of the public, property, and the 
national security and foreign policy interests of the United States 
during commercial launch or reentry activities and to encourage, 
facilitate, and promote commercial space transportation.''
  To carry out this mission, AST, as the office is known, is tasked 
with overseeing commercially licensed launches, test launches under 
experimental permits, licenses and permits for new vehicle designs, 
supporting NASA and the Commercial Crew contractors, taking the lead 
role in coordinating space traffic at the White House's request, and 
many other duties.
  Over the past few years, the number of activities AST oversees has 
grown significantly; yet funding and staffing levels have remained 
absolutely flat.
  Just last month, the House of Representatives passed the SPACE Act on 
an overwhelmingly bipartisan basis. That bill establishes a statutory 
and regulatory regime that provides stability and encourages private 
sector investment in order to facilitate the growth of commercial space 
activities. If we are passing legislation to encourage growth, we need 
to provide this office with increased resources to keep up.
  We rely on the commercial space sector for many things: reliable, 
frequent, and inexpensive launches; communications, navigation, and 
imaging satellites; and services such as the Internet, telephone, 
television, and radio, which are staples of modern life.
  Going forward, there are companies whose goal is to provide space 
tourism services. There are also ventures planning missions to harvest 
precious resources from celestial bodies. This is just the tip of the 
iceberg for this growth industry.
  This is an industry that is constantly innovating. It is also an 
industry we have come to increasingly rely on. If AST does not get the 
additional resources, it could lead to slips of planned launch dates 
for some companies as the office is unable to process inspections, 
permits, and licenses in a timely manner. On top of being a hindrance 
to this growth industry, it could also reduce the functionality and 
capabilities we take for granted in our everyday lives.
  This funding will give AST additional resources to accomplish its 
mission. As its workload continues to grow, I encourage the Office of 
Commercial Space Transportation to continue to work alongside industry 
in developing and supporting consensus safety standards that can 
streamline the inspection process.
  I appreciate Chairman Diaz-Balart's leadership and his recognition of 
the importance of this office. I thank him for working with me on this 
amendment, particularly given the constraints he is under while 
crafting this appropriations bill.

[[Page 8582]]

  I understand we are in tough fiscal times; however, we need to ensure 
we do not strangle the unlimited potential of the commercial 
spaceflight industry. An important piece of this is ensuring that the 
Office of Commercial Space Transportation can keep up with the growth 
of this burgeoning industry.
  I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and the underlying 
legislation.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Bridenstine).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                        facilities and equipment

                    (airport and airway trust fund)

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, for 
     acquisition, establishment, technical support services, 
     improvement by contract or purchase, and hire of national 
     airspace systems and experimental facilities and equipment, 
     as authorized under part A of subtitle VII of title 49, 
     United States Code, including initial acquisition of 
     necessary sites by lease or grant; engineering and service 
     testing, including construction of test facilities and 
     acquisition of necessary sites by lease or grant; 
     construction and furnishing of quarters and related 
     accommodations for officers and employees of the Federal 
     Aviation Administration stationed at remote localities where 
     such accommodations are not available; and the purchase, 
     lease, or transfer of aircraft from funds available under 
     this heading, including aircraft for aviation regulation and 
     certification; to be derived from the Airport and Airway 
     Trust Fund, $2,500,000,000, of which $460,000,000 shall 
     remain available until September 30, 2016, and $2,040,000,000 
     shall remain available until September 30, 2018: Provided, 
     That there may be credited to this appropriation funds 
     received from States, counties, municipalities, other public 
     authorities, and private sources, for expenses incurred in 
     the establishment, improvement, and modernization of national 
     airspace systems: Provided further, That upon initial 
     submission to the Congress of the fiscal year 2017 
     President's budget, the Secretary of Transportation shall 
     transmit to the Congress a comprehensive capital investment 
     plan for the Federal Aviation Administration which includes 
     funding for each budget line item for fiscal years 2017 
     through 2021, with total funding for each year of the plan 
     constrained to the funding targets for those years as 
     estimated and approved by the Office of Management and 
     Budget: Provided further, That the amount herein appropriated 
     shall be reduced by $100,000 per day for each day after the 
     initial submission of the fiscal year 2017 President's budget 
     that such report has not been submitted to Congress.

                 research, engineering, and development

                    (airport and airway trust fund)

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, for 
     research, engineering, and development, as authorized under 
     part A of subtitle VII of title 49, United States Code, 
     including construction of experimental facilities and 
     acquisition of necessary sites by lease or grant, 
     $156,750,000, to be derived from the Airport and Airway Trust 
     Fund and to remain available until September 30, 2018: 
     Provided, That there may be credited to this appropriation as 
     offsetting collections, funds received from States, counties, 
     municipalities, other public authorities, and private 
     sources, which shall be available for expenses incurred for 
     research, engineering, and development.

                       grants-in-aid for airports

                (liquidation of contract authorization)

                      (limitation on obligations)

                    (airport and airway trust fund)

       For liquidation of obligations incurred for grants-in-aid 
     for airport planning and development, and noise compatibility 
     planning and programs as authorized under subchapter I of 
     chapter 471 and subchapter I of chapter 475 of title 49, 
     United States Code, and under other law authorizing such 
     obligations; for procurement, installation, and commissioning 
     of runway incursion prevention devices and systems at 
     airports of such title; for grants authorized under section 
     41743 of title 49, United States Code; and for inspection 
     activities and administration of airport safety programs, 
     including those related to airport operating certificates 
     under section 44706 of title 49, United States Code, 
     $3,600,000,000, to be derived from the Airport and Airway 
     Trust Fund and to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That none of the funds under this heading shall be available 
     for the planning or execution of programs the obligations for 
     which are in excess of $3,350,000,000 in fiscal year 2016, 
     notwithstanding section 47117(g) of title 49, United States 
     Code: Provided further, That none of the funds under this 
     heading shall be available for the replacement of baggage 
     conveyor systems, reconfiguration of terminal baggage areas, 
     or other airport improvements that are necessary to install 
     bulk explosive detection systems: Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, of funds limited 
     under this heading, not more than $107,100,000 shall be 
     obligated for administration, not less than $15,000,000 shall 
     be available for the Airport Cooperative Research Program, 
     and not less than $31,000,000 shall be available for Airport 
     Technology Research.

                       administrative provisions

       Sec. 110.  None of the funds in this Act may be used to 
     compensate in excess of 600 technical staff-years under the 
     federally funded research and development center contract 
     between the Federal Aviation Administration and the Center 
     for Advanced Aviation Systems Development during fiscal year 
     2016.
       Sec. 111.  None of the funds in this Act shall be used to 
     pursue or adopt guidelines or regulations requiring airport 
     sponsors to provide to the Federal Aviation Administration 
     without cost building construction, maintenance, utilities 
     and expenses, or space in airport sponsor-owned buildings for 
     services relating to air traffic control, air navigation, or 
     weather reporting: Provided, That the prohibition of funds in 
     this section does not apply to negotiations between the 
     agency and airport sponsors to achieve agreement on below-
     market rates for these items or to grant assurances that 
     require airport sponsors to provide land without cost to the 
     FAA for air traffic control facilities.
       Sec. 112.  The Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration may reimburse amounts made available to 
     satisfy 49 U.S.C. 41742(a)(1) from fees credited under 49 
     U.S.C. 45303 and any amount remaining in such account at the 
     close of that fiscal year may be made available to satisfy 
     section 41742(a)(1) for the subsequent fiscal year.
       Sec. 113.  Amounts collected under section 40113(e) of 
     title 49, United States Code, shall be credited to the 
     appropriation current at the time of collection, to be merged 
     with and available for the same purposes of such 
     appropriation.
       Sec. 114.  None of the funds in this Act shall be available 
     for paying premium pay under subsection 5546(a) of title 5, 
     United States Code, to any Federal Aviation Administration 
     employee unless such employee actually performed work during 
     the time corresponding to such premium pay.
       Sec. 115.  None of the funds in this Act may be obligated 
     or expended for an employee of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration to purchase a store gift card or gift 
     certificate through use of a Government-issued credit card.
       Sec. 116.  None of the funds in this Act may be obligated 
     or expended for retention bonuses for an employee of the 
     Federal Aviation Administration without the prior written 
     approval of the Assistant Secretary for Administration of the 
     Department of Transportation.
       Sec. 117.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none 
     of the funds made available under this Act or any prior Act 
     may be used to implement or to continue to implement any 
     limitation on the ability of any owner or operator of a 
     private aircraft to obtain, upon a request to the 
     Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, a 
     blocking of that owner's or operator's aircraft registration 
     number from any display of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration's Aircraft Situational Display to Industry 
     data that is made available to the public, except data made 
     available to a Government agency, for the noncommercial 
     flights of that owner or operator.
       Sec. 118.  None of the funds in this Act shall be available 
     for salaries and expenses of more than 9 political and 
     Presidential appointees in the Federal Aviation 
     Administration.
       Sec. 119.  None of the funds made available under this Act 
     may be used to increase fees pursuant to section 44721 of 
     title 49, United States Code, until the FAA provides to the 
     House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a report that 
     justifies all fees related to aeronautical navigation 
     products and explains how such fees are consistent with 
     Executive Order 13642.
       Sec. 119A.  None of the funds in this Act may be used to 
     close a regional operations center of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration or reduce its services unless the 
     Administrator notifies the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations not less than 90 full business days in 
     advance.
       Sec. 119B.  None of the funds appropriated or limited by 
     this Act may be used to change weight restrictions or prior 
     permission rules at Teterboro airport in Teterboro, New 
     Jersey.

                     Federal Highway Administration

                 limitation on administrative expenses

                          (highway trust fund)

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Contingent upon enactment of authorization legislation, not 
     to exceed $426,100,000, together with advances and 
     reimbursements received by the Federal Highway 
     Administration, shall be obligated for necessary expenses for 
     administration and operation of the Federal Highway 
     Administration. In addition, not to exceed $3,248,000 shall 
     be transferred to the Appalachian Regional Commission in 
     accordance with section 104 of title 23, United States Code.

[[Page 8583]]



                          federal-aid highways

                      (limitation on obligations)

                          (highway trust fund)

       Contingent upon enactment of authorization legislation, 
     funds available for the implementation or execution of 
     Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs 
     authorized under titles 23 and 49, United States Code, and 
     the provisions of such authorization legislation shall not 
     exceed total obligations of $40,256,000,000 for fiscal year 
     2016: Provided, That the Secretary may collect and spend 
     fees, as authorized by title 23, United States Code, to cover 
     the costs of services of expert firms, including counsel, in 
     the field of municipal and project finance to assist in the 
     underwriting and servicing of Federal credit instruments and 
     all or a portion of the costs to the Federal Government of 
     servicing such credit instruments: Provided further, That 
     such fees are available until expended to pay for such costs: 
     Provided further, That such amounts are in addition to 
     administrative expenses that are also available for such 
     purpose, and are not subject to any obligation limitation or 
     the limitation on administrative expenses under section 608 
     of title 23, United States Code.

                (liquidation of contract authorization)

                          (highway trust fund)

       Contingent upon enactment of authorization legislation, for 
     the payment of obligations incurred in carrying out Federal-
     aid highway and highway safety construction programs 
     authorized under title 23, United States Code, 
     $40,995,000,000 derived from the Highway Trust Fund (other 
     than the Mass Transit Account), to remain available until 
     expended.

       administrative provisions--federal highway administration

       Sec. 120.  Contingent upon enactment of authorization 
     legislation:
       (a) For fiscal year 2016, the Secretary of Transportation 
     shall--
       (1) not distribute from the obligation limitation for 
     Federal-aid highways--
       (A) amounts authorized for administrative expenses and 
     programs by section 104(a) of title 23, United States Code; 
     and
       (B) amounts authorized for the Bureau of Transportation 
     Statistics;
       (2) not distribute an amount from the obligation limitation 
     for Federal-aid highways that is equal to the unobligated 
     balance of amounts--
       (A) made available from the Highway Trust Fund (other than 
     the Mass Transit Account) for Federal-aid highway and highway 
     safety construction programs for previous fiscal years the 
     funds for which are allocated by the Secretary (or 
     apportioned by the Secretary under sections 202 or 204 of 
     title 23, United States Code); and
       (B) for which obligation limitation was provided in a 
     previous fiscal year;
       (3) determine the proportion that--
       (A) the obligation limitation for Federal-aid highways, 
     less the aggregate of amounts not distributed under 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection; bears to
       (B) the total of the sums authorized to be appropriated for 
     the Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction 
     programs (other than sums authorized to be appropriated for 
     provisions of law described in paragraphs (1) through (11) of 
     subsection (b) and sums authorized to be appropriated for 
     section 119 of title 23, United States Code, equal to the 
     amount referred to in subsection (b)(12) for such fiscal 
     year), less the aggregate of the amounts not distributed 
     under paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection;
       (4) distribute the obligation limitation for Federal-aid 
     highways, less the aggregate amounts not distributed under 
     paragraphs (1) and (2), for each of the programs (other than 
     programs to which paragraph (1) applies) that are allocated 
     by the Secretary under such authorization legislation and 
     title 23, United States Code, or apportioned by the Secretary 
     under sections 202 or 204 of that title, by multiplying--
       (A) the proportion determined under paragraph (3); by
       (B) the amounts authorized to be appropriated for each such 
     program for such fiscal year; and
       (5) distribute the obligation limitation for Federal-aid 
     highways, less the aggregate amounts not distributed under 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) and the amounts distributed under 
     paragraph (4), for Federal-aid highway and highway safety 
     construction programs that are apportioned by the Secretary 
     under such authorization legislation or title 23, United 
     States Code (other than the amounts apportioned for the 
     National Highway Performance Program in section 119 of title 
     23, United States Code, that are exempt from the limitation 
     under subsection (b)(12) and the amounts apportioned under 
     sections 202 and 204 of that title) in the proportion that--
       (A) amounts authorized to be appropriated for the programs 
     that are apportioned under title 23, United States Code, or 
     such authorization legislation to each State for such fiscal 
     year; bears to
       (B) the total of the amounts authorized to be appropriated 
     for the programs that are apportioned under title 23, United 
     States Code, or such authorization legislation to all States 
     for such fiscal year.
       (b) Exceptions From Obligation Limitation.--The obligation 
     limitation for Federal-aid highways shall not apply to 
     obligations under or for--
       (1) section 125 of title 23, United States Code;
       (2) section 147 of the Surface Transportation Assistance 
     Act of 1978 (23 U.S.C. 144 note; 92 Stat. 2714);
       (3) section 9 of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1981 (95 
     Stat. 1701);
       (4) subsections (b) and (j) of section 131 of the Surface 
     Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (96 Stat. 2119);
       (5) subsections (b) and (c) of section 149 of the Surface 
     Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 
     (101 Stat. 198);
       (6) sections 1103 through 1108 of the Intermodal Surface 
     Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2027);
       (7) section 157 of title 23, United States Code (as in 
     effect on June 8, 1998);
       (8) section 105 of title 23, United States Code (as in 
     effect for fiscal years 1998 through 2004, but only in an 
     amount equal to $639,000,000 for each of those fiscal years);
       (9) Federal-aid highway programs for which obligation 
     authority was made available under the Transportation Equity 
     Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107) or subsequent Acts 
     for multiple years or to remain available until expended, but 
     only to the extent that the obligation authority has not 
     lapsed or been used;
       (10) section 105 of title 23, United States Code (as in 
     effect for fiscal years 2005 through 2012, but only in an 
     amount equal to $639,000,000 for each of those fiscal years);
       (11) section 1603 of SAFETEA-LU (23 U.S.C. 118 note; 119 
     Stat. 1248), to the extent that funds obligated in accordance 
     with that section were not subject to a limitation on 
     obligations at the time at which the funds were initially 
     made available for obligation; and
       (12) section 119 of title 23, United States Code (but, for 
     each of fiscal years 2013 through 2016, only in an amount 
     equal to $639,000,000).
       (c) Redistribution of Unused Obligation Authority.--
     Notwithstanding subsection (a), the Secretary shall, after 
     August 1 of such fiscal year--
       (1) revise a distribution of the obligation limitation made 
     available under subsection (a) if an amount distributed 
     cannot be obligated during that fiscal year; and
       (2) redistribute sufficient amounts to those States able to 
     obligate amounts in addition to those previously distributed 
     during that fiscal year, giving priority to those States 
     having large unobligated balances of funds apportioned under 
     sections 144 (as in effect on the day before the date of 
     enactment of Public Law 112-141) and 104 of title 23, United 
     States Code.
       (d) Applicability of Obligation Limitations to 
     Transportation Research Programs.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     obligation limitation for Federal-aid highways shall apply to 
     contract authority for transportation research programs 
     carried out under--
       (A) chapter 5 of title 23, United States Code; and
       (B) the transportation research programs sections of such 
     authorization legislation.
       (2) Exception.--Obligation authority made available under 
     paragraph (1) shall--
       (A) remain available for a period of 4 fiscal years; and
       (B) be in addition to the amount of any limitation imposed 
     on obligations for Federal-aid highway and highway safety 
     construction programs for future fiscal years.
       (e) Redistribution of Certain Authorized Funds.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the date of 
     distribution of obligation limitation under subsection (a), 
     the Secretary shall distribute to the States any funds 
     (excluding funds authorized for the program under section 202 
     of title 23, United States Code) that--
       (A) are authorized to be appropriated for such fiscal year 
     for Federal-aid highway programs; and
       (B) the Secretary determines will not be allocated to the 
     States (or will not be apportioned to the States under 
     section 204 of title 23, United States Code), and will not be 
     available for obligation, for such fiscal year because of the 
     imposition of any obligation limitation for such fiscal year.
       (2) Ratio.--Funds shall be distributed under paragraph (1) 
     in the same proportion as the distribution of obligation 
     authority under subsection (a)(5).
       (3) Availability.--Funds distributed to each State under 
     paragraph (1) shall be available for any purpose described in 
     section 133(b) of title 23, United States Code.
       Sec. 121.  Notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, funds received 
     by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics from the sale of 
     data products, for necessary expenses incurred pursuant to 
     chapter 63 of title 49, United States Code, may be credited 
     to the Federal-aid highways account for the purpose of 
     reimbursing the Bureau for such expenses: Provided, That such 
     funds shall be subject to the obligation limitation for 
     Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs.

[[Page 8584]]

       Sec. 122.  Not less than 15 days prior to waiving, under 
     his or her statutory authority, any Buy America requirement 
     for Federal-aid highways projects, the Secretary of 
     Transportation shall make an informal public notice and 
     comment opportunity on the intent to issue such waiver and 
     the reasons therefor: Provided, That the Secretary shall 
     provide an annual report to the House and Senate Committees 
     on Appropriations on any waivers granted under the Buy 
     America requirements.
       Sec. 123.  None of the funds in this Act to the Department 
     of Transportation may be used to provide credit assistance 
     unless not less than 3 days before any application approval 
     to provide credit assistance under sections 603 and 604 of 
     title 23, United States Code, the Secretary of Transportation 
     provides notification in writing to the following committees: 
     the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations; the 
     Committee on Environment and Public Works and the Committee 
     on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs of the Senate; and the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House 
     of Representatives: Provided, That such notification shall 
     include, but not be limited to, the name of the project 
     sponsor; a description of the project; whether credit 
     assistance will be provided as a direct loan, loan guarantee, 
     or line of credit; and the amount of credit assistance.
       Sec. 124.  Section 127 of title 23, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(m) Longer Combination Vehicles in Idaho.--No limit or 
     other prohibition under this section, except as provided in 
     this subsection, applies to a longer combination vehicle 
     operating on a segment of the Interstate System in the State 
     of Idaho if such vehicle--
       ``(1) has a gross vehicle weight of 129,000 pounds or less;
       ``(2) complies with the single axle, tandem axle, and 
     bridge formula limits set forth in subsection (a); and
       ``(3) is authorized to operate on such segment under Idaho 
     State Law.''.
       Sec. 125.  Section 31111(b)(1)(A) of title 49, United 
     States Code, is amended by striking ``or of less than 28 feet 
     on a semitrailer or trailer operating in a truck tractor-
     semitrailer-trailer combination,'' and inserting ``or, 
     notwithstanding section 31112, of less than 33 feet on a 
     semitrailer or trailer operating in a truck tractor-
     semitrailer-trailer combination,''.
       Sec. 126. Exemption.--
       (a) In General.--Section 31112(c)(5) of title 49, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Nebraska may'' and inserting ``Nebraska 
     and Kansas may''; and
       (2) by striking ``the State of Nebraska'' and inserting 
     ``the relevant state''.
       (b) Conforming and Technical Amendments.--Section 31112(c) 
     of such title is amended--
       (1) by striking the subsection designation and heading and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(c) Special Rules for Wyoming, Ohio, Alaska, Iowa, 
     Nebraska, and Kansas.--'';
       (2) by striking ``; and'' at the end of paragraph (3) and 
     inserting a semicolon; and
       (3) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (4) and 
     inserting ``; and''.
       Sec. 127.  Section 130(e)(1) of title 23, United States 
     Code, is amended by striking ``$220,000,000'' and inserting 
     ``$350,000,000''.

              Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

              motor carrier safety operations and programs

                (liquidation of contract authorization)

                      (limitation on obligations)

                          (highway trust fund)

       Contingent upon enactment of authorization legislation, for 
     payment of obligations incurred in the implementation, 
     execution and administration of motor carrier safety 
     operations and programs pursuant to section 31104(i) of title 
     49, United States Code, and sections 4127 and 4134 of Public 
     Law 109-59, as amended by Public Law 112-141, and as extended 
     by Public Law 113-159, $259,000,000, to be derived from the 
     Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account), 
     together with advances and reimbursements received by the 
     Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, the sum of which 
     shall remain available until expended: Provided, That funds 
     available for implementation, execution or administration of 
     motor carrier safety operations and programs authorized under 
     title 49, United States Code, and sections 4127 and 4134 of 
     Public Law 109-59, as amended by Public Law 112-141, and as 
     extended by Public Law 113-159, shall not exceed total 
     obligations of $259,000,000 for ``Motor Carrier Safety 
     Operations and Programs'' for fiscal year 2016, of which 
     $9,000,000, to remain available for obligation until 
     September 30, 2018, is for the research and technology 
     program, and of which $34,545,000, to remain available for 
     obligation until September 30, 2018, is for information 
     management: Provided further, That $1,000,000 shall be made 
     available for commercial motor vehicle operator grants to 
     carry out section 4134 of Public Law 109-59, as amended by 
     Public Law 112-141, and as extended by Public Law 113-159.

                      motor carrier safety grants

                (liquidation of contract authorization)

                      (limitation on obligations)

                          (highway trust fund)

       Contingent upon enactment of authorization legislation, for 
     payment of obligations incurred in carrying out sections 
     31102, 31104(a), 31106, 31107, 31109, 31309, 31313 of title 
     49, United States Code, and sections 4126 and 4128 of Public 
     Law 109-59, as amended by Public Law 112-141, as extended by 
     Public Law 113-159, $313,000,000, to be derived from the 
     Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) and 
     to remain available until expended: Provided, That funds 
     available for the implementation or execution of motor 
     carrier safety programs shall not exceed total obligations of 
     $313,000,000 in fiscal year 2016 for ``Motor Carrier Safety 
     Grants''; of which $218,000,000 shall be available for the 
     motor carrier safety assistance program, $30,000,000 shall be 
     available for commercial driver's license program improvement 
     grants, $32,000,000 shall be available for border enforcement 
     grants, $5,000,000 shall be available for performance and 
     registration information system management grants, 
     $25,000,000 shall be available for the commercial vehicle 
     information systems and networks deployment program, and 
     $3,000,000 shall be available for safety data improvement 
     grants: Provided further, That, of the funds made available 
     herein for the motor carrier safety assistance program, 
     $32,000,000 shall be available for audits of new entrant 
     motor carriers.

 administrative provisions--federal motor carrier safety administration

       Sec. 130.  Funds appropriated or limited in this Act shall 
     be subject to the terms and conditions stipulated in section 
     350 of Public Law 107-87 and section 6901 of Public Law 110-
     28.
       Sec. 131.  The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 
     shall send notice of 49 CFR section 385.308 violations by 
     certified mail, registered mail, or another manner of 
     delivery, which records the receipt of the notice by the 
     persons responsible for the violations.
       Sec. 132.  None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this Act or any other Act may be used to 
     implement, administer, or enforce sections 395.3(c) and 
     395.3(d) of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, and such 
     section shall have no force or effect on submission of the 
     final report issued by the Secretary, as required by section 
     133 of Division K of Public Law 113-235, unless the Secretary 
     and the Inspector General of the Department of Transportation 
     each review and determine that the final report--
       (1) meets the statutory requirements set forth in such 
     section; and
       (2) establishes that commercial motor vehicle drivers who 
     operated under the restart provisions in effect between July 
     1, 2013, and the day before the date of enactment of such 
     Public Law demonstrated statistically significant improvement 
     in all outcomes related to safety, operator fatigue, driver 
     health and longevity, and work schedules, in comparison to 
     commercial motor vehicle drivers who operated under the 
     restart provisions in effect on June 30, 2013.
       Sec. 133.  None of the funds limited or otherwise made 
     available under the heading ``Motor Carrier Safety Operations 
     and Programs'' may be used to deny an application to renew a 
     Hazardous Materials Safety Program permit for a motor carrier 
     based on that carrier's Hazardous Materials Out-of-Service 
     rate, unless the carrier has the opportunity to submit a 
     written description of corrective actions taken, and other 
     documentation the carrier wishes the Secretary to consider, 
     including submitting a corrective action plan, and the 
     Secretary determines the actions or plan is insufficient to 
     address the safety concerns that resulted in that Hazardous 
     Materials Out-of-Service rate.
       Sec. 134.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to develop, issue, or implement any regulation that 
     increases levels of minimum financial responsibility for 
     transporting passengers or property as in effect on January 
     1, 2014, under regulations issued pursuant to sections 31138 
     and 31139 of title 49, United States Code.

                              {time}  2130


                  Amendment Offered by Mr. Cartwright

  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Chair, I rise to offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Strike section 134.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Chair, tonight I urge the adoption of my 
amendment, which would allow the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Administration to continue its congressionally mandated ongoing work to 
improve safety and accountability in the trucking and bus industry. I 
do so out of a

[[Page 8585]]

concern that we need to exhibit common sense in what we do. We need to 
be fiscally prudent, we need to promote safe highways in our Nation, 
and we need to recognize the importance of promoting personal 
responsibility and accountability.
  My amendment would strike a section of this bill that would halt the 
FMCSA's work toward issuing a rule that would make our highways safer 
for everyone by creating an incentive for motor carriers to make safety 
a greater priority. We have to allow the FMCSA to proceed with the 
development of a rule to increase insurance minimums for motor 
carriers, which have not been updated in, fully, 35 years in this 
Nation and, thus, have become outdated to the point of uselessness.
  The first point I make is that it is simply common sense that we 
adjust for inflation. Not adjusting for inflation for 35 years is not 
prudent, and it makes no sense. It allows carriers to travel on our 
Nation's highways in a financially irresponsible manner, in a manner 
that would allow them not to be accountable for whatever harm they 
might cause.
  Adjusting for inflation is common sense. It is also fiscally prudent, 
because what happens? Right now in this Nation, tractor-trailers are 
allowed to travel around with $750,000 of liability insurance. The 
FMCSA is studying that number to see what it should be updated to after 
35 years. $750,000 is not enough money.
  Just this morning in my district in northeastern Pennsylvania, there 
was a horrendous truck and bus accident in which three people were 
killed and a dozen others were seriously injured. When three people are 
killed, asking their families to share $750,000 is not fiscally 
responsible. Look who pays the difference.
  If somebody is killed or if somebody is rendered, for example, a 
paraplegic, they are going to incur incredible amounts of medical 
bills; they are not going to be able to work. Who picks up the 
difference when that happens? It is the Social Security system, it is 
the Medicare system, it is John Q. Taxpayer that ends up paying the 
bill when the trucking company doesn't have enough insurance to pay the 
damages.
  That is why it is fiscally prudent that we allow the FMCSA to 
continue its important work, and it is important work that was mandated 
by the MAP-21 bill that required the FMCSA to do this work.
  It also promotes safe highways, because if we raise insurance 
minimums up to modern and responsible levels, that means insurance 
companies will have to engage in actual real underwriting. They will 
have to go out from the home office and visit the headquarters of 
trucking companies to make sure they are acting properly and safely and 
responsibly. If they do that, if you want to buy insurance at 
reasonable levels, you have to act safely.
  Finally, Madam Chair, this is about personal responsibility. If you 
don't have enough insurance, you get away without being personally 
responsible when these horrendous crashes happen.
  Madam Chair, I yield to Mr. Price for a colloquy.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I 
want to commend him for offering this amendment.
  Madam Chair, as he has stressed very effectively, this is simply 
irrational to freeze these claims where they were in the early 1980s, 
and it also defies our own body's directions to the DOT to look at this 
and to think about what kind of future changes might be in order. This 
simply preempts that whole process; is that right?
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. That is correct. For that very reason, I urge 
everyone to support my amendment to allow the FMCSA to finish its 
important work of examining and developing a rule that is critical to 
preventing devastating trucking accidents and keeping our highways safe 
and secure for everyone.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Iowa. Madam Chair, I claim time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. YOUNG of Iowa. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Chair, I oppose this amendment. As is frequently the case in 
Washington, D.C., the proposed rules requiring truckers to increase 
their liability insurance is a solution in search of a problem. The 
provision currently included in the bill must remain. It must remain 
because it protects job creators so they can stay in business. When you 
consider that 99.9 percent of crashes are already covered by existing 
insurance requirements, you can see that increasing insurance and, 
thus, costs at the expense of jobs is just not a credible solution.
  Safety is important. We all know that. We all want to make sure that 
our roadways are safe. But the Department of Transportation readily 
admits that raising the cost does not necessarily improve safety. The 
DOT's own study expresses a crippling revelation to proponents of a 
cost increase on our job creators. There may be more effective ways 
that reduce crashes at a lower cost.
  Bottom line, we need to strike a balance. If the proposed regulations 
went into effect, our smaller trucking companies in Iowa and other 
rural areas in States around the country would be unable to absorb the 
increased costs, and it could threaten their ability to stay in 
business. Too frequently in this town we are working to fix the 
mistakes that were made by so-called Washington solutions. I strongly 
encourage the rejection of this amendment tonight.
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. YOUNG of Iowa. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Chair, on the one point about 99.9 percent of 
crashes settling within existing insurance minimums, there we have the 
opponents of my amendment speaking really out of both sides of their 
mouth, because if they say it is so rare that a crash will cost more 
than the minimum insurance, then what that means is that the expense of 
insuring against that minimal risk has to be minimal itself, but these 
are the same people saying that it will be a crippling additional 
insurance premium. It doesn't make sense.
  Mr. YOUNG of Iowa. Reclaiming my time, I yield the balance of my time 
to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry).
  Mr. PERRY. Madam Chair, I, too, oppose this amendment. Increasing 
insurance requirements will not improve highway safety. I mean, what 
incentive does it create? How does increasing the insurance requirement 
improve safety? It is not backed by any sound data.
  The agency's own data shows that current requirements cover damages 
in more--more--than 99 percent of all crashes. Think about that, more 
than 99 percent of all crashes. But to the gentleman's point, my friend 
from Pennsylvania, the agency is planning on tying these requirements 
to medical inflation, and that results in increases of 500 percent or 
more. Think about that, medical inflation, this administration. I mean, 
isn't that the height of irony? I thought they were driving the cost of 
medical inflation down. That is another whole story.
  The fact is the industry has a remarkable safety record compared to 
all commercial motor vehicles. As a matter of fact, motor coaches 
average only 20 fatalities per year and schoolbuses only 5. Now, that 
is not meant to minimize those losses because every life is precious, 
but in a highway environment that produces 35,000 fatalities per year, 
the DOT study did not even consider accident data, claims data, or talk 
to insurance carriers about the impacts of increasing insurance or 
whether there is even a need for it.
  Indeed, this is a solution that is looking for a problem, a problem 
that does not exist. I urge the Members to vote ``no'' on this 
amendment.
  Mr. YOUNG of Iowa. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Cartwright).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.

[[Page 8586]]


  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
will be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Sec. 135.  None of the funds made available by this Act or 
     previous appropriations Acts under the heading ``Motor 
     Carrier Safety Operations and Programs'' shall be used to pay 
     for costs associated with design, development, testing, or 
     implementation of a wireless roadside inspection program 
     until 180 days after the Secretary of Transportation 
     certifies to the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations that such program does not conflict with 
     existing non-Federal electronic screening systems, create 
     capabilities already available, or require additional 
     statutory authority to incorporate generated inspection data 
     into safety determinations or databases, and has restrictions 
     to specifically address privacy concerns of affected motor 
     carriers and operators: Provided, That nothing in this 
     section shall be construed as affecting the Department's 
     ongoing research efforts in this area.

             National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

                        operations and research

       For expenses necessary to discharge the functions of the 
     Secretary, with respect to traffic and highway safety 
     authorized under chapter 301 and part C of subtitle VI of 
     title 49, United States Code, $150,000,000, of which 
     $20,000,000 shall remain available through September 30, 
     2017.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Gosar

  Mr. GOSAR. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Collins of Georgia). The Clerk will report the 
amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 40, line 12, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,200,000)''.
       Page 142, line 9, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $500,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Arizona and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.

                              {time}  2145

  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment which 
seeks to bolster funds for the inspector general of the National 
Railroad Passenger Corporation, or Amtrak.
  I am a strong proponent of government oversight, and I believe the 
revelatory work of the inspector general should be staunchly supported 
within each agency of the Federal Government.
  Today, given the dismal financial record of Amtrak through its 
history, compounded with recent safety failures, it is clear that the 
scrupulous, objective oversight of the inspector general is needed for 
this agency now more than ever.
  This amendment redirects $500,000 to the Amtrak Office of the 
Inspector General salaries and expenses account to bring it up to the 
budget request level.
  Since the Inspector General Act was passed into law, the IG community 
has saved taxpayers billions of dollars and has uncovered countless 
examples of wrongdoing in the Federal Government. The inspector general 
community does good work. Let's give them the resources they need.
  The committee has noted the good work of the Amtrak OIG in the 
committee report, stating: ``The OIG's efforts have resulted in 
valuable studies and recommendations for this committee and for the 
Corporation that have yielded cost savings and management improvements. 
These studies have been in a number of areas, including food and 
beverage service, capital planning, overtime, and fraud.''
  I commend the committee for the work they have done to support 
efficient and effective government.
  This amendment is directly in line with the high value the committee 
places on the thorough work of the OIG and will ensure additional 
transparency and accountability within Amtrak.
  There is a wide agreement about the need to reform, streamline, and 
improve Amtrak. A valuable first step in that reform is supporting the 
objective, rigorous auditing information which the OIG is uniquely 
qualified to produce.
  I ask my colleagues to join me in support of government 
accountability by giving the Amtrak OIG the resources they need to 
identify the waste, fraud, and abuse within a government agency that is 
in desperate need of reform.
  I thank the chairman and the ranking member for their leadership on 
this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                        operations and research

                (liquidation of contract authorization)

                      (limitation on obligations)

                          (highway trust fund)

       Contingent upon enactment of authorization legislation, for 
     payment of obligations incurred in carrying out the 
     provisions of 23 U.S.C. 403, and chapter 303 of title 49, 
     United States Code, $125,000,000, to be derived from the 
     Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) and 
     to remain available until expended: Provided, That none of 
     the funds in this Act shall be available for the planning or 
     execution of programs the total obligations for which, in 
     fiscal year 2016, are in excess of $125,000,000, of which 
     $120,000,000 shall be for programs authorized under 23 U.S.C. 
     403 and $5,000,000 shall be for the National Driver Register 
     authorized under chapter 303 of title 49, United States Code: 
     Provided further, That within the $120,000,000 obligation 
     limitation for operations and research, $20,000,000 shall 
     remain available until September 30, 2017, and shall be in 
     addition to the amount of any limitation imposed on 
     obligations for future years: Provided further, That 
     $6,500,000 of the total obligation limitation for operations 
     and research in fiscal year 2016 shall be applied toward 
     unobligated balances of contract authority provided in prior 
     Acts for carrying out the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 403, and 
     chapter 303 of title 49, United States Code.

                     highway traffic safety grants

                (liquidation of contract authorization)

                      (limitation on obligations)

                          (highway trust fund)

       Contingent on the enactment of authorization legislation, 
     for payment of obligations incurred in carrying out 
     provisions of 23 U.S.C. 402 and 405, section 2009 of Public 
     Law 109-59, as amended by Public Law 112-141, and section 
     31101(a)(6) of Public Law 112-141, to remain available until 
     expended, $561,500,000, to be derived from the Highway Trust 
     Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account): Provided, That 
     none of the funds in this Act shall be available for the 
     planning or execution of programs the total obligations for 
     which, in fiscal year 2016, are in excess of $561,500,000 for 
     programs authorized under 23 U.S.C. 402 and 405, section 2009 
     of Public Law 109-59, as amended by Public Law 112-141, and 
     section 31101(a)(6) of Public Law 112-141, of which 
     $235,000,000 shall be for ``Highway Safety Programs'' under 
     23 U.S.C. 402; $272,000,000 shall be for ``National Priority 
     Safety Programs'' under 23 U.S.C. 405; $29,000,000 shall be 
     for the ``High Visibility Enforcement Program'' under section 
     2009 of Public Law 109-59, as amended by Public Law 112-141; 
     $25,500,000 shall be for ``Administrative Expenses'' under 
     section 31101(a)(6) of Public Law 112-141: Provided further, 
     That none of these funds shall be used for construction, 
     rehabilitation, or remodeling costs, or for office 
     furnishings and fixtures for State, local or private 
     buildings or structures: Provided further, That not to exceed 
     $500,000 of the funds made available for ``National Priority 
     Safety Programs'' under 23 U.S.C. 405 for ``Impaired Driving 
     Countermeasures'' (as described in subsection (d) of that 
     section) shall be available for technical assistance to the 
     States: Provided further, That with respect to the 
     ``Transfers'' provision under 23 U.S.C. 405(a)(1)(G), any 
     amounts transferred to increase the amounts made available 
     under section 402 shall include the obligation authority for 
     such amounts: Provided further, That the Administrator shall 
     notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations of 
     any exercise of the authority granted under the previous 
     proviso or under 23 U.S.C. 405(a)(1)(G) within 60 days.

      administrative provisions--national highway traffic safety 
                             administration

       Sec. 140.  An additional $130,000 shall be made available 
     to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, out of 
     the amount limited for section 402 of title 23, United States 
     Code, to pay for travel and related expenses for State 
     management reviews and to pay for core competency development 
     training and related expenses for highway safety staff.
       Sec. 141.  The limitations on obligations for the programs 
     of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration set in 
     this Act shall not apply to obligations for which obligation 
     authority was made available in previous public laws but only 
     to the extent that

[[Page 8587]]

     the obligation authority has not lapsed or been used.
       Sec. 142.  None of the funds in this Act shall be used to 
     implement section 404 of title 23, United States Code.
       Sec. 143.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to obligate or award funds for the National Highway 
     Traffic Safety Administration's National Roadside Survey.
       Sec. 144.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to mandate global positioning system (GPS) tracking 
     in private passenger motor vehicles without providing full 
     and appropriate consideration of privacy concerns under 5 
     U.S.C. chapter 5, subchapter II.

                    Federal Railroad Administration

                         safety and operations

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Railroad 
     Administration, not otherwise provided for, $186,870,000, of 
     which $15,400,000 shall remain available until expended.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Garrett

  Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 44, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $16,930,000)''.
       Page 52, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $83,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from New Jersey and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
  Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment that 
will bolster our Nation's rail safety and operations.
  First, I would like to thank the gentleman from Florida for his 
dedication and important work on this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, the number of train derailments and accidents in our 
local communities is a growing concern among my constituents and 
Americans all across the country.
  In the first 2 months of 2015, there were 18 Amtrak accidents, as 
well as recent oil train derailments in West Virginia and in North 
Dakota. Most recently, Mr. Chairman, an Amtrak train crash in 
Philadelphia killed eight people and injured dozens more.
  In New Jersey alone, there are 2,400 miles of freight lines and over 
1,000 passenger rail miles, and we must ensure, Mr. Chairman, that 
these existing lines are operating safely.
  So what do we have here? My amendment fully funds the Federal 
Railroad Administration's safety and operations account without 
increasing spending in the underlying bill. The FRA's safety and 
operations account provides funding for the FRA's safety program 
activities related to passenger and freight railroads.
  So how do we do this? By reallocating a mere 4 percent of funding 
from capital investment grants, we can fund the safe operation of our 
Nation's trains at the President's requested levels.
  Mr. Chairman, we do not build a new section onto our house if our 
roof is caving in. So we should not be adding on to these systems if 
they are caving in or failing.
  So why are we funding new projects before we ensure that our current 
rail lines have enough dollars, enough funding for their safety?
  My amendment would simply prioritize safety and maintenance of our 
existing infrastructure over the ribbon-cutting ceremonies associated 
with system expansion.
  In light of the recent upsurge in deadly rail accidents, now is the 
time to adequately fund the safety and operations of our trains. 
Additionally, with our rising national debt, it is very important that 
we remain fiscally responsible and prioritize how we spend our 
constituents' hard-earned tax dollars.
  That is why, in conclusion, my amendment does not increase spending, 
but only prioritizes a commonsense directive. And so I urge my 
colleagues to support my amendment to fund train safety, and I reserve 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, while I know and I am absolutely 
certain that the gentleman from New Jersey's heart is in the right 
place, unfortunately, I cannot support the offset.
  The committee carefully calculated the New Start numbers to be able 
to accommodate the signed FFGAs and Small Starts Grant Agreements at 
the beginning of the fiscal year, and I am a firm believer that once 
you sign a grant, once you make that commitment, we should honor it. 
This reduction would impact those signed agreements, so I reluctantly 
oppose this amendment.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina 
(Mr. Price), the ranking member.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding, and I want to echo his opposition to this amendment, although 
I do commend Mr. Garrett for his focus on safety and operations. I, 
too, would like to raise that appropriation to the request level. That 
is a good objective.
  There are a couple of problems here, though. One, is that because of 
differences in outlay rates, to pick up $17 million on the safety and 
operations side you have to cut $83 million from the transit New 
Starts. That has to do with differences in outlay rates. But the fact 
is, it is a substantial cut. And these New Starts in the bill, I remind 
colleagues, are already $1.3 billion below the President's request. 
They are $198 million below what we have this year.
  These are badly underfunded items. So we simply, again, are robbing 
Peter to pay Paul. But because of the disproportionate impact here, and 
the fact that New Starts are already so underresourced, I reluctantly 
oppose this amendment.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chairman, two points. The first is, I understand the 
gentleman's opposition on procedural grounds as far as the differences 
in outlays and what have you. But when you go back home and talk to 
your district and say you are trying to do something for safety, as we 
are in this case, and you say: Well, the reason we can't do this is the 
procedural aspect of outlays versus the actual amount of money going in 
and the amount of money being cut, and so on and so forth, and you go 
through all the rubric and the matrix that we use around here and all 
the buzz words on the floor to try to explain things, the eyes of the 
people back home glaze over, rightfully so, because they say: Those are 
your rules, not ours. Why don't you just get something done.
  What they are asking to get done is rail safety. And that is what 
this amendment does.
  I just want to end with one quote. Back in 2010, the head of the 
FTA--at that time, the administrator was Peter Rogoff--chastised local 
transit agencies for promoting rail construction for so many new rail 
lines. He said on one hand, agencies were unable to maintain the rail 
lines they already had. The FTA had recently at that point estimated 
that rail transit systems suffered from close to a $60 billion 
maintenance backlog--and the backlog was growing even then.
  And he said this: ``If you can't afford to operate the systems you 
have,'' he asked the agencies, ``why does it make sense for us to 
partner with you in new expansions?''
  That is a great question. If they can't fix up what is already out 
there and all the problems on the rail lines out there on important 
things like safety, then why on Earth are we spending all these tens of 
millions of dollars on brand new programs that we know that they are 
not going to be able to maintain as well? Let's do first things first.
  As I said in my little example before, if your roof is collapsing on 
your house, you don't add a new deck, you don't put in a new pool, you 
don't put in a paved new driveway, you don't do anything else. You 
repair the roof, first and foremost, and then everything else comes 
after that.
  And that is really all I am asking. Let's maintain the safety, first 
and foremost, so that everyone riding on the rails can feel confident 
that they are operating right. Then, after that, let's come back here 
to the floor and fix up the other funding mechanism for new programs 
and what have you, and go forward.

[[Page 8588]]

  Right now, let's make sure that our constituents back home can feel 
confident every time they ride on a transit system, be it a bus or 
train or something else, that they know that it is adequately funded 
and taken care of and maintained.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey 
will be postponed.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                   railroad research and development

         For necessary expenses for railroad research and 
     development, $39,100,000, to remain available until expended.

       railroad rehabilitation and improvement financing program

         The Secretary of Transportation is authorized to issue 
     direct loans and loan guarantees pursuant to sections 501 
     through 504 of the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory 
     Reform Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-210), as amended, such 
     authority to exist as long as any such direct loan or loan 
     guarantee is outstanding. Provided, That pursuant to section 
     502 of such Act, as amended, no new direct loans or loan 
     guarantee commitments shall be made using Federal funds for 
     the credit risk premium during fiscal year 2016.

    operating grants to the national railroad passenger corporation

         To enable the Secretary of Transportation to make 
     quarterly grants to the National Railroad Passenger 
     Corporation, in amounts based on the Secretary's assessment 
     of the Corporation's seasonal cash flow requirements, for the 
     operation of intercity passenger rail, as authorized by 
     section 101 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement 
     Act of 2008 (division B of Public Law 110-432), $288,500,000, 
     to remain available until expended: Provided, That the 
     amounts available under this paragraph shall be available for 
     the Secretary to approve funding to cover operating losses 
     for the Corporation only after receiving and reviewing a 
     grant request for each specific train route: Provided 
     further, That each such grant request shall be accompanied by 
     a detailed financial analysis, revenue projection, and 
     capital expenditure projection justifying the Federal support 
     to the Secretary's satisfaction: Provided further, That not 
     later than 60 days after enactment of this Act, the 
     Corporation shall transmit, in electronic format, to the 
     Secretary and the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations the annual budget, business plan, the 5-Year 
     Financial Plan for fiscal year 2016 required under section 
     204 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 
     2008 and the comprehensive fleet plan for all Amtrak rolling 
     stock: Provided further, That the budget, business plan and 
     the 5-Year Financial Plan shall include annual information on 
     the maintenance, refurbishment, replacement, and expansion 
     for all Amtrak rolling stock consistent with the 
     comprehensive fleet plan: Provided further, That the 
     Corporation shall provide monthly performance reports in an 
     electronic format which shall describe the work completed to 
     date, any changes to the business plan, and the reasons for 
     such changes as well as progress against the milestones and 
     target dates of the 2012 performance improvement plan: 
     Provided further, That the Corporation's budget, business 
     plan, 5-Year Financial Plan, semiannual reports, monthly 
     reports, comprehensive fleet plan and all supplemental 
     reports or plans comply with requirements in Public Law 112-
     55: Provided further, That none of the funds provided in this 
     Act may be used to support any route on which Amtrak offers a 
     discounted fare of more than 50 percent off the normal peak 
     fare: Provided further, That the preceding proviso does not 
     apply to routes where the operating loss as a result of the 
     discount is covered by a State and the State participates in 
     the setting of fares.


                     Amendment Offered by Ms. Titus

  Ms. TITUS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 45, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $1,000,000) (increased by $1,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentlewoman 
from Nevada and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Nevada.

                              {time}  2200

  Ms. TITUS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today with this very simple 
amendment. It is one that is meant to shed light on inadequate 
investments that are being made in our Nation's passenger rail service.
  The bill before us appropriates nearly $16 billion for aviation, over 
$40 billion for our roads, over $10 billion for public transit, but 
just $1.1 billion for our Nation's passenger rail service.
  I represent Las Vegas, where we import everything from tourists to 
lobsters, so we certainly understand the importance of transportation 
mobility.
  It is interesting, many international and domestic travelers alike 
are shocked to learn, when they are coming to Las Vegas, that a major 
metropolitan city, home to more than 2 million residents and playground 
and boardroom to over 42 million visitors a year, we just don't have 
access to passenger rail service.
  Visitors from Europe or Asia are accustomed to taking trains from one 
city to another, and they face a sad reality when traveling to Las 
Vegas from other Southwestern tourist destinations.
  From Los Angeles, for example, you would have to take a 7-hour train 
ride that drops you off in Kingman, Arizona, at 1:30 in the morning. 
There, you would have to find the bus station, which is 4 miles away, 
get on a bus at 4 in the morning to travel another 3 hours to downtown 
Las Vegas. That is just crazy.
  The last Amtrak train on the Desert Wind line departed the back of 
the Plaza Hotel in May of 1997, bound for Los Angeles.
  Well, a lot has changed since the late 1990s. Over the last 17 years, 
southern Nevada's population has grown by a million new residents, and 
10 million more visitors travel to southern Nevada annually, putting 
enormous strain on our area's highways and the airport, which is among 
the top 10 busiest airports in the country.
  More than 42,000 vehicles also cross the I-15 border between 
California and Nevada daily. If you have traveled along that busy 
stretch of road, you know the kind of traffic nightmares that you might 
encounter.
  In fact, I recently spoke with an airline pilot who frequently makes 
the short flight between Los Angeles and Las Vegas, and he remarked 
that you can't get lost. All you have to do is follow the red brake 
lights on I-15 all the way to McCarran.
  We can and we must do better; but this isn't just about Las Vegas. 
Cities like Phoenix, Arizona; Nashville, Tennessee; Columbus, Ohio; 
Louisville, Kentucky; and Boise, Idaho, don't have passenger rail 
service either.
  In addition, there is no direct rail service between major 
metropolitan areas like Houston and Dallas, Atlanta and Orlando, and 
Kansas City and Oklahoma City. I believe that expanding rail service to 
unserved communities like those in southern Nevada should be a 
priority, but, unfortunately, this legislation before us does not 
really get us there.
  At the end of April, I organized a roundtable back in my district to 
discuss the need to restore passenger service to Las Vegas, and I was 
really surprised by the high level of interest from local stakeholders.
  We had participants from our State and local transportation 
authorities, the gaming and hotel industries, the chamber of commerce, 
labor unions and economic development organizations, all in agreement 
that southern Nevada should have passenger rail service as part of our 
long-term economic viability plans. This type of development is a 
regional and should be a national priority.
  Now, a lot of attention has been paid to the Northeast corridor, 
where travelers frequent Amtrak service along the East Coast, but we 
should not forget that it was the railroad that built the West and 
still, today, remains a critical piece of our transportation network.
  China is investing $128 million in rail in 2015 alone and India, $137 
billion over the next 5 years; yet we are investing only $1.1 billion.

[[Page 8589]]

  Mr. Chairman, since this amendment really has no monetary impact, I 
would respectfully ask that you accept it. It is my hope that we 
recognize this mode of transportation that is so tied to our Nation's 
history and that we can continue to work together to see that it gets 
the attention and support that it deserves.
  Thank you very much for your time and your consideration. I hope 
that, together, we can work to be sure that passenger rail service is 
expanded throughout the country and especially in the Southwest.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Titus).
  The amendment was agreed to.


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Brooks of Alabama

  Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 45, strike line 6 and all that follows through page 
     47, line 3.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Alabama and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama.
  Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, America recently suffered four 
straight trillion dollar deficits. In the past few months, America's 
debt blew through the $18 trillion mark.
  America pays over $200 billion per year in debt service, which is 
more than four times what the Federal Government spends on highways, 
bridges, and interstates each year. America's Comptroller General warns 
that America's deficits and debt paths are unsustainable.
  The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office warns that our debt 
service cost is on a path to increase by another $600 billion within a 
decade, to more than $800 billion per year. That is more than America 
spends each year on national defense. The CBO also warns that, within a 
decade, if current trends continue, America will face yearly trillion 
dollar deficits in perpetuity.
  Per then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen's 
testimony before the House Armed Services Committee, debt is America's 
``greatest threat to our national security.''
  As a result of America's debt, in a few short years, America's 
uniformed military personnel numbers will be our smallest since before 
World War II, America's Navy will have the smallest number of 
operational naval vessels since World War I, and America's Air Force 
will have its smallest number of operational aircraft in its history. 
Debt, not our enemies, is slowly but surely stripping America of its 
ability to defend itself.
  In sum, Washington's financial irresponsibility, this House of 
Representatives' financial irresponsibility, is pushing America into a 
debilitating insolvency and bankruptcy that will destroy the American 
Dream for our children and grandchildren.
  It is in this setting that I beseech this House of Representatives to 
be financially responsible by supporting my amendment that eliminates 
Federal Government operating subsidies of Amtrak, thus forcing Amtrak 
to operate in the black.
  How bad is the Amtrak subsidy problem? The Congressional Research 
Service reports that, from 1971 to 2015, Federal Amtrak subsidies 
totaled $78 billion in constant 2015 dollars. In fiscal year 2014, 
Amtrak had a net loss of $1.1 billion. Who paid for that loss? 
America's children and grandchildren, that is who.
  How so? It is because America does not have the money and had to 
borrow every penny of that $1.1 billion, thus burdening Americans for 
generations to come.
  Mr. Chairman, a business that relies on subsidies and tax dollars to 
cover losses has little incentive to operate efficiently or effectively 
or, for that matter, as safely as it should.
  It is appalling that the Federal Government undermines and threatens 
the future of America's children and grandchildren in order to 
subsidize Amtrak passenger service that would be self-sufficient if 
Amtrak riders stopped mooching off of hard-working American taxpayers 
and, instead, simply paid for the actual cost of their rides.
  Amtrak supporters often claim that Amtrak will go out of business if 
it is not subsidized by American taxpayers. That is bunk unsupported by 
facts.
  This same ``woe is me'' argument was made about freight train 
subsidies; yet, when freight rail subsidies ended and freight rail was 
sold to private investors in the 1980s, freight rail did not go out of 
business and still operates today.
  Similarly, the Federal Government does not operate or subsidize 
national airlines or national bus services; yet airlines and buses 
operate profitably in the private sector, despite Federal Government 
subsidies for Amtrak, their competitor.
  Just as airlines, bus services, and freight rail operate without 
government subsidies, Amtrak will do the same if this House of 
Representatives has the courage to wean Amtrak from the taxpayer 
nipple.
  Mr. Chairman, after more than 40 years, it is time to stop the 
runaway Amtrak train. It is time to force Amtrak riders to pay their 
own way by ending their subsidized rides on the backs of American 
taxpayers.
  I urge adoption of my amendment to do just that.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I seek time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong 
opposition to this amendment which, purely and simply, would end 
intercity passenger rail for our Nation.
  I remind colleagues, there is not a single mode of transportation in 
this country that is not subsidized, contrary to what we have just 
heard.
  To make the case further, I yield such time as she may consume to the 
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Brown), a distinguished member of the 
authorizing committee.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, when I was coming up, I used to like this television 
show, ``Robin Hood.'' My colleagues practice what I call reverse Robin 
Hood, robbing from the working people and the poor people and the 
transit people to give tax breaks to the rich.
  Just a few weeks ago, the House Republicans passed a bill cutting 
taxes by $269 billion--I guess that didn't affect the deficit--for 
their wealthiest friends, but can't find the $2 billion that we need 
for Amtrak--shameful.
  The funding cuts proposed in this amendment would simply force Amtrak 
to shut down, strand millions of rail passengers, disrupt commuter 
operations, add to our already congested roads and airports, eliminate 
over 20,000 jobs nationwide, and jeopardize local economies and 
businesses that depend on Amtrak's service.
  Amtrak provides the majority of all intercity passenger rail service 
in the United States, with more States and localities across America 
turning to passenger rail to meet the transportation needs of our 
citizens.
  Amtrak has done an excellent job, based on the fact that 9/11, when 
we were attacked, Amtrak was the only means that you could move away.
  When we had Hurricane Katrina, Amtrak is the only way that we could 
move people out of harm's way by evacuating and delivering food and 
water and supplies.
  Amtrak has made significant improvement in its system over the last 
several years, has steady increase in ridership numbers, played a vital 
role in disaster recovery, and has an ambitious agenda for future 
growth.
  I encourage all Members to vote against this ill-willed and ill-
thought-out amendment.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I would respond that there is no 
factual basis for the gentlewoman's comments that have just been made.
  Socialism does not work. We need to get Amtrak passengers off the 
backs of

[[Page 8590]]

all taxpayers, including those that are poor, that can't afford the 
taxes that they are already having to pay to benefit those Amtrak 
riders. Let's set them free.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield to my colleague 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah).
  Mr. FATTAH. Let me thank the ranking member.
  The fact of the matter is, notwithstanding what was offered to the 
House as the picture of America, we actually live in the greatest 
country in the world. We have the strongest economy. We are the 
wealthiest country. There is no country, based on the IMF, that would 
want to trade our position vis-a-vis debt-to-wealth ratio.
  I hear the gentleman saying, Woe is America, and we can't afford to 
subsidize rail. I think the ranking member makes it clear that there is 
no form of transportation that is not subsidized.
  I heard this utterance that we don't subsidize airplane travel. This 
is nonsensical. Just the facts of this bill itself outline some of our 
country's subsidies for our airline industry.

                              {time}  2215

  But I want to talk about Amtrak.
  When it is said that there is a $1 billion subsidy and that somehow 
we can't afford that from last year, I want to remind this House that 
for each and every month we have been in Afghanistan, we have been 
spending $2 billion a week for well over a decade, as a Nation. The 
idea that we can't afford to have a first-rate passenger rail system 
defies logic. It is just a matter of political will.
  We need to make a decision about America's place in the world, and 
our economy is dependent on our ability to transport not just freight 
but human beings, and Amtrak is critical to that.
  I thank the gentleman from North Carolina for yielding me time.
  I hope this House will reconsider this thrust of the majority to move 
away from passenger rail. I heard some talk from the gentleman that we 
have got to stop this runaway train, but we tried to stop a train in 
Philadelphia, and if we had made the investments, there would be people 
who would be alive today.
  We need to make these investments, and we need to move our country 
forward. It is not about political philosophy. It is about 
practicality.
  Our economic competitors are subsidizing rail. And if we want to make 
our economy work, we are going to have to make Amtrak work. And we can 
do that through some of the efforts on this bill today.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank the gentleman for his wise words 
and join him in wholeheartedly opposing this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Brooks).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Alabama will 
be postponed.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

  capital and debt service grants to the national railroad passenger 
                              corporation

       To enable the Secretary of Transportation to make grants to 
     the National Railroad Passenger Corporation for capital 
     investments as authorized by sections 101(c), 102, and 219(b) 
     of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 
     (division B of Public Law 110-432), $850,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended, of which not to exceed $160,200,000 
     shall be for debt service obligations as authorized by 
     section 102 of such Act: Provided, That of the amounts made 
     available under this heading, not less than $50,000,000 shall 
     be made available to bring Amtrak-served facilities and 
     stations into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities 
     Act: Provided further, That after an initial distribution of 
     up to $200,000,000, which shall be used by the Corporation as 
     a working capital account, all remaining funds shall be 
     provided to the Corporation only on a reimbursable basis: 
     Provided further, That of the amounts made available under 
     this heading, up to $20,000,000 may be used by the Secretary 
     to subsidize operating losses of the Corporation should the 
     funds provided under the heading ``Operating Grants to the 
     National Railroad Passenger Corporation'' be insufficient to 
     meet operational costs for fiscal year 2016: Provided 
     further, That the Secretary may retain up to one-half of 1 
     percent of the funds provided under this heading to fund the 
     costs of project management and oversight of activities 
     authorized by subsections 101(a) and 101(c) of division B of 
     Public Law 110-432: Provided further, That the Secretary 
     shall approve funding for capital expenditures, including 
     advance purchase orders of materials, for the Corporation 
     only after receiving and reviewing a grant request for each 
     specific capital project justifying the Federal support to 
     the Secretary's satisfaction: Provided further, That except 
     as otherwise provided herein, none of the funds under this 
     heading may be used to subsidize operating losses of the 
     Corporation: Provided further, That none of the funds under 
     this heading may be used for capital projects not approved by 
     the Secretary of Transportation or on the Corporation's 
     fiscal year 2016 business plan: Provided further, That in 
     addition to the project management oversight funds authorized 
     under section 101(d) of division B of Public Law 110-432, the 
     Secretary may retain up to an additional $3,000,000 of the 
     funds provided under this heading to fund expenses associated 
     with implementing section 212 of division B of Public Law 
     110-432, including the amendments made by section 212 to 
     section 24905 of title 49, United States Code: Provided 
     further, That Amtrak shall conduct a business case analysis 
     on capital investments that exceed $10,000,000 in life-cycle 
     costs: Provided further, That each contract for a capital 
     acquisition that exceeds $10,000,000 in life cycle costs 
     shall state that funding is subject to the availability of 
     appropriated funds provided by an appropriations Act.


               amendment offered by ms. brown of florida

  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 47, line 11, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $861,500,000)''.

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentlewoman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentlewoman from Florida and a 
Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, my amendment increases capital 
grants to Amtrak by $861 million. This will bring the total funding for 
Amtrak in the bill to $2 billion, equal to Amtrak's fiscal year 2016 
budget request to Congress.
  This bill, as if it wasn't bad enough, cut $290 million from Amtrak's 
capital program, which is used to repair and replace aging 
infrastructure on the Northeast corridor, including 140-year-old 
bridges and tunnels, and implement positive train control, a system 
that, according to the National Transportation Safety Board, would have 
prevented the recent Amtrak derailment in Philadelphia.
  According to the April 2015 report to Congress, ``At the current rate 
of available funding, it would take over 300 years to replace all of 
the bridges on the Northeast corridor, well beyond the timeframe in 
which assets would simply be shut down.''
  The list of critical needs extends far beyond just bridges and 
tunnels. Major portions of Amtrak's electrical power supply system date 
back to 1930.
  According to the commission, in total, $21.1 billion is needed to 
achieve a state of good repair on the corridor, $8.7 billion of which 
is needed to address critical infrastructure needs over the next 5 
years.
  We cannot point to the recent Amtrak derailment and say that it was 
directly caused by a lack of investment. That is true. But we do know 
from the NTSB that it was preventable had positive train control been 
installed on that section of track.
  Amtrak included $36.4 million in their $2 billion fiscal year 2016 
budget request to Congress. Amtrak testified at a hearing in the 
Transportation and

[[Page 8591]]

Infrastructure Committee yesterday that had they been provided adequate 
funding from the get-go, they would have been able to implement 
positive train control sooner.
  The impact of this tragic accident could also have been lessened had 
the Republican-controlled Congress not denied Amtrak's request for 
funding to replace passenger cars that date back to 1975 with newer 
cars.
  At this time, I yield to the gentleman from Philadelphia, 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah).
  Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment.
  I think it is critically important that we understand that the 
President requested an increase in capital allotments for Amtrak. Not 
only was that not honored, but we actually went with the wisdom of the 
majority: we actually cut last year's number by over $250-plus million.
  This is a move in the wrong direction for our country, and I hope 
that through the gentlewoman's amendment, we can reverse that. So I 
stand in support of it, and I hope that the majority would allow us to 
proceed to a vote.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. I reserve the balance of my time.


                             point of order

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes a net increase 
in budget authority in the bill.
  The amendment is not in order under section 3(d)(3) of House 
Resolution 5 of the 114th Congress, which states the following:
  ``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general 
appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the 
bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments 
proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority 
pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''
  The amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill 
in violation of such section.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order?
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I wish to be heard on the point 
of order.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Florida is recognized.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, just a few short weeks ago, House 
Republicans passed a bill cutting taxes by $269 billion for their 
wealthiest friends, yet we can't find $2 billion for Amtrak to make it 
safe?
  My friend from Florida, this is unacceptable; shame.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman needs to confine her remarks to the 
point of order.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. I thought I was speaking to the point of order, 
sir.
  That is my point. We cut $269 billion, and we can't find $2 billion 
to make Amtrak safe? That is the point.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair is prepared to rule.
  The gentleman from Florida makes a point of order that the amendment 
offered by the gentlewoman from Florida violates section 3(d)(3) of 
House Resolution 5.
  Section 3(d)(3) establishes a point of order against an amendment 
proposing a net increase in budgetary authority in the pending bill.
  As persuasively asserted by the gentleman from Florida, the amendment 
proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill. Therefore, the 
point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.


               amendment offered by mr. brooks of alabama

  Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 47, strike line 4 and all that follows through page 
     49, line 8.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Alabama and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama.
  Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, my first amendment, Brooks No. 
19, strikes $288.5 million in operating subsidies for Amtrak. This 
second amendment, which is Brooks No. 21, strikes capital and debt 
service subsidies that total $850 million per year to get to the point 
where we can strike all taxpayer subsidies for Amtrak.
  I would rely on the arguments previously made with respect to my 
first amendment to support this second amendment.
  I would add, however, that I have heard some comments about the 
safety associated with Amtrak. I would emphasize at this point that if 
you want safety with rail service, probably the best thing to do is to 
put it in the private sector and eliminate Amtrak altogether.
  Look at airlines, air carriers; they are private sector and are much 
safer than Amtrak. Look at buses; they are private sector and are safer 
than Amtrak. And I would submit that if lives are what concern the 
opponents to these amendments that they would propose putting Amtrak 
into private hands in order to have the same kind of safety record that 
we have with buses, air carriers, and other modes of private 
transportation.
  Mr. Chairman, at this point, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to 
the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I very strongly oppose 
this amendment which, like the gentleman's previous amendment, would 
essentially end passenger rail service in this country. It is just that 
drastic. It is also targeting passenger rail in a way that obscures the 
fact that every mode of transportation in this country is subsidized. 
It is in the public interest to maintain diverse modes of 
transportation that serve our various transportation needs and our 
various population centers.
  Amtrak provides an invaluable service to this country: 500 
destinations in 46 States, connecting small communities that don't have 
access to air service.
  Amtrak is popular with the American people. It is increasingly being 
taken advantage of. In the last 11 years, 10 consecutive years of 
record ridership, serving nearly 32 million passengers last year.
  Without Amtrak's service in the Northeast corridor, where would we 
be? There would be virtual gridlock in New York's airports, but it is 
not just the Northeast corridor. I come from a State that had the 
insight years ago to invest in State Amtrak service, and now Amtrak is 
the preferred mode of transportation for thousands of people between 
Raleigh and Charlotte, with three full routes a day in each direction.
  This is an irresponsible amendment. It will eliminate thousands of 
jobs. It will harm local economies. And it will violate labor 
agreements. There is so much wrong with this.
  I urge its rejection and yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I would submit that the argument 
that this would end rail service is absolutely false and is not 
supported by history. Nothing in history supports the gentleman's 
argument. However well-intentioned, the evidence is clear.
  Freight rail, the same kind of argument was made. Subsidies were 
ended. It went into the private sector. It survives and thrives today.
  There is an argument that buses and air carriers are somehow or 
another subsidized. I would submit that what we are talking about, 
there are user fees and there are gasoline taxes and diesel taxes that 
pay for those roads that buses use, and there are air passenger charges 
that pay for the cost of those airports that air carriers use.
  So with that as a backdrop, I would submit that it is time for Amtrak 
passengers to pay their own way. It is time for Amtrak passengers to 
quit riding on the backs of other taxpayers. They have the ability to 
pay their own way. The rest of the country is expected to pay their own 
way when they travel. As such, I would ask this body to adopt my 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page 8592]]

  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Brooks).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Alabama will 
be postponed.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       administrative provisions--federal railroad administration

       Sec. 150.  The Secretary of Transportation may receive and 
     expend cash, or receive and utilize spare parts and similar 
     items, from non-United States Government sources to repair 
     damages to or replace United States Government owned 
     automated track inspection cars and equipment as a result of 
     third-party liability for such damages, and any amounts 
     collected under this section shall be credited directly to 
     the Safety and Operations account of the Federal Railroad 
     Administration, and shall remain available until expended for 
     the repair, operation and maintenance of automated track 
     inspection cars and equipment in connection with the 
     automated track inspection program.
       Sec. 151.  None of the funds provided to the National 
     Railroad Passenger Corporation may be used to fund any 
     overtime costs in excess of $35,000 for any individual 
     employee: Provided, That the President of Amtrak may waive 
     the cap set in the previous proviso for specific employees 
     when the President of Amtrak determines such a cap poses a 
     risk to the safety and operational efficiency of the system: 
     Provided further, That Amtrak shall report to the House and 
     Senate Committees on Appropriations each quarter of the 
     calendar year on waivers granted to employees and amounts 
     paid above the cap for each month within such quarter and 
     delineate the reasons each waiver was granted: Provided 
     further, That the President of Amtrak shall report to the 
     House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by March 1, 
     2016, a summary of all overtime payments incurred by the 
     Corporation for 2015 and the three prior calendar years: 
     Provided further, That such summary shall include the total 
     number of employees that received waivers and the total 
     overtime payments the Corporation paid to those employees 
     receiving waivers for each month for 2015 and for the three 
     prior calendar years.

                     Federal Transit Administration

                        administrative expenses

       For necessary administrative expenses of the Federal 
     Transit Administration's programs authorized by chapter 53 of 
     title 49, United States Code, $102,933,000, of which not more 
     than $4,000,000 shall be available to carry out the 
     provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5329 and not less than $750,000 shall 
     be available to carry out the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5326: 
     Provided, That none of the funds provided or limited in this 
     Act may be used to create a permanent office of transit 
     security under this heading: Provided further, That upon 
     submission to the Congress of the fiscal year 2017 
     President's budget, the Secretary of Transportation shall 
     transmit to Congress the annual report on New Starts, 
     including proposed allocations for fiscal year 2017.

                              {time}  2230


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Langevin

  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 50, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(decreased by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 52, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Rhode Island and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Rhode Island.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment I am offering today with my good friends 
Congressmen Quigley and Butterfield will return funding for FTA 
Technical Assistance and Training back to its 2014 level. Older adults 
and individuals with disabilities disproportionately rely on public 
transit to live, learn, get to work and access recreation in their 
communities. The Technical Assistance and Training dollars made 
available by this amendment will help increase mobility for people with 
disabilities and older adults. By providing this assistance to our 
transit systems and services, we can ensure that they become more 
accessible for those who rely on them the most.
  Mr. Chairman, FTA has a long history of working with Easter Seals, 
the National Association of Area Agencies on Aging, and others to 
provide training, technical assistance, and other problem-solving 
support to the transit industry, people with disabilities, and older 
adults; and it is imperative that this work continue as more people age 
and more people with disabilities seek to live as independently as 
possible.
  Now, in order to realize this goal, FTA needs adequate resources to 
support these technical assistance activities. To that end, my 
amendment will increase funding by $2 million for FTA Technical 
Assistance and Training and reduce, by an equivalent amount, funding 
for FTA administrative expenses.
  Mr. Chairman, the House adopted this exact amendment last year to 
restore FTA Technical Assistance and Training to $5 million. 
Unfortunately, it was cut to $3 million in this bill. My amendment will 
simply restore the funds back to the fiscal year '15 House-adopted 
level of $5 million.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I ask that my colleagues support this 
amendment, which will provide a world of benefit to all those that it 
serves.
  I thank my colleagues today for their consideration.
  Again, I urge passage of the amendment, and with that, Mr. Chairman, 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Clerk will read.
  Clerk read as follows:

                         transit formula grants

                (liquidation of contract authorization)

                      (limitation on obligations)

                          (highway trust fund)

       Contingent upon enactment of authorization legislation, for 
     payment of obligations incurred in the Federal Public 
     Transportation Assistance Program in this account, and for 
     payment of obligations incurred in carrying out the 
     provisions of 49 U.S.C. 5305, 5307, 5310, 5311, 5318, 
     5322(d), 5329(e)(6), 5335, 5337, 5339, and 5340, as amended 
     by Public Law 112-141, and section 20005(b) of Public Law 
     112-141, $9,500,000,000, to be derived from the Mass Transit 
     Account of the Highway Trust Fund and to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That funds available for the 
     implementation or execution of programs authorized under 49 
     U.S.C. 5305, 5307, 5310, 5311, 5318, 5322(d), 5329(e)(6), 
     5335, 5337, 5339, and 5340, as amended by Public Law 112-141, 
     and section 20005(b) of Public Law 112-141, shall not exceed 
     total obligations of $8,595,000,000 in fiscal year 2016.

                            transit research

       For necessary expenses to carry out 49 U.S.C. 5312, 
     $26,000,000.

                   technical assistance and training

       For necessary expenses to carry out 49 U.S.C. 5314 
     $3,000,000.

                       capital investment grants

       For necessary expenses to carry out 49 U.S.C. 5309, 
     $1,921,395,000, to remain available until expended.


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Grothman

  Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 52, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $230,000,000)''.
       Page 156, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $230,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Wisconsin and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, as you know, we are very in debt in this 
country. This budget is on path to balance the budget eventually years 
down the road, but, really, we should be looking to cut spending right 
now.
  You look at things the Federal Government is paying for that should 
be done locally, and one of those things is these new capital 
improvements on mass transit projects. I think normally these things do 
not get the ridership that justifies these projects, and we would not 
be doing these projects, local governments would not be applying for 
these projects or building these projects if they had to pay their 
money themselves. The only reason these things go ahead is the Federal 
Government is paying for them, and the Federal Government has no money.

[[Page 8593]]

  Mr. Chairman, this proposal will bring back down the funding on this 
line to what the Appropriations Committee wanted only 2 years ago, and 
for whatever reason, apparently in negotiations, this amount went up 
last year. But I don't think it is too much to ask that this House not 
zero out this line--and we could argue that we shouldn't be doing this 
at all--but at least go back to the levels of 2013, especially given 
the huge amount of debt that is being piled up at this time.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, the committee carefully calculated the 
New Start number to be able to accommodate the signed FFGAs and Small 
Starts Grant Agreements at the beginning of the fiscal year.
  Again, as I submitted before, I am a firm believer that once you sign 
a grant agreement, then we should, frankly, honor that. This reduction 
would impact those signed agreements, and I reluctantly oppose the 
gentleman's amendment. I know the passion that he has for this, but I 
again have to reluctantly oppose the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from North Carolina (Mr. Price), the ranking member.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the 
chairman's yielding. I would like to echo his opposition to this 
amendment.
  I have just retrieved here a list of New Start projects that, under 
the present funding levels of the bill, probably aren't going to be 
able to be addressed. We are talking about the Westside project in Los 
Angeles. We are talking about San Diego, Denver, Baltimore, the 
Washington, D.C. area, the Maryland National Capital Purple Line, 
Minneapolis, Fort Worth. These are ready to go. These are ready to go 
with strong support in their communities, a strong impact on moving 
people and providing jobs. It is just unthinkable that we would cut 
this further.
  Transit is an extremely important mode of transportation in many of 
our cities and suburban areas too, and the bill is inadequate. We need 
to find ways to make it more adequate going forward.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment would move exactly in the wrong 
direction, so I urge its defeat.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, it is all fine and good to move forward, but we are 
going to borrow about 14 percent of this budget, and we have got to 
stop saying whenever we see a spending item it is time to move forward. 
I think what we have to do here is--I can certainly understand if we 
made commitments today, I can understand how people of goodwill would 
not want this amendment. But if this amendment doesn't pass, then I 
think we have to make doubly certain that a year from now we have a 
dramatic reduction here.
  If there are any of these projects that are that important, the local 
unit of government can fund it. There is no surer way to overspend than 
have the Federal Government give grants to local units of government 
that they would never dream of spending themselves.
  That is what is going on here, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman).
  The amendment was rejected.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

      grants to the washington metropolitan area transit authority

       For grants to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit 
     Authority as authorized under section 601 of division B of 
     Public Law 110-432, $100,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That the Secretary shall approve grants 
     for capital and preventive maintenance expenditures for the 
     Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority only after 
     receiving and reviewing a request for each specific project: 
     Provided further, That prior to approving such grants, the 
     Secretary shall certify that the Washington Metropolitan Area 
     Transit Authority is making significant progress in 
     eliminating the material weaknesses, significant 
     deficiencies, and minor control deficiencies identified in 
     the most recent Financial Management Oversight Review: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary shall determine that the 
     Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority has placed the 
     highest priority on those investments that will improve the 
     safety of the system before approving such grants:  Provided 
     further, That the Secretary, in order to ensure safety 
     throughout the rail system, may waive the requirements of 
     section 601(e)(1) of title VI of Public Law 110-432 (112 
     Stat. 4968).


                  Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Mica

  Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 53, line 11, strike the colon and all that follows 
     through line 15 and insert a period.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Mica) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. MICA. My colleagues, at this late hour, this is a simple 
amendment. It strikes a waiver that was granted to the Washington 
Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, and it is a waiver that has been 
in place for several years. It waives the requirements for them to 
complete installation of cellular service in the tunnels of the Metro 
system in Washington, D.C. That waiver allows them to continue to 
receive Federal funds but not have made the installation.
  It is funny because congressional staffers said: Well, Mr. Mica, why 
are you doing this? I am doing this because, as the chairman of a 
subcommittee on transportation oversight, I had to conduct a hearing 
after the January 12 deadly incident in the Washington area Metro. You 
may recall at L'Enfant Plaza, on the Yellow Line, there was an incident 
in which smoke filled the tunnel. A passenger train was left outside of 
the station.
  I might say that, back in 2008, we set up a requirement that we have 
at the stations, within 1 year, Metro cellular service, and then by 4 
years later, the entire system. So they were given from 2008 to 2012 to 
complete the system. They never completed the system. One individual 
died, others were injured, and we disrupted service. It was a day from 
hell in Washington, D.C.
  Mr. Chairman, they never completed the job. They said they were going 
to complete the job right after 2012. They did not complete the job. 
They said it would be done in 2015. The last time I checked, it is 
2015. It won't be done in 2015. They will not even sit down with the 
carriers who will install this equipment, and it is really at no cost 
to Metro.
  I have talked to Mr. Connolly, the gentleman from Virginia; I have 
talked to Mrs. Comstock, the gentlewoman from Virginia; I have talked 
to Mr. Hoyer, the gentleman from Maryland; and others. We have all had 
it with Metro not complying with us.
  This waiver was put in to give them the opportunity to comply, and 
they haven't complied. Now it is in here again, and I am offering, in 
this amendment, to take it out.
  I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Diaz-Balart), the chairman, for comment.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. I want to thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
  Mr. Chairman, when the gentleman from Florida is talking about this 
issue, I think all of us should be very, very concerned. I will tell 
you I think that the gentleman from Florida has been beyond reasonable, 
has tried to get folks to do what they were, again, supposed to do, and 
they have not done it.
  So I just want to let the gentleman from Florida know that I am 
looking forward, and I am committed to making sure that this issue is 
solved one way or another. I am hoping that it is

[[Page 8594]]

solved in a nice, positive way. But otherwise, I want to let the 
gentleman from Florida know that I will be working with him to make 
sure that we hold folks accountable.
  Mr. MICA. Again, Mr. Chairman, I am willing to work with everyone. 
Again, I have had to conduct oversight over a tragedy that could have 
and should have been prevented.
  Here is the latest headline: ``Can You Hear Me Now? In Metro Tunnels, 
Answer Is `Not Yet.'''
  Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Connolly).
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend.
  Mr. Chairman, I sympathize deeply with the concerns expressed by my 
friend and colleague from Florida (Mr. Mica), and I know Metro is 
committed to working with the wireless carriers to ensure seamless 
coverage throughout the rail system. I appreciate his willingness 
ultimately to withdraw the amendment so as not to jeopardize other 
vital safety improvements underway at Metro by conditioning the Federal 
commitment, which has already been reduced and which is matched by our 
State and local partners, on completion of this wireless upgrade.
  Without question, the January arcing incident at L'Enfant Plaza 
underscored the urgent need for having working communications in 
Metro's underground stations and tunnels. While faulty electrical 
wiring was to blame for the fire and hazardous smoke, a breakdown in 
communications, as Mr. Mica has indicated, led to passengers being 
stranded in dangerous conditions aboard that Yellow Line train for an 
extended period of time. It wasn't just public safety personnel who 
experienced problems communicating. Stranded riders also reported 
having spotty or no cellular service in the tunnel.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to 
the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he 
may consume to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly), our 
colleague, so he can complete his statement.
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from North Carolina, 
the distinguished ranking member.
  Tragically, one rider--Carol Glover of Virginia, my home State--died 
as a result of smoke inhalation, and dozens of others required medical 
treatment and/or hospitalization.

                              {time}  2245

  This was, and remains, an unacceptable situation, and I and all of 
the members of the national capital region delegation are committed to 
working with the NSTB, FTA, Metro, and our regional partners to ensure 
corrective actions are taken to restore public confidence.
  I would note for my colleagues, the current Federal law already 
includes language requiring Metro riders to have underground access to 
wireless telecommunications services if the service providers work with 
Metro to install such services. Unfortunately, they have lagged behind 
again, as my friend from Florida has indicated.
  Congress approved that requirement as part of the Passenger Rail 
Investment and Improvement Act of 2008. One year later, as required by 
the law, the wireless providers did successfully establish service in 
the 20 busiest underground rail stations. However, Congress has granted 
an extension on the timeline to install wireless service to the tunnels 
and the rest of the system because Metro and the wireless providers 
have run into delays with scheduling work while Metro trains are not 
running, performing higher priority safety improvements as directed by 
the NTSB, and other factors. However, they continue to work toward 
meeting this requirement, albeit at a very slow and glacial pace.
  Metro is particularly motivated to complete this work as it also 
involves a parallel upgrade of its own underground radio communications 
services. Metro is an essential component of this region's 
transportation network, moving hundreds of thousands of commuters every 
day, including a significant portion of Federal employees. It also 
serves as America's subway, transporting 12 million visitors from 
across the country to the Nation's Capital each year.
  It is critical that we maintain this bipartisan commitment to match 
local and State funding so that Metro can continue working with the 
NTSB and FTA on its critical safety upgrades.
  Mr. Mica is right, and all of us from the national capital region 
agree with him. I pledge upon withdrawal of this amendment we will work 
with Mr. Mica to ensure that Metro meets deadlines at a much more 
expeditious pace than has been the case in the past.
  Again, I thank my friend from North Carolina for yielding, and I 
thank Mr. Mica for his leadership.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MICA. Will the gentleman from North Carolina yield?
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I just want to conclude. I want to thank Mr. 
Connolly. I want to thank Mrs. Comstock, and the chairman particularly, 
for working on this.
  I think we have gotten the attention of the Washington Metropolitan 
Area Transit Authority. We have an agreement to bring the parties 
together as a result of this pending amendment. That is set. If it does 
not go through, I can assure you we will find a way to put this waiver 
in.
  At this time, though, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my 
amendment. I will bring the parties together and hopefully common sense 
and good faith will prevail.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Florida?
  There was no objection.


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Connolly

  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 52, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $50,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Virginia and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chair.
  I rise to offer an amendment with my colleagues in the national 
capital region that would restore full funding of the Federal 
commitment for vital rider safety improvements to ``America's Subway,'' 
the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, or Metro.
  Let me remind my colleagues, this is not like the traditional transit 
or capital funding under the Department of Transportation. The 
Passenger Rail Investment Improvement Act of 2008 specifically 
authorized a $150 million annual Federal commitment for 10 years, and 
Congress has worked in bipartisan fashion the past 6 years to fulfill 
that. It was a Republican initiative initiated and authored by my 
predecessor, Republican member Tom Davis of Virginia.
  As required by law, the Federal funding is matched dollar for dollar, 
with $150 million coming from Virginia, Maryland, and the District of 
Columbia.
  I appreciate the efforts of my fellow Virginian, Mr. Rigell, and the 
subcommittee chairman, my friend, Mr. Diaz-Balart, to try to work with 
us to restore some of the funding at full committee markup. But 
reducing any of this funding would renege on the Federal commitment and 
jeopardize the successful local-State-Federal partnership we have 
worked so hard to create.
  It would also open the door for our partners to pull back on their 
commitments commensurately, which would only exacerbate Metro's 
challenge in upgrading its aging infrastructure.
  This partnership is funding critical safety improvements throughout 
the

[[Page 8595]]

system identified by Metro itself, the National Transportation Safety 
Board, and the Federal Transit Administration following the tragic 2009 
Red Line accident and the recent tragedy on the Yellow Line this past 
January. The most visible improvement is the purchase of 7000-series 
new rail cars with advanced crash-resilient technology and extra 
capacity to replace the oldest and original cars in the fleet.
  Congress and the Federal Government have a responsibility in the 
operation and safety of Metro. Half of all Metro stations are located 
on Federal property, and approximately 40 percent of rush-hour riders 
on Metro are, in fact, Federal employees, including many Members of 
Congress and their staffs.
  It is critical we maintain this bipartisan commitment to match local 
and State funding so that Metro can continue making these safety 
upgrades.
  I want to thank Mr. Hoyer, Ms. Norton, Mr. Van Hollen, Ms. Edwards, 
Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Delaney, Mr. Beyer, and my friend Mrs. Comstock for 
working with us on this regional priority.
  I now yield the balance of my time to the distinguished Delegate from 
the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friend for yielding and as 
a cosponsor of this amendment, which has profound safety implications 
for America's subway. I think it is so urgent that a member of the 
Appropriations Committee has already restored $25 million.
  This was a partnership, a partnership between the Federal Government 
and Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia. It became real 
after there was a crash that took the lives of nine District of 
Columbia residents in 2009.
  This is a unique transit agency. This is where staff of this body, 
this is where visitors from all over the world ride. If this funding is 
delayed, it will delay the crashworthy 7000-series trains. It is in 
trains that were not crashworthy that we lost lives. We beg that this 
funding be restored.
  The District, Maryland, and Virginia are each fulfilling their part 
of the partnership. It is up to the Federal Government to do our part 
and fulfill our part. Don't break the partnership open now.
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, and I 
continue to reserve my point of order.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from 
Virginia (Mrs. Comstock), who, obviously, is very passionate about this 
issue.
  Mrs. COMSTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and 
I rise as a cosponsor of the amendment in support of the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, as been pointed out by my colleagues, Congress did make 
a 10-year statutory commitment as a Federal partner, a 50-50 partner, 
to provide capital grant money to the Washington Metropolitan Area 
Transit Authority. This funding has been used for vital capital and 
safety improvements on the Metro system that so many of our 
constituents and our staff and tourists, people from all over the 
world, travel on every day.
  As part of that agreement, matching grant money from the Commonwealth 
of Virginia, the District of Columbia, and the State of Maryland have 
all supplemented this in a full 50-50 match. This is truly a good 
partnership that has worked well since the bill was passed in 2008, and 
we should continue to fulfill that commitment.
  This amendment would restore the already obligated funding to the 
bill and keep the promise that we have already made. Metro needs these 
important funds for capital improvements that will address important 
safety concerns.
  I appreciate the opportunity to join my colleagues in the national 
capital area in support of this amendment.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I insist on my point of order.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman will state his point of order.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes a net increase 
in budget authority in the bill.
  The amendment is not in order under section 3(d)(3) of House 
Resolution 5, 114th Congress, which states the following:
  ``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general 
appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the 
bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments 
proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority 
pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes a net increase in budget 
authority in the bill in violation of such section.
  I respectfully ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order?
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the invocation of 
the point of order.
  This is a provision that has been in law for the past 6 years, and I 
believe that it ought to be enshrined in law for a 7th. We represent 
the entire National Capital Region. This is a unique region. This is 
the Nation's Capital. And we ought not to be reneging on a deal that 
was worked out with great effort 6 years ago based on a point of order.
  With that, I oppose the point of order, Mr. Chairman.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair is prepared to rule.
  The gentleman from Florida makes a point of order that the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Virginia violates section 3(d)(3) of 
House Resolution 5.
  Section 3(d)(3) establishes a point of order against an amendment 
proposing a net increase in budget authority in the pending bill.
  As persuasively asserted by the gentleman from Florida, the amendment 
proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill. Therefore, the 
point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       administrative provisions--federal transit administration

       Sec. 160.  The limitations on obligations for the programs 
     of the Federal Transit Administration shall not apply to any 
     authority under 49 U.S.C. 5338, previously made available for 
     obligation, or to any other authority previously made 
     available for obligation.
       Sec. 161.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     funds appropriated or limited by this Act under the heading 
     Fixed Guideway Capital Investment of the Federal Transit 
     Administration for projects specified in this Act or 
     identified in reports accompanying this Act not obligated by 
     September 30, 2020, and other recoveries, shall be directed 
     to projects eligible to use the funds for the purposes for 
     which they were originally provided.
       Sec. 162.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any 
     funds appropriated before October 1, 2015, under any section 
     of chapter 53 of title 49, United States Code, that remain 
     available for expenditure, may be transferred to and 
     administered under the most recent appropriation heading for 
     any such section.
       Sec. 163.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none 
     of the funds made available in this Act shall be used to 
     enter into a full funding grant agreement for a project with 
     a New Starts share greater than 50 percent.
       Sec. 164. (a) Loss of Eligibility.--Except as provided in 
     subsection (b), none of the funds in this or any other Act 
     may be available to advance in any way a new light or heavy 
     rail project towards a full funding grant agreement as 
     defined by 49 U.S.C. 5309 for the Metropolitan Transit 
     Authority of Harris County, Texas if the proposed capital 
     project is constructed on or planned to be constructed on 
     Richmond Avenue west of South Shepherd Drive or on Post Oak 
     Boulevard north of Richmond Avenue in Houston, Texas.
       (b) Exception for a New Election.--The Metropolitan Transit 
     Authority of Harris County, Texas, may attempt to construct 
     or construct a new fixed guideway capital project, including 
     light rail, in the locations referred to in subsection (a) 
     if--
       (1) voters in the jurisdiction that includes such locations 
     approve a ballot proposition that specifies routes on 
     Richmond Avenue west of South Shepherd Drive or on Post Oak 
     Boulevard north of Richmond Avenue in Houston, Texas; and
       (2) the proposed construction of such routes is part of a 
     comprehensive, multi-modal, service-area wide transportation 
     plan

[[Page 8596]]

     that includes multiple additional segments of fixed guideway 
     capital projects, including light rail for the jurisdiction 
     set forth in the ballot proposition. The ballot language 
     shall include reasonable cost estimates, sources of revenue 
     to be used and the total amount of bonded indebtedness to be 
     incurred as well as a description of each route and the 
     beginning and end point of each proposed transit project.

             Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation

       The Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation is hereby 
     authorized to make such expenditures, within the limits of 
     funds and borrowing authority available to the Corporation, 
     and in accord with law, and to make such contracts and 
     commitments without regard to fiscal year limitations as 
     provided by section 104 of the Government Corporation Control 
     Act, as amended, as may be necessary in carrying out the 
     programs set forth in the Corporation's budget for the 
     current fiscal year.

                       operations and maintenance

                    (harbor maintenance trust fund)

       For necessary expenses to conduct the operations, 
     maintenance, and capital asset renewal activities of those 
     portions of the Saint Lawrence Seaway owned, operated, and 
     maintained by the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development 
     Corporation, $32,042,000, to be derived from the Harbor 
     Maintenance Trust Fund, pursuant to Public Law 99-662.

                        Maritime Administration

                       maritime security program

       For necessary expenses to maintain and preserve a U.S.-flag 
     merchant fleet to serve the national security needs of the 
     United States, $186,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended.

                        operations and training

       For necessary expenses of operations and training 
     activities authorized by law, $164,158,000, of which 
     $22,000,000 shall remain available until expended for 
     maintenance and repair of training ships at State Maritime 
     Academies, and of which $5,000,000 shall remain available 
     until expended for National Security Multi-Mission Vessel 
     design for State Maritime Academies and National Security, 
     and of which $2,400,000 shall remain available through 
     September 30, 2017, for the Student Incentive Program at 
     State Maritime Academies, and of which $1,200,000 shall 
     remain available until expended for training ship fuel 
     assistance payments, and of which $19,700,000 shall remain 
     available until expended for facilities maintenance and 
     repair, equipment, and capital improvements at the United 
     States Merchant Marine Academy, and of which $3,000,000 shall 
     remain available through September 30, 2017, for Maritime 
     Environment and Technology Assistance grants, contracts, and 
     cooperative agreement: Provided, That amounts apportioned for 
     the United States Merchant Marine Academy shall be available 
     only upon allotments made personally by the Secretary of 
     Transportation or the Assistant Secretary for Budget and 
     Programs: Provided further, That the Superintendent, Deputy 
     Superintendent and the Director of the Office of Resource 
     Management of the United States Merchant Marine Academy may 
     not be allotment holders for the United States Merchant 
     Marine Academy, and the Administrator of the Maritime 
     Administration shall hold all allotments made by the 
     Secretary of Transportation or the Assistant Secretary for 
     Budget and Programs under the previous proviso: Provided 
     further, That 50 percent of the funding made available for 
     the United States Merchant Marine Academy under this heading 
     shall be available only after the Secretary, in consultation 
     with the Superintendent and the Maritime Administrator, 
     completes a plan detailing by program or activity how such 
     funding will be expended at the Academy, and this plan is 
     submitted to the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations.

                             ship disposal

       For necessary expenses related to the disposal of obsolete 
     vessels in the National Defense Reserve Fleet of the Maritime 
     Administration, $4,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended.

          maritime guaranteed loan (title xi) program account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary administrative expenses of the maritime 
     guaranteed loan program, $3,135,000 shall be paid to the 
     appropriations for ``Maritime Administration--Operations and 
     Training''.

           administrative provisions--maritime administration

       Sec. 170.  Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, 
     in addition to any existing authority, the Maritime 
     Administration is authorized to furnish utilities and 
     services and make necessary repairs in connection with any 
     lease, contract, or occupancy involving Government property 
     under control of the Maritime Administration: Provided, That 
     payments received therefor shall be credited to the 
     appropriation charged with the cost thereof and shall remain 
     available until expended: Provided further, That rental 
     payments under any such lease, contract, or occupancy for 
     items other than such utilities, services, or repairs shall 
     be covered into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts.
       Sec. 171.  None of the funds available or appropriated in 
     this Act shall be used by the United States Department of 
     Transportation or the United States Maritime Administration 
     to negotiate or otherwise execute, enter into, facilitate or 
     perform fee-for-service contracts for vessel disposal, 
     scrapping or recycling, unless there is no qualified domestic 
     ship recycler that will pay any sum of money to purchase and 
     scrap or recycle a vessel owned, operated or managed by the 
     Maritime Administration or that is part of the National 
     Defense Reserve Fleet: Provided, That such sales offers must 
     be consistent with the solicitation and provide that the work 
     will be performed in a timely manner at a facility qualified 
     within the meaning of section 3502 of Public Law 106-398: 
     Provided further, That nothing contained herein shall affect 
     the Maritime Administration's authority to award contracts at 
     least cost to the Federal Government and consistent with the 
     requirements of 54 U.S.C. 308704, section 3502, or otherwise 
     authorized under the Federal Acquisition Regulation.

         Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

                          operational expenses

       For necessary operational expenses of the Pipeline and 
     Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, $20,725,000.

                       hazardous materials safety

       For expenses necessary to discharge the hazardous materials 
     safety functions of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 
     Safety Administration, $60,500,000, of which $7,570,000 shall 
     remain available until September 30, 2018: Provided, That up 
     to $800,000 in fees collected under 49 U.S.C. 5108(g) shall 
     be deposited in the general fund of the Treasury as 
     offsetting receipts: Provided further, That there may be 
     credited to this appropriation, to be available until 
     expended, funds received from States, counties, 
     municipalities, other public authorities, and private sources 
     for expenses incurred for training, for reports publication 
     and dissemination, and for travel expenses incurred in 
     performance of hazardous materials exemptions and approvals 
     functions.

                            pipeline safety

                         (pipeline safety fund)

                    (oil spill liability trust fund)

       For expenses necessary to conduct the functions of the 
     pipeline safety program, for grants-in-aid to carry out a 
     pipeline safety program, as authorized by 49 U.S.C. 60107, 
     and to discharge the pipeline program responsibilities of the 
     Oil Pollution Act of 1990, $145,870,000, of which $19,500,000 
     shall be derived from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund and 
     shall remain available until September 30, 2018; and of which 
     $124,500,000 shall be derived from the Pipeline Safety Fund, 
     of which $66,309,000 shall remain available until September 
     30, 2018: Provided, That not less than $1,000,000 of the 
     funds provided under this heading shall be for the One-Call 
     state grant program.

                              {time}  2300


                    Amendment Offered by Mrs. Capps

  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 61, line 22, strike the period at the end insert the 
     following: ``: Provided further, That not less than 
     $1,000,000 of the funds provided under this heading shall be 
     for the finalization and implementation of rules required 
     under section 60102(n) of title 49, United States Code, and 
     section 8(b)(3) of the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, 
     and Job Creation Act of 2011 (49 U.S.C. 60108 note; 125 Stat. 
     1911).''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentlewoman 
from California and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment that will take a 
modest step forward to improve pipeline safety. This issue is of 
particular importance to me and to my constituents.
  Two weeks ago, more than 100,000 gallons of crude oil spilled from 
the ruptured Plains All American Pipeline along the treasured Gaviota 
Coast, in my district, just north of Santa Barbara. The oil quickly 
flowed under the highway, onto the beach, and into the ocean where the 
oil slick spread south for miles along the coastline, affecting 
pristine environmental habitats, recreational interests, and commercial 
fishing operations.
  While the exact causes of this spill are still being investigated, it 
is already clear that woefully inadequate Federal pipeline safety 
standards played a significant role, but it didn't have to be this way.
  In 2011, the House worked in a bipartisan way to pass the Pipeline 
Safety,

[[Page 8597]]

Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act. This law, which passed the 
House unanimously, directed the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety 
Administration, or PHMSA, to update and strengthen key pipeline safety 
standards.
  The law called on PHMSA to issue a rule requiring automatic shutoff 
valves on new pipelines and to strengthen requirements for the 
inclusion of leak detection technologies on pipelines.
  The law required these rules to be finalized by January of last year; 
yet, here today, we are still waiting. PHMSA has not even issued a 
proposed rule on these commonsense regulations, which passed the House 
unanimously. PHMSA continues to drag its feet, and communities like 
mine continue to pay the price. It is time for PHMSA to follow the law 
and the bipartisan will of Congress.
  My amendment is simple. It would set aside $1 million of PHMSA's own 
budget for the finalization and implementation of these overdue 
pipeline safety and spill mitigation rules.
  My amendment would simply help ensure that section 4 and section 8 of 
the bipartisan 2011 pipeline safety law are finally implemented so that 
our Federal regulations are in line with today's reality.
  My amendment does not cost a dime, and it does not authorize any new 
programs. Section 4 requires new pipelines to install automatic shutoff 
valves, and section 8 requires pipeline operators to use the latest 
leak detection technologies. Both of these provisions were enacted 
unanimously by this House in 2011.
  The pipeline that burst in my district did not have an automatic 
shutoff valve despite the fact that other comparable pipelines in the 
area do use this technology. An automatic shutoff valve would not have 
prevented the spill necessarily, but it certainly would have minimized 
it. It took over 2 hours for the pipeline operator to even identify 
where the pipeline had ruptured, let alone to actually stop the flow of 
crude oil.
  That is unacceptable. If the standards required under section 4 and 
section 8 had been required of the Plains pipeline in my district, the 
spill likely would have been much less severe. My amendment would take 
a small, yet important step forward to address these troubling issues 
by pushing PHMSA to get its act together and finalize these rules.
  Mr. Chairman, oil and gas development, by its nature, is a dangerous 
and dirty business. The mere fact that the Plains and other companies 
have oil spill contingency funds shows that there is no such thing as a 
safe pipeline. Spills do happen, and they will continue to happen as 
long as we depend on fossil fuels for our energy needs. We have a 
responsibility, therefore, to do all we can to make these pipelines as 
safe as possible.
  Congress has repeatedly directed PHMSA to strengthen its standards; 
yet this agency has done little. My amendment would help hold their 
feet to the fire and get commonsense safety standards finalized and 
implemented. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Amendment Offered by Mrs. Capps

  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 61, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $27,604,000)''.
       Page 61, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $27,604,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentlewoman 
from California and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, it is no secret that Federal pipeline 
safety standards are in serious need of improvement. Despite repeated 
bipartisan efforts to strengthen these standards, the Pipeline and 
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, PHMSA, has dragged its feet 
on implementing the new rules.
  Not only has this agency failed to keep up with new statutory 
requirements, they struggle to even enforce the rules they already have 
on the books. There are several reasons for this, including rapid 
growth in the miles of new pipelines to inspect and the need to compete 
with the private sector for the best talent while using limited 
resources.
  PHMSA's preliminary estimate of serious incidents on pipelines showed 
an increase in 2014; and, with the miles of pipelines only multiplying, 
these numbers will surely grow. That is why my amendment would increase 
funding for PHMSA's pipeline safety program by $27 million, to simply 
match the President's own fiscal year 2016 budget request. While this 
would not solve the multitude of problems facing the agency, it would 
certainly make a big difference in two key areas.
  First, it would help PHMSA retain and recruit the best inspectors and 
staff. Last year, Congress provided funding for 100 additional full-
time employees to help PHMSA adjust to the increasing demand; and, as 
part of its fiscal year 2016 request, PHMSA requested $15 million to 
fully fund and annualize these employees. The current bill only 
provides enough funding for 1 year of salaries for these new employees.
  How is the agency supposed to attract the best talent when they can't 
count on paying their new employees for more than a year at a time?
  Second, my amendment would also provide requested funding for the 
national pipeline information exchange. This information exchange would 
be a comprehensive database of integrated pipeline safety information 
from PHMSA, from State regulators, industry, and other Federal 
resources.
  Of the 2.6 million miles of pipeline in the United States, PHMSA 
inspects only 20 percent, while States monitor the remaining 80 
percent. However, the information the States gather through inspections 
is neither shared among the States, nor with PHMSA. That is kind of 
unbelievable. It makes no sense. We should be doing everything we can 
to analyze and understand this data.
  My amendment would fund this exchange to help regulators be more 
effective and to better protect communities like mine from future 
spills. There are currently pilot information exchange programs in 7 
States, and the funding provided by my amendment would allow PHMSA to 
expand these information exchanges to 25 States.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment costs absolutely nothing from the American 
taxpayers, not one dime. The increased funding would come from a modest 
increase in user fees paid into the pipeline safety fund. These user 
fees are paid for by the oil companies that profit enormously from the 
oil and gas flowing through the pipelines that PHMSA oversees.
  Oil companies are seeing record profits from a booming oil and gas 
development industry. This is leading to more miles of pipeline and 
more risks for local communities like mine. The least they can do is 
ensure that the Federal oversight of the industry is keeping pace with 
the growth because, when pipelines fail, it is our local communities 
and our constituents, not the oil companies, who suffer the most.
  My amendment takes a small step forward to help strengthen the 
pipeline safety and oversight, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Will the gentlewoman yield?
  Mrs. CAPPS. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I commend my colleague for offering this 
amendment, and I want to offer my strong support.
  Mr. Chairman, we are talking here about annualizing the funding--in 
other words, bringing these people on board permanently--for pipeline 
safety inspectors who were hired in fiscal year 2015. We are also 
talking about the better coordination of enforcement activities between 
Federal, State, and local officials.
  I would like to remind my colleagues we have 2.6 million miles of 
pipeline

[[Page 8598]]

across this country. I think the number is maybe 548 personnel in the 
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
  This is an enormous task. The gentlewoman's amendment would greatly 
improve our capacity to address this challenge, and I urge its 
adoption.
  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. The authorization for this program expires this 
year, Mr. Chairman. Frankly, there are many questions, and it is not 
really clear whether or not the next authorization would accommodate 
this funding fee level. I understand the gentlewoman's passion, but I 
must respectfully urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, again, I urge the adoption of this 
amendment. I have a classic example of why it is needed, and I ask for 
your consideration.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California 
will be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                     emergency preparedness grants

                     (emergency preparedness fund)

       For necessary expenses to carry out 49 U.S.C. 5128(b), 
     $188,000, to be derived from the Emergency Preparedness Fund, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2017: Provided, That 
     notwithstanding the fiscal year limitation specified in 49 
     U.S.C. 5116, not more than $28,318,000 shall be made 
     available for obligation in fiscal year 2016 from amounts 
     made available by 49 U.S.C. 5116(i), and 5128(b) and (c): 
     Provided further, That notwithstanding 49 U.S.C. 5116(i)(4), 
     not more than 4 percent of the amounts made available from 
     this account shall be available to pay administrative costs: 
     Provided further, That none of the funds made available by 49 
     U.S.C. 5116(i), 5128(b), or 5128(c) shall be made available 
     for obligation by individuals other than the Secretary of 
     Transportation, or his or her designee.

                      Office of Inspector General

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of the Inspector 
     General to carry out the provisions of the Inspector General 
     Act of 1978, as amended, $86,223,000: Provided, That the 
     Inspector General shall have all necessary authority, in 
     carrying out the duties specified in the Inspector General 
     Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. 3), to investigate allegations 
     of fraud, including false statements to the government (18 
     U.S.C. 1001), by any person or entity that is subject to 
     regulation by the Department: Provided further, That the 
     funds made available under this heading may be used to 
     investigate, pursuant to section 41712 of title 49, United 
     States Code: (1) unfair or deceptive practices and unfair 
     methods of competition by domestic and foreign air carriers 
     and ticket agents; and (2) the compliance of domestic and 
     foreign air carriers with respect to item (1) of this 
     proviso: Provided further, That hereafter funds transferred 
     to the Office of the Inspector General through forfeiture 
     proceedings or from the Department of Justice Assets 
     Forfeiture Fund or the Department of the Treasury Forfeiture 
     Fund, as a participating agency, as an equitable share from 
     the forfeiture of property in investigations in which the 
     Office of Inspector General participates, or through the 
     granting of a Petition for Remission or Mitigation, shall be 
     deposited to the credit of this account for law enforcement 
     activities authorized under the Inspector General Act of 
     1978, as amended, to remain available until expended.

                      Surface Transportation Board

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Surface Transportation Board, 
     including services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $31,375,000: 
     Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     not to exceed $1,250,000 from fees established by the 
     Chairman of the Surface Transportation Board shall be 
     credited to this appropriation as offsetting collections and 
     used for necessary and authorized expenses under this 
     heading: Provided further, That the sum herein appropriated 
     from the general fund shall be reduced on a dollar-for-dollar 
     basis as such offsetting collections are received during 
     fiscal year 2016, to result in a final appropriation from the 
     general fund estimated at no more than $30,125,000.

            General Provisions--Department of Transportation

       Sec. 180.  During the current fiscal year, applicable 
     appropriations to the Department of Transportation shall be 
     available for maintenance and operation of aircraft; hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles and aircraft; purchase of liability 
     insurance for motor vehicles operating in foreign countries 
     on official department business; and uniforms or allowances 
     therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-5902).
       Sec. 181.  Appropriations contained in this Act for the 
     Department of Transportation shall be available for services 
     as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for individuals 
     not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the rate for an 
     Executive Level IV.
       Sec. 182.  None of the funds in this Act shall be available 
     for salaries and expenses of more than 110 political and 
     Presidential appointees in the Department of Transportation: 
     Provided, That none of the personnel covered by this 
     provision may be assigned on temporary detail outside the 
     Department of Transportation.
       Sec. 183. (a) No recipient of funds made available in this 
     Act shall disseminate personal information (as defined in 18 
     U.S.C. 2725(3)) obtained by a State department of motor 
     vehicles in connection with a motor vehicle record as defined 
     in 18 U.S.C. 2725(1), except as provided in 18 U.S.C. 2721 
     for a use permitted under 18 U.S.C. 2721.
       (b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), the Secretary shall not 
     withhold funds provided in this Act for any grantee if a 
     State is in noncompliance with this provision.
       Sec. 184.  Funds received by the Federal Highway 
     Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and Federal 
     Railroad Administration from States, counties, 
     municipalities, other public authorities, and private sources 
     for expenses incurred for training may be credited 
     respectively to the Federal Highway Administration's 
     ``Federal-Aid Highways'' account, the Federal Transit 
     Administration's ``Technical Assistance and Training'' 
     account, and to the Federal Railroad Administration's 
     ``Safety and Operations'' account, except for State rail 
     safety inspectors participating in training pursuant to 49 
     U.S.C. 20105.
       Sec. 185.  None of the funds in this Act to the Department 
     of Transportation may be used to make a loan, loan guarantee, 
     line of credit, or grant unless the Secretary of 
     Transportation notifies the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations not less than 3 full business days before any 
     project competitively selected to receive a discretionary 
     grant award, any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, 
     loan commitment, loan guarantee commitment, line of credit 
     commitment, or full funding grant agreement totaling $750,000 
     or more is announced by the department or its modal 
     administrations from:
       (1) any discretionary grant or federal credit program of 
     the Federal Highway Administration including the emergency 
     relief program;
       (2) the airport improvement program of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration;
       (3) any program of the Federal Railroad Administration;
       (4) any program of the Federal Transit Administration other 
     than the formula grants and fixed guideway modernization 
     programs;
       (5) any program of the Maritime Administration; or
       (6) any funding provided under the headings ``National 
     Infrastructure Investments'' in this Act: 
       Provided, That the Secretary gives concurrent notification 
     to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations for any 
     ``quick release'' of funds from the emergency relief program: 
     Provided further, That no notification shall involve funds 
     that are not available for obligation.
       Sec. 186.  Rebates, refunds, incentive payments, minor fees 
     and other funds received by the Department of Transportation 
     from travel management centers, charge card programs, the 
     subleasing of building space, and miscellaneous sources are 
     to be credited to appropriations of the Department of 
     Transportation and allocated to elements of the Department of 
     Transportation using fair and equitable criteria and such 
     funds shall be available until expended.
       Sec. 187.  Amounts made available in this or any other Act 
     that the Secretary determines represent improper payments by 
     the Department of Transportation to a third-party contractor 
     under a financial assistance award, which are recovered 
     pursuant to law, shall be available--
       (1) to reimburse the actual expenses incurred by the 
     Department of Transportation in recovering improper payments; 
     and
       (2) to pay contractors for services provided in recovering 
     improper payments or contractor support in the implementation 
     of the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002: Provided, 
     That amounts in excess of that required for paragraphs (1) 
     and (2)--

[[Page 8599]]

       (A) shall be credited to and merged with the appropriation 
     from which the improper payments were made, and shall be 
     available for the purposes and period for which such 
     appropriations are available: Provided further, That where 
     specific project or accounting information associated with 
     the improper payment or payments is not readily available, 
     the Secretary may credit an appropriate account, which shall 
     be available for the purposes and period associated with the 
     account so credited; or
       (B) if no such appropriation remains available, shall be 
     deposited in the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts: Provided 
     further, That prior to the transfer of any such recovery to 
     an appropriations account, the Secretary shall notify the 
     House and Senate Committees on Appropriations of the amount 
     and reasons for such transfer: Provided further, That for 
     purposes of this section, the term ``improper payments'' has 
     the same meaning as that provided in section 2(d)(2) of 
     Public Law 107-300.
       Sec. 188.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if 
     any funds provided in or limited by this Act are subject to a 
     reprogramming action that requires notice to be provided to 
     the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, 
     transmission of said reprogramming notice shall be provided 
     solely to the Committees on Appropriations, and said 
     reprogramming action shall be approved or denied solely by 
     the Committees on Appropriations: Provided, That the 
     Secretary may provide notice to other congressional 
     committees of the action of the Committees on Appropriations 
     on such reprogramming but not sooner than 30 days following 
     the date on which the reprogramming action has been approved 
     or denied by the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations.
       Sec. 189.  None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available under this Act may be used by the Surface 
     Transportation Board of the Department of Transportation to 
     charge or collect any filing fee for rate or practice 
     complaints filed with the Board in an amount in excess of the 
     amount authorized for district court civil suit filing fees 
     under section 1914 of title 28, United States Code.
       Sec. 190.  Funds appropriated in this Act to the modal 
     administrations may be obligated for the Office of the 
     Secretary for the costs related to assessments or 
     reimbursable agreements only when such amounts are for the 
     costs of goods and services that are purchased to provide a 
     direct benefit to the applicable modal administration or 
     administrations.
       Sec. 191.  The Secretary of Transportation is authorized to 
     carry out a program that establishes uniform standards for 
     developing and supporting agency transit pass and transit 
     benefits authorized under section 7905 of title 5, United 
     States Code, including distribution of transit benefits by 
     various paper and electronic media.
       Sec. 192.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     shall be used by the Surface Transportation Board to take any 
     actions with respect to the construction of a high speed rail 
     project in California unless the permit is issued by the 
     Board with respect to the project in its entirety.
       Sec. 193.  None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to facilitate new scheduled air transportation 
     originating from the United States if such flights would land 
     on, or pass through, property confiscated by the Cuban 
     Government, including property in which a minority interest 
     was confiscated, as the terms confiscated, Cuban Government, 
     and property are defined in paragraphs (4), (5), and (12)(A), 
     respectively, of section 4 of the Cuban Liberty and 
     Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996 (22 U.S.C. 6023 
     (4), (5), and (12)(A)): Provided, That for this section, new 
     scheduled air transportation shall include any flights not 
     already regularly scheduled prior to March 31, 2015.
       This title may be cited as the ``Department of 
     Transportation Appropriations Act, 2016''.

                                TITLE II

              DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

                     Management and Administration

                           executive offices

       For necessary salaries and expenses for Executive Offices, 
     which shall be comprised of the offices of the Secretary, 
     Deputy Secretary, Adjudicatory Services, Congressional and 
     Intergovernmental Relations, Public Affairs, Small and 
     Disadvantaged Business Utilization, and the Center for Faith-
     Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, $14,500,000: Provided, 
     That not to exceed $25,000 of the amount made available under 
     this heading shall be available to the Secretary for official 
     reception and representation expenses as the Secretary may 
     determine.

                     administrative support offices

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary salaries and expenses for Administrative 
     Support Offices, $547,000,000, of which $45,600,000, to 
     remain available until expended, in addition to amounts made 
     available under this heading for the Office of the Chief 
     Financial Officer and the Office of the Chief Human Capital 
     Officer, shall be for funding shared service agreements 
     between the Department of Housing and Urban Development and 
     the Department of the Treasury; $39,000,000 shall be 
     available for the Office of the Chief Financial Officer; 
     $93,000,000 shall be available for the Office of the General 
     Counsel; $199,000,000 shall be available for the Office of 
     Administration; $40,000,000 shall be available for the Office 
     of the Chief Human Capital Officer; $49,000,000 shall be 
     available for the Office of Field Policy and Management; 
     $16,000,000 shall be available for the Office of the Chief 
     Procurement Officer; $3,000,000 shall be available for the 
     Office of Departmental Equal Employment Opportunity; 
     $4,000,000 shall be available for the Office of Strategic 
     Planning and Management; $44,000,000 shall be available for 
     the Office of the Chief Information Officer; and of which the 
     remaining amount shall be available through September 30, 
     2017, for transfer to the appropriations for offices 
     specified under this heading or the heading ``Program Office 
     Salaries and Expenses'' in this title: Provided, That funds 
     provided under this heading may be used for necessary 
     administrative and non-administrative expenses of the 
     Department of Housing and Urban Development, not otherwise 
     provided for, including purchase of uniforms, or allowances 
     therefor, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles; and services as authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 3109: Provided further, That notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, funds appropriated under this heading may 
     be used for advertising and promotional activities that 
     directly support program activities funded in this title: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary shall provide the 
     Committees on Appropriations quarterly written notification 
     regarding the status of pending congressional reports: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary shall provide in 
     electronic form all signed reports required by Congress.

                  Program Office Salaries and Expenses

                       public and indian housing

       For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of Public 
     and Indian Housing, $203,000,000.

                   community planning and development

       For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of 
     Community Planning and Development, $102,000,000.

                                housing

       For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of 
     Housing, $372,000,000.

                    policy development and research

       For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of Policy 
     Development and Research, $22,700,000.

                   fair housing and equal opportunity

       For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of Fair 
     Housing and Equal Opportunity, $73,000,000.

            office of lead hazard control and healthy homes

       For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of Lead 
     Hazard Control and Healthy Homes, $6,700,000.

                   Public and Indian Housing Programs

                     tenant-based rental assistance

       For activities and assistance for the provision of tenant-
     based rental assistance authorized under the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) 
     (``the Act'' herein), not otherwise provided for, 
     $15,918,643,000 to remain available until September 30, 2018, 
     shall be available on October 1, 2015 (in addition to the 
     $4,000,000,000 previously appropriated under this heading 
     that became available on October 1, 2015), and 
     $4,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2019, 
     shall be available on October 1, 2016: Provided, That the 
     amounts made available under this heading are provided as 
     follows:
       (1) $18,151,000,000 shall be available for renewals of 
     expiring section 8 tenant-based annual contributions 
     contracts (including renewals of enhanced vouchers under any 
     provision of law authorizing such assistance under section 
     8(t) of the Act) and including renewal of other special 
     purpose or incremental vouchers: Provided, That 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, from amounts 
     provided under this paragraph and any carryover, the 
     Secretary for the calendar year 2016 funding cycle shall 
     provide renewal funding for each public housing agency based 
     on validated voucher management system (VMS) leasing and cost 
     data for the prior calendar year and by applying an inflation 
     factor as established by the Secretary, by notice published 
     in the Federal Register, and by making any necessary 
     adjustments for the costs associated with the first-time 
     renewal of vouchers under this paragraph including tenant 
     protection, HOPE VI, and Choice Neighborhoods vouchers: 
     Provided further, That in determining calendar year 2016 
     funding allocations under this heading for public housing 
     agencies, including agencies participating in the Moving To 
     Work (MTW) demonstration, the Secretary may take into account 
     the anticipated impact of changes in targeting and utility 
     allowances, on public housing agencies' contract renewal 
     needs: Provided further, That none of the funds provided 
     under this paragraph may be used to fund a total number of 
     unit months under lease which exceeds a public housing 
     agency's authorized level of units under contract, except for 
     public housing agencies participating in the MTW 
     demonstration, which are instead governed by the terms and 
     conditions of their

[[Page 8600]]

     MTW agreements: Provided further, That the Secretary shall, 
     to the extent necessary to stay within the amount specified 
     under this paragraph (except as otherwise modified under this 
     paragraph), prorate each public housing agency's allocation 
     otherwise established pursuant to this paragraph: Provided 
     further, That except as provided in the following provisos, 
     the entire amount specified under this paragraph (except as 
     otherwise modified under this paragraph) shall be obligated 
     to the public housing agencies based on the allocation and 
     pro rata method described above, and the Secretary shall 
     notify public housing agencies of their annual budget by the 
     latter of 60 days after enactment of this Act or March 1, 
     2016: Provided further, That the Secretary may extend the 
     notification period with the prior written approval of the 
     House and Senate Committees on Appropriations: Provided 
     further, That public housing agencies participating in the 
     MTW demonstration shall be funded pursuant to their MTW 
     agreements and shall be subject to the same pro rata 
     adjustments under the previous provisos: Provided further, 
     That the Secretary may offset public housing agencies' 
     calendar year 2016 allocations based on the excess amounts of 
     public housing agencies' net restricted assets accounts, 
     including HUD held programmatic reserves (in accordance with 
     VMS data in calendar year 2015 that is verifiable and 
     complete), as determined by the Secretary: Provided further, 
     That public housing agencies participating in the MTW 
     demonstration shall also be subject to the offset, as 
     determined by the Secretary, excluding amounts subject to the 
     single fund budget authority provisions of their MTW 
     agreements, from the agencies' calendar year 2016 MTW funding 
     allocation: Provided further, That the Secretary shall use 
     any offset referred to in the previous two provisos 
     throughout the calendar year to prevent the termination of 
     rental assistance for families as the result of insufficient 
     funding, as determined by the Secretary, and to avoid or 
     reduce the proration of renewal funding allocations: Provided 
     further, That up to $75,000,000 shall be available only: (1) 
     for adjustments in the allocations for public housing 
     agencies, after application for an adjustment by a public 
     housing agency that experienced a significant increase, as 
     determined by the Secretary, in renewal costs of vouchers 
     resulting from unforeseen circumstances or from portability 
     under section 8(r) of the Act; (2) for vouchers that were not 
     in use during the 12-month period in order to be available to 
     meet a commitment pursuant to section 8(o)(13) of the Act; 
     (3) for adjustments for costs associated with HUD-Veterans 
     Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) vouchers; (4) for 
     adjustments for public housing agencies with voucher leasing 
     rates at the end of the calendar year that exceed the average 
     leasing for the 12-month period used to establish the 
     allocation, and for additional leasing of vouchers that were 
     issued but not leased prior to the end of such calendar year; 
     (5) for public housing agencies that despite taking 
     reasonable cost savings measures, as determined by the 
     Secretary, would otherwise be required to terminate rental 
     assistance for families as a result of insufficient funding; 
     and (6) for adjustments in the allocations for public housing 
     agencies that experienced a significant increase, as 
     determined by the Secretary, in renewal costs as a result of 
     participation in the Small Area Fair Market Rent 
     demonstration: Provided further, That the Secretary shall 
     allocate amounts under the previous proviso based on need, as 
     determined by the Secretary;
       (2) $130,000,000 shall be for section 8 rental assistance 
     for relocation and replacement of housing units that are 
     demolished or disposed of pursuant to section 18 of the Act, 
     conversion of section 23 projects to assistance under section 
     8, the family unification program under section 8(x) of the 
     Act, relocation of witnesses in connection with efforts to 
     combat crime in public and assisted housing pursuant to a 
     request from a law enforcement or prosecution agency, 
     enhanced vouchers under any provision of law authorizing such 
     assistance under section 8(t) of the Act, HOPE VI and Choice 
     Neighborhood vouchers, mandatory and voluntary conversions, 
     and tenant protection assistance including replacement and 
     relocation assistance or for project-based assistance to 
     prevent the displacement of unassisted elderly tenants 
     currently residing in section 202 properties financed between 
     1959 and 1974 that are refinanced pursuant to Public Law 106-
     569, as amended, or under the authority as provided under 
     this Act: Provided, That when a public housing development is 
     submitted for demolition or disposition under section 18 of 
     the Act, the Secretary may provide section 8 rental 
     assistance when the units pose an imminent health and safety 
     risk to residents: Provided further, That the Secretary may 
     only provide replacement vouchers for units that were 
     occupied within the previous 24 months that cease to be 
     available as assisted housing, subject only to the 
     availability of funds: Provided further, That of the amounts 
     made available under this paragraph, $5,000,000 may be 
     available to provide tenant protection assistance, not 
     otherwise provided under this paragraph, to residents 
     residing in low vacancy areas and who may have to pay rents 
     greater than 30 percent of household income, as the result of 
     (1) the maturity of a HUD-insured, HUD-held or section 202 
     loan that requires the permission of the Secretary prior to 
     loan prepayment; (2) the expiration of a rental assistance 
     contract for which the tenants are not eligible for enhanced 
     voucher or tenant protection assistance under existing law; 
     or (3) the expiration of affordability restrictions 
     accompanying a mortgage or preservation program administered 
     by the Secretary: Provided further, That such tenant 
     protection assistance made available under the previous 
     proviso may be provided under the authority of section 8(t) 
     or section 8(o)(13) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 
     (42 U.S.C. 1437f(t)): Provided further, That the Secretary 
     shall issue guidance to implement the previous provisos, 
     including, but not limited to, requirements for defining 
     eligible at-risk households within 120 days of the enactment 
     of this Act: Provided further, That any tenant protection 
     voucher made available from amounts under this paragraph 
     shall not be reissued by any public housing agency, except 
     the replacement vouchers as defined by the Secretary by 
     notice, when the initial family that received any such 
     voucher no longer receives such voucher, and the authority 
     for any public housing agency to issue any such voucher shall 
     cease to exist: Provided further, That the Secretary, for the 
     purpose under this paragraph, may use unobligated balances, 
     including recaptures and carryovers, remaining from amounts 
     appropriated in prior fiscal years under this heading for 
     voucher assistance for nonelderly disabled families and for 
     disaster assistance made available under Public Law 110-329;
       (3) $1,530,000,000 shall be for administrative and other 
     expenses of public housing agencies in administering the 
     section 8 tenant-based rental assistance program, of which up 
     to $10,000,000 shall be available to the Secretary to 
     allocate to public housing agencies that need additional 
     funds to administer their section 8 programs, including fees 
     associated with section 8 tenant protection rental 
     assistance, the administration of disaster related vouchers, 
     Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing vouchers, and other 
     special purpose incremental vouchers: Provided, That no less 
     than $1,520,000,000 of the amount provided in this paragraph 
     shall be allocated to public housing agencies for the 
     calendar year 2016 funding cycle based on section 8(q) of the 
     Act (and related Appropriation Act provisions) as in effect 
     immediately before the enactment of the Quality Housing and 
     Work Responsibility Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-276): 
     Provided further, That if the amounts made available under 
     this paragraph are insufficient to pay the amounts determined 
     under the previous proviso, the Secretary may decrease the 
     amounts allocated to agencies by a uniform percentage 
     applicable to all agencies receiving funding under this 
     paragraph or may, to the extent necessary to provide full 
     payment of amounts determined under the previous proviso, 
     utilize unobligated balances, including recaptures and 
     carryovers, remaining from funds appropriated to the 
     Department of Housing and Urban Development under this 
     heading from prior fiscal years, excluding special purpose 
     vouchers, notwithstanding the purposes for which such amounts 
     were appropriated: Provided further, That all public housing 
     agencies participating in the MTW demonstration shall be 
     funded pursuant to their MTW agreements, and shall be subject 
     to the same uniform percentage decrease as under the previous 
     proviso: Provided further, That amounts provided under this 
     paragraph shall be only for activities related to the 
     provision of tenant-based rental assistance authorized under 
     section 8, including related development activities;
       (4) $107,643,210 for the renewal of tenant-based assistance 
     contracts under section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National 
     Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013), including necessary 
     administrative expenses: Provided, That administrative and 
     other expenses of public housing agencies in administering 
     the special purpose vouchers in this paragraph shall be 
     funded under the same terms and be subject to the same pro 
     rata reduction as the percent decrease for administrative and 
     other expenses to public housing agencies under paragraph (3) 
     of this heading;
       (5) The Secretary shall separately track all special 
     purpose vouchers funded under this heading.

                              {time}  2315


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Al Green of Texas

  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 74, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $75,000,000)''.
       Page 75, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $75,000,000)''.
       Page 77, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $75,000,000)''.
       Page 78, line 9, before the semicolon insert the following: 
     ``, except that of the amount made available by this proviso, 
     $75,000,000 shall be used only for the purpose under this 
     clause''.

  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas (during the reading). Mr. Chair, I ask that the 
amendment be considered as read.

[[Page 8601]]

  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman from Texas and a 
Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise tonight in support of the 
people who make it possible for us to be here. Of course, I speak of 
those persons who go to distant places, those persons who serve us in 
our military who don't always return the same way they left.
  I rise tonight because we have had a successful program. The HUD VASH 
program has been successful, and it has contributed to the decline in 
homelessness among those persons who make it possible for us to be 
here, who make real the great and noble American ideals: liberty and 
justice for all; government of the people, by the people, for the 
people.
  Mr. Chairman, homelessness has declined 33 percent among our veteran 
population since 2010, and this is because the President made it a 
priority. President Obama indicated that he would reduce homelessness 
among veterans, and he had 2015 as a targeted date.
  I am proud to say that in my city of Houston, Texas, our mayor, 
Annise Parker, had an event just recently with three HUD Secretaries, 
and it was announced at that event that in Houston, Texas, the 
resources were available to accommodate a veteran in need of a place to 
call home.
  Tonight, Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment that would accord $75 
million to the HUD VASH program. This $75 million would be used to make 
sure that what we have done we will not only continue to do, but we can 
do even better.
  I believe that the people who have served us and who find themselves 
now living on the streets of life should have a better quality of life. 
For this reason, I will promote this amendment tonight, understanding 
that a point of order has been made, but also understanding that it is 
necessary for us to continue to remind ourselves that we have people 
who are willing to make the sacrifice and that we should make 
sacrifices for them.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. I want to thank the gentleman, again, for his 
passion for this issue and for talking to me about this issue, and I 
look forward to continuing to work with the gentleman.
  Obviously, all of us know that there is never anything, there is 
never enough that we could ever do for our veterans. So again, I thank 
the gentleman, and I look forward to continuing to work with the 
gentleman.
  I thank you for yielding your time.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman and I thank 
the Congress of the United States of America because Congress has 
appropriated money for these VASH vouchers, this program. I have always 
tried to get more because I think our veterans deserve as much as we 
can give them, but I am appreciative for what Congress has done, and I 
am appreciative for what the chairman has done.
  So tonight I will withdraw my amendment, Mr. Chairman, but I do so 
with the understanding that as we move forward, knowing that we have 
done a great job, the President has done well, that the cities and 
municipalities have worked well with the President, this has been an 
integrated system, holistic approach to ending homelessness among our 
veterans, but I still believe that we cannot allow ourselves to relax. 
We must never assume that we have done enough for those who are willing 
to do all for us.
  With that, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.


                    amendment offered by ms. norton

  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 74, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $512,000,000)''.
       Page 75, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $512,000,000)''.

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentlewoman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentlewoman from the District 
of Columbia and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia.
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment to H.R. 2577, 
the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies 
Appropriation Act, that would fully fund the existing Housing Choice 
Vouchers and replenish the 67,000 vouchers lost to the fiscal year 2013 
sequestration.
  It is difficult, Mr. Chair, to think of a more urgent issue 
confronting the American people. Affordable housing has reached zero in 
many communities of our country. It is estimated that 2.1 million low-
income families utilize the Housing Choice Voucher program. These are 
the most vulnerable among us, including children, senior citizens, 
veterans, and persons with disabilities who rely on this important 
program to keep their families from becoming homeless.
  Most families must make roughly $18.92 per hour to afford a two-
bedroom apartment, which is more than 2\1/2\ times the Federal minimum 
wage. In the District of Columbia, where affordable housing has 
virtually disappeared, families must make $28.25 per hour to afford a 
two-bedroom apartment, making the Nation's Capital one of the most 
expensive housing markets in the Nation.
  The District mirrors cities and suburbs throughout the country, 
however. For over a decade, District residents have faced increasing 
rents, stagnant incomes, and the disappearance of affordable rental 
units. As a result, the city has had to close--actually close 
altogether--its housing waiting list, which includes vouchers, leaving 
more than 72,000 people waiting to be placed and thousands more waiting 
for a chance even to get on the list.
  My amendment would fund President Obama's budget request to restore 
67,000 vouchers lost during the fiscal year 2013 sequestration, 
bringing urgently needed relief to struggling families across the 
country. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. What is 
Congress here for if not to bring some relief to millions of families 
across the country, those who are most in need?
  I reserve the balance of my time.


                             point of order

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I insist on my point of order.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida may state his point of 
order.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is not in order under 
section 3(d)(3) of House Resolution 5 of the 114th Congress which 
states the following:
  ``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general 
appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the 
bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments 
proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority 
pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''
  The amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill 
in violation of such section.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order?
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to be heard.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from the District of Columbia is 
recognized.

[[Page 8602]]


  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, but for sequestration probably most of 
these housing vouchers would have gone through. They are already cut. 
These are cuts that were never anticipated. These were sequestration 
cuts. The Congress cannot ignore forever the neediest people for 
housing as homelessness increases and as there is no relief whatsoever.
  I understand the point of order. I can't agree with it. I think at 
some point this Congress must face what it must do for people who but 
for sequestration, something none of us wanted, none of us anticipated, 
would at least among them have some who would have these housing 
vouchers.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair is prepared to rule.
  The gentleman from Florida makes a point of order that the amendment 
offered by the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia violates 
section 3(d)(3) of House Resolution 5.
  Section 3(d)(3) establishes a point of order against an amendment 
proposing a net increase in budget authority in the pending bill.
  As persuasively asserted by the gentleman from Florida, the amendment 
proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill. Therefore, the 
point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Nadler

  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 74, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,204,853,210)''.
       Page 75, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $182,816,000)''.
       Page 79, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $20,000,000)''.
       Page 81, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $490,037,000)''.
       Page 83, after line 10, insert the following:
       (5) $277,000,000 shall be for incremental rental voucher 
     assistance under section 8(o) of the Act to be distributed 
     based on relative need, as determined by the Secretary: 
     Provided, That the Secretary shall make such funding 
     available, notwithstanding section 204 (competition 
     provision) of this title;
       (6) $177,500,000 shall be used for incremental rental 
     voucher assistance for use by families, veterans, and tribal 
     families who are experiencing homelessness, as well as 
     victims of domestic and dating violence: Provided, That 
     eligibility for veterans is made without regard to discharge 
     status: Provided further, That the Secretary shall make such 
     funding available through a competitive process to public 
     housing agencies that partner with eligible Continuums of 
     Care, as identified by the Secretary and to recipients 
     eligible to receive block grants under the Native American 
     Housing Assistance and Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA) 
     (25 U.S.C. 4101 et seq.): Provided further, That assistance 
     provided to recipients eligible under NAHASDA shall be 
     subject to requirements of NAHASDA: Provided further, That 
     the Secretary may waive, or specify alternative requirements 
     for any provision or statute or regulation that the Secretary 
     administers in connection with the use of funds made 
     available under this paragraph upon a finding by the 
     Secretary that any such waivers or alternative requirements 
     are necessary for the effective delivery and administration 
     of such voucher assistance: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary shall issue guidance to implement the previous 
     proviso;
       (7) $37,500,000 shall be made available to provide 
     incremental rental voucher assistance for victims of domestic 
     violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking, as 
     defined by the Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization Act 
     of 2013 (Public Law 113-4), who require an emergency 
     transfer: Provided, That the Secretary shall issue guidance 
     to implement this paragraph;
       (8) $20,000,000 shall be made available for new incremental 
     voucher assistance through the Family Unification Program: 
     Provided, That the assistance made available under this 
     paragraph shall continue to remain available for family 
     unification upon turnover: Provided further, That the amounts 
     made available under this paragraph shall be used only in 
     connection with tenant-based assistance on behalf of--
       (A) any family--
       (i) who is otherwise eligible for such assistance; and
       (ii) who the public child welfare agency for the 
     jurisdiction has certified is a family for whom the lack of 
     adequate housing is a primary factor in the imminent 
     placement of the family's child or children in out-of-home 
     care; and
       (B) for a period not to exceed 60 months, otherwise 
     eligible youths who have attained at least 18 years of age 
     and not more than 21 years of age and who have left foster 
     care at age 16 or older.
       Page 83, line 11, strike ``(5)'' and insert ``(9)''

  Mr. NADLER (during the reading). Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent 
to waive the reading of the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman from New York and a 
Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, the funding levels provided in this bill are 
unrealistic and unsustainable and clearly demonstrate that our current 
budget process has failed. This bill reveals where the majority's 
priorities lie, and they clearly do not lie in serving the most basic 
function of government: to provide for the safety and well-being of its 
citizens.
  This bill makes major cuts to critical HUD programs. The public 
housing capital fund is slashed by $200 million, barely reaching its 
1989 level, almost 30 years ago. This will cover less than half of the 
basic maintenance needs and does nothing to address the $25 billion in 
deferred projects.
  For the first time since 2007, this body will provide no new funding 
to provide housing and support to homeless veterans. The Healthy Homes 
and Lead Hazard Control program is cut by 32 percent, even as The 
Washington Post reported 2 months ago that in low-income West Baltimore 
neighborhoods, more than 3 percent of children under the age of 6 had 
dangerously high levels of lead in their blood, which we know leads to 
learning disabilities and can lead to lifelong dependency, not to 
mention lifelong dependency on the taxpayers.
  But perhaps most startling is the bill's failure to provide low-
income seniors and hard-working families adequate access to affordable 
housing through HUD's Section 8 program. Rental assistance helps 2.1 
million very-low-income households to rent modest homes in the private 
market at affordable costs. Households that use vouchers have an 
average income of $13,000 per year, well below the Federal poverty 
line, and nearly all include children, seniors, or people with 
disabilities. Only about one in four eligible low-income families 
receives Federal rental assistance. Long waiting lists remain in nearly 
every community, and these long waits are exacerbated by a lack of 
administrative funding for public housing agencies.
  Sequestration has only made this situation worse. As of June of last 
year, an estimated 100,000 fewer families were receiving assistance 
from Section 8 due to the sequestration cuts; 100,000 families cut off. 
These cuts have had a severe impact on communities at a time when the 
number of very-low-income renters with worst case housing needs remains 
30 percent higher than it was before the Great Recession.
  Through the fiscal year 2014 and fiscal year 2015 appropriations 
bills, Congress began the work of reversing the deep cuts in assistance 
caused by sequestration, but nearly 67,000 vouchers have yet to be 
restored. My amendment would finally restore those lost vouchers by 
providing an additional $512 million to the voucher renewal account. 
This amendment mirrors the President's request and targets 30,000 
vouchers to those families and individuals most in need of housing 
assistance: homeless families; veterans, including those not covered by 
the VASH program; victims of domestic violence; and Native Americans.

                              {time}  2330

  The bill does include important and helpful language directing HUD to 
target vouchers to the vulnerable populations as they become available 
but provides no funds for HUD to do so.
  My amendment sets aside specific funding for these targeted vouchers 
to make sure the most vulnerable populations have access to safe, 
affordable housing.

[[Page 8603]]

  This additional funding will go a long way toward ensuring that every 
family that qualifies for rental assistance finds a home. However, at 
the funding levels for administrative fees in this legislation, it 
would be impossible for public housing agencies to hire and maintain 
enough staff to process and renew vouchers.
  We cannot continue to undermine our hard-working public housing 
agencies by failing to provide them enough money to function. My 
amendment would finally address the undercutting of public housing 
agencies by providing an additional $490 million to match the 
President's request.
  Mr. Chairman, this is the minimum we can do to meet the vital needs 
of our lowest-income citizens and of our veterans. I urge adoption of 
this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.


                             POINT OF ORDER

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I insist on the point of order.
  The amendment is not in order under section 3(d)(3) of House 
Resolution 5, 114th Congress, which states:
  ``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general 
appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the 
bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments 
proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority 
pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''
  The amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill 
in violation of such section.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order?
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, we can all agree that this amendment is 
necessary. We are talking about denying tens of thousands of families 
and seniors access to an efficient, cost-effective program that keeps 
families together and lowers the government's costs over the long term. 
Without this amendment, we will see a spike in homelessness, a spike in 
medical costs, and a spike in hungry children.
  I understand the point of order. I understand that the rules demand 
an offset for any funding increase in the bill. I also appreciate the 
chairman's efforts to support Section 8 and public housing. However, 
when funding levels are as restrictive as this bill provides across the 
board, it is impossible to offset such drastic underfunding without 
hurting other people in need.
  When faced with a funding bill----
  The Acting CHAIR. Does the gentleman from New York wish to speak to 
the point of order?
  The gentleman will confine his remarks to the point of order.
  Mr. NADLER. When faced with a funding bill that fails to provide any 
new funding to support homeless veterans and is leaving victims of 
domestic violence and homeless families with no access to secure 
housing, we need to take action to support the most vulnerable among 
us.
  I hope that as we go forward, we can find a way to provide these 
funds so that kids, working families, and seniors are not out on the 
street.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair is prepared to rule.
  The gentleman from Florida makes a point of order that the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from New York violates section 3(d)(3) of 
House Resolution 5.
  Section 3(d)(3) establishes a point of order against an amendment 
proposing a net increase in budget authority in the pending bill.
  As persuasively asserted by the gentleman from Florida, the amendment 
proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill. Therefore, the 
point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I think it is very 
important that this moment not pass without us expressing appreciation 
to Mr. Nadler and to Ms. Norton for these amendments they have offered, 
because they are addressing a critical issue, a critical deficiency in 
this bill. And believe me, Mr. Chairman, this is just the tip of the 
iceberg.
  The President proposed in his budget to provide additional rental 
vouchers to compensate for those lost earlier to sequestration. He also 
proposed funding for 30,000 new targeted vouchers, as Mr. Nadler was 
indicating: homeless families, veterans, Native Americans, victims of 
domestic violence and stalking, reuniting families.
  Because of this budget policy that has us so hamstrung, we are simply 
not addressing in this bill any of these desperate needs. I invite 
colleagues to talk to their local housing authorities, if they haven't 
already. Ask how many are on the waiting list. Ask how many people are 
desperate for decent housing. There is nothing more basic to our 
communities' well-being than decent housing.
  I don't know of a single housing program that isn't underresourced, 
and all this because of a budget policy that really isn't working as 
fiscal policy. That is what it is supposed to be doing, but it is 
decimating these investments that our country needs to be making.
  I said the tip of the iceberg. Here is what I mean. The Choice 
Neighborhoods initiative is the successor to HOPE VI. That has been an 
enormously successful program in my area of Raleigh-Durham in North 
Carolina. That is $20 million. That is a token amount. I hope we will 
revisit that amount later.
  Public housing capital fund, $1.68 billion. That is $194 million cut 
from last year. That goes back to where we were 26 years ago. And then 
we have a $25 billion backlog--not even beginning to address that.
  Mr. Chairman, my district displays rental housing for the elderly, 
housing for the disabled. Local congregations have taken on these 
projects. We have group homes for the disabled that have done a 
wonderful job. This budget simply turns them into rental renewal 
programs. No capital funding, no increase in the supply. And so it 
goes.
  So Mr. Nadler and Ms. Norton have done us a great service tonight in 
pressing the case for tenant-based rental assistance--for these 
vouchers--and for addressing some of these very needy categories of our 
fellow citizens. But it is the tip of the iceberg. It is only one of an 
array of programs that we very much need to address.
  I am hopeful that the inadequacy of this bill tonight, and the kind 
of debate we are having tonight, the kind of sharp relief that these 
needs are being put into, will motivate us very strongly sooner rather 
than later.
  Let's not wait for a Presidential veto. Let's not wait for some kind 
of governmental shutdown. Let's show that we can govern. Let's show 
that we can take hold of our situation, invest the way a great country 
should invest, and do a budget agreement that secures our fiscal future 
but also makes room for the kind of investments that we should make.
  So I thank my colleagues for bringing up these critical housing 
needs. We simply must address them in the weeks ahead.
  I yield back the balance of my time.


                   amendment offered by mr. grothman

  Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 74, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $614,000,000)''.
       Page 75, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $434,000,000)''.
       Page 81, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $180,000,000)''.
       Page 81, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $180,000,000)''.
       Page 156, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $614,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Wisconsin and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, I am glad to be here. It shows different 
people look at this budget and see different things.
  I look at this budget and see a $614 million increase in Section 8 
housing, and I look at the huge debt we have,

[[Page 8604]]

and I say: Why are we spending more? Other people apparently look at 
the $614 million increase and say: Why, that is just a pittance.
  Obviously, a 3 percent increase in any program at a time we are in 
the huge debt we are should be viewed skeptically. I have an amendment 
here to get rid of the $614 million increase.
  Now, as I understand, the reason there is an increase is because we 
are getting in less receipts on the Section 8 housing and, therefore, 
we feel that the citizens of this country have to make up the 
difference.
  My opinion is they have done nothing that we have to take more out of 
their pocket, either in taxes or by way of inflation, and we should not 
be increasing this funding by $614 million.
  In the debate over the last amendment it was said that there is a 
waiting list on a lot of these programs. That doesn't mean we have to 
spend more money on the programs. If we are giving away something for 
free, there is always going to be a waiting list. If you go out in 
society, if a store says, we are going to give away something for free, 
you have a waiting list, right?
  This is a flawed program for a couple of reasons. I don't object to 
using it for disabled people. I don't object to using it for elderly 
people. But like many welfare-related programs, two things help you in 
eligibility for this program.
  First of all, you are required not to work very hard. And the 
gentleman made a point that the income level of a lot of these people 
in the projects isn't that high. That is because if they made more 
money, they wouldn't be eligible for the generous subsidies. So, of 
course they are not making a lot of money. It is wrong to set up a 
program that discourages industry.
  The second thing wrong with this program is it discourages marriage. 
A lot of these housing things are set up such that if somebody marries 
the mother or father of their children who is working harder, you lose 
the subsidy. I can't imagine anything more foolish than setting up a 
program that says we will give you an apartment if you raise a child 
out of wedlock, but if you get married, we will take away your 
apartment.
  The last time we really looked at this program was 1994. It is time 
we look at it again. And the idea of pouring another $614 million into 
this program is out of line.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in 
opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in 
opposition with considerable enthusiasm.
  It is as though what I said 5 minutes ago about the deficiencies of 
this bill--this whole budget strategy that has left us so unable to 
address our needs--it is as though the gentleman took that and went in 
exactly the opposite direction.
  His amendment reduced an allocation that is already far too low, and 
it takes these rental assistance programs and reduces them further. Not 
only does it not meet the need that we are seeing but actually reduces 
what we are already doing. This means evictions. I promise you, it 
means large-scale evictions. It means a cutting back in communities 
across this country of the housing alternatives that people have.
  I have always thought, Mr. Chairman, that rental assistance--Section 
8--should be a housing program that conservatives should love because 
it is market-based. It is not, contrary to what the gentleman says, a 
total free ride. As a matter of fact, people pay a third of their 
income in rent. What Section 8 provides is a modest boost so that these 
housing developments and these apartment buildings can work. People can 
live there. They put their own money in, and they get a boost. They are 
able to move toward self-sufficiency.
  So it is not public housing. It is housing for people who are able to 
do more for themselves and who are receiving support as they do that. 
This would be unconscionable to cut this program further.
  With great conviction I believe this would be a mistaken amendment, a 
hard-hearted amendment, and one that this body should reject.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman).
  The amendment was rejected.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                        housing certificate fund

                        (including rescissions)

       Unobligated balances, including recaptures and carryover, 
     remaining from funds appropriated to the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development under this heading, the heading 
     ``Annual Contributions for Assisted Housing'' and the heading 
     ``Project-Based Rental Assistance'', for fiscal year 2016 and 
     prior years may be used for renewal of or amendments to 
     section 8 project-based contracts and for performance-based 
     contract administrators, notwithstanding the purposes for 
     which such funds were appropriated: Provided, That any 
     obligated balances of contract authority from fiscal year 
     1974 and prior that have been terminated shall be rescinded: 
     Provided further, That amounts heretofore recaptured, or 
     recaptured during the current fiscal year, from section 8 
     project-based contracts from source years fiscal year 1975 
     through fiscal year 1987 are hereby rescinded, and an amount 
     of additional new budget authority, equivalent to the amount 
     rescinded is hereby appropriated, to remain available until 
     expended, for the purposes set forth under this heading, in 
     addition to amounts otherwise available.

                      public housing capital fund

       For the Public Housing Capital Fund Program to carry out 
     capital and management activities for public housing 
     agencies, as authorized under section 9 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437g) (``the Act''), 
     $1,681,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2019: 
     Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of law or 
     regulation, during fiscal year 2016 the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development may not delegate to any Department 
     official other than the Deputy Secretary and the Assistant 
     Secretary for Public and Indian Housing any authority under 
     paragraph (2) of section 9(j) regarding the extension of the 
     time periods under such section: Provided further, That for 
     purposes of such section 9(j), the term ``obligate'' means, 
     with respect to amounts, that the amounts are subject to a 
     binding agreement that will result in outlays, immediately or 
     in the future: Provided further, That up to $3,000,000 shall 
     be to support ongoing Public Housing Financial and Physical 
     Assessment activities: Provided further, That of the total 
     amount provided under this heading, not to exceed $20,000,000 
     shall be available for the Secretary to make grants, 
     notwithstanding section 204 of this Act, to public housing 
     agencies for emergency capital needs including safety and 
     security measures necessary to address crime and drug-related 
     activity as well as needs resulting from unforeseen or 
     unpreventable emergencies and natural disasters excluding 
     Presidentially declared emergencies and natural disasters 
     under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) occurring in fiscal year 2016: 
     Provided further, That of the total amount provided under 
     this heading $30,000,000 shall be for supportive services, 
     service coordinator and congregate services as authorized by 
     section 34 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1437z-6) and the Native 
     American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 
     1996 (25 U.S.C. 4101 et seq.): Provided further, That of the 
     total amount made available under this heading, up to 
     $15,000,000 may be used for a Jobs-Plus initiative modeled 
     after the Jobs-Plus demonstration: Provided further, That the 
     funding provided under the previous proviso shall provide 
     competitive grants to partnerships between public housing 
     authorities, local workforce investment boards established 
     under section 117 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, 
     and other agencies and organizations that provide support to 
     help public housing residents obtain employment and increase 
     earnings: Provided further, That applicants must demonstrate 
     the ability to provide services to residents, partner with 
     workforce investment boards, and leverage service dollars: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary may set aside a portion 
     of the funds provided for the Resident Opportunity and Self-
     Sufficiency program to support the services element of the 
     Jobs-Plus Pilot initiative: Provided further, That the 
     Secretary may allow PHAs to request exemptions from rent and 
     income limitation requirements under sections 3 and 6 of the 
     United States Housing Act of 1937 as necessary to implement 
     the Jobs-Plus program, on such terms and conditions as the 
     Secretary may approve upon a finding by the Secretary that 
     any such waivers or alternative requirements are necessary 
     for the effective implementation of the Jobs-Plus initiative 
     as a voluntary program for residents: Provided further, That 
     the Secretary shall publish by notice in the Federal Register 
     any waivers or alternative requirements pursuant to the 
     preceding proviso no later than 10 days before the effective

[[Page 8605]]

     date of such notice: Provided further, That for funds 
     provided under this heading, the limitation in section 
     9(g)(1) of the Act shall be 25 percent: Provided further, 
     That the Secretary may waive the limitation in the previous 
     proviso to allow public housing agencies to fund activities 
     authorized under section 9(e)(1)(C) of the Act: Provided 
     further, That from the funds made available under this 
     heading, the Secretary shall provide bonus awards in fiscal 
     year 2016 to public housing agencies that are designated high 
     performers: Provided further, That the Department shall 
     notify public housing agencies of their formula allocation 
     within 60 days of enactment of this Act.

                     public housing operating fund

       For 2016 payments to public housing agencies for the 
     operation and management of public housing, as authorized by 
     section 9(e) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437g(e)), $4,440,000,000.

                    choice neighborhoods initiative

       For competitive grants under the Choice Neighborhoods 
     Initiative (subject to section 24 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437v), unless otherwise 
     specified under this heading), for transformation, 
     rehabilitation, and replacement housing needs of both public 
     and HUD-assisted housing and to transform neighborhoods of 
     poverty into functioning, sustainable mixed income 
     neighborhoods with appropriate services, schools, public 
     assets, transportation and access to jobs, $20,000,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2018: Provided, That 
     grant funds may be used for resident and community services, 
     community development, and affordable housing needs in the 
     community, and for conversion of vacant or foreclosed 
     properties to affordable housing: Provided further, That the 
     use of funds made available under this heading shall not be 
     deemed to be public housing notwithstanding section 3(b)(1) 
     of such Act: Provided further, That grantees shall commit to 
     an additional period of affordability determined by the 
     Secretary of not fewer than 20 years: Provided further, That 
     grantees shall undertake comprehensive local planning with 
     input from residents and the community, and that grantees 
     shall provide a match in State, local, other Federal or 
     private funds: Provided further, That grantees may include 
     local governments, tribal entities, public housing 
     authorities, and nonprofits: Provided further, That for-
     profit developers may apply jointly with a public entity: 
     Provided further, That for purposes of environmental review, 
     a grantee shall be treated as a public housing agency under 
     section 26 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437x), and grants under this heading shall be subject 
     to the regulations issued by the Secretary to implement such 
     section: Provided further, That such grantees shall create 
     partnerships with other local organizations including 
     assisted housing owners, service agencies, and resident 
     organizations: Provided further, That the Secretary shall 
     consult with the Secretaries of Education, Labor, 
     Transportation, Health and Human Services, Agriculture, and 
     Commerce, the Attorney General, and the Administrator of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency to coordinate and leverage 
     other appropriate Federal resources: Provided further, That 
     unobligated balances, including recaptures, remaining from 
     funds appropriated under the heading ``Revitalization of 
     Severely Distressed Public Housing (HOPE VI)'' in fiscal year 
     2011 and prior fiscal years may be used for purposes under 
     this heading, notwithstanding the purposes for which such 
     amounts were appropriated.

                        family self-sufficiency

       For the Family Self-Sufficiency program to support family 
     self-sufficiency coordinators under section 23 of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937, to promote the development of 
     local strategies to coordinate the use of assistance under 
     sections 8 and 9 of such Act with public and private 
     resources, and enable eligible families to achieve economic 
     independence and self-sufficiency, $75,000,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2017: Provided, That the 
     Secretary may, by Federal Register notice, waive or specify 
     alternative requirements under sections b(3), b(4), b(5), or 
     c(1) of section 23 of such Act in order to facilitate the 
     operation of a unified self-sufficiency program for 
     individuals receiving assistance under different provisions 
     of the Act, as determined by the Secretary: Provided further, 
     That owners of multifamily properties with project-based 
     subsidy contracts under section 8 may compete for funding 
     under this heading and/or voluntarily make a Family Self-
     Sufficiency program available to the assisted tenants of such 
     property in accordance with procedures established by the 
     Secretary: Provided further, That such procedures established 
     pursuant to the previous proviso shall permit participating 
     tenants to accrue escrow funds in accordance with section 
     23(d)(2) and shall allow owners to use funding from residual 
     receipt accounts to hire coordinators for their own Family 
     Self-Sufficiency program.

                  native american housing block grants

       For the Native American Housing Block Grants program, as 
     authorized under title I of the Native American Housing 
     Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA) (25 
     U.S.C. 4111 et seq.), $650,000,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2020: Provided, That, notwithstanding the 
     Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act 
     of 1996, to determine the amount of the allocation under 
     title I of such Act for each Indian tribe, the Secretary 
     shall apply the formula under section 302 of such Act with 
     the need component based on single-race census data and with 
     the need component based on multi-race census data, and the 
     amount of the allocation for each Indian tribe shall be the 
     greater of the two resulting allocation amounts: Provided 
     further, That of the amounts made available under this 
     heading, $3,500,000 shall be contracted for assistance for 
     national or regional organizations representing Native 
     American housing interests for providing training and 
     technical assistance to Indian housing authorities and 
     tribally designated housing entities as authorized under 
     NAHASDA: Provided further, That of the funds made available 
     under the previous proviso, not less than $2,000,000 shall be 
     made available for a national organization as authorized 
     under section 703 of NAHASDA (25 U.S.C. 4212): Provided 
     further, That of the amounts made available under this 
     heading, $2,000,000 shall be to support the inspection of 
     Indian housing units, contract expertise, training, and 
     technical assistance in the training, oversight, and 
     management of such Indian housing and tenant-based 
     assistance, including up to $300,000 for related travel: 
     Provided further, That of the amount provided under this 
     heading, $2,000,000 shall be made available for the cost of 
     guaranteed notes and other obligations, as authorized by 
     title VI of NAHASDA: Provided further, That such costs, 
     including the costs of modifying such notes and other 
     obligations, shall be as defined in section 502 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended: Provided 
     further, That these funds are available to subsidize the 
     total principal amount of any notes and other obligations, 
     any part of which is to be guaranteed, not to exceed 
     $17,452,007: Provided further, That the Department will 
     notify grantees of their formula allocation within 60 days of 
     the date of enactment of this Act: Provided further, 
     notwithstanding section 302(d) of NAHASDA, if on January 1, 
     2016, a recipient's total amount of undisbursed block grants 
     in the Department's line of credit control system is greater 
     than three times the formula allocation it would otherwise 
     receive under this heading, the Secretary shall adjust that 
     recipient's formula allocation down by the difference between 
     its total amount of undisbursed block grants in the 
     Department's line of credit control system on January 1, 
     2016, and three times the formula allocation it would 
     otherwise receive: Provided further, That grant amounts not 
     allocated to a recipient pursuant to the previous proviso 
     shall be allocated under the need component of the formula 
     proportionately among all other Indian tribes not subject to 
     an adjustment: Provided further, That the two previous 
     provisos shall not apply to any Indian tribe that would 
     otherwise receive a formula allocation of less than 
     $5,000,000: Provided further, That to take effect, the three 
     previous provisos do not require the issuance of any 
     regulation.

           indian housing loan guarantee fund program account

       For the cost of guaranteed loans, as authorized by section 
     184 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (12 
     U.S.C. 1715z-13a), $8,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That such costs, including the costs of 
     modifying such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of 
     the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, That 
     these funds are available to subsidize total loan principal, 
     any part of which is to be guaranteed, up to $1,269,841,270, 
     to remain available until expended: Provided further, That up 
     to $750,000 of this amount may be for administrative contract 
     expenses including management processes and systems to carry 
     out the loan guarantee program.

                   Community Planning and Development

              housing opportunities for persons with aids

       For carrying out the Housing Opportunities for Persons with 
     AIDS program, as authorized by the AIDS Housing Opportunity 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 12901 et seq.), $332,000,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2017, except that amounts 
     allocated pursuant to section 854(c)(3) of such Act shall 
     remain available until September 30, 2018: Provided, That the 
     Secretary shall renew all expiring contracts for permanent 
     supportive housing that initially were funded under section 
     854(c)(3) of such Act from funds made available under this 
     heading in fiscal year 2010 and prior fiscal years that meet 
     all program requirements before awarding funds for new 
     contracts under such section: Provided further, That the 
     Department shall notify grantees of their formula allocation 
     within 60 days of enactment of this Act.

                              {time}  2345


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Nadler

  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 94, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.

[[Page 8606]]

       Page 116, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.

  Mr. NADLER (during the reading). Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent 
to waive the reading of the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman from New York and a 
Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, since 1992, the Housing Opportunities for Persons with 
AIDS has provided a vital safety net. In the United States, 50,000 
people become infected with HIV every year, and 1.2 million people are 
living with HIV/AIDS. More than 500,000 of these individuals will need 
some form of housing assistance during the course of their illness, but 
145,000 individuals have unmet housing needs.
  HOPWA combines housing support with additional services to help 
people living with HIV/AIDS and their families stay in stable, safe 
housing; manage their illness; and remain active in their communities. 
Housing interventions are critical in our continued fight against HIV/
AIDS, and research clearly shows that stable housing leads to better 
health outcomes.
  Providing stable housing to people living with HIV/AIDS reduces the 
risk of transmission to a partner by 96 percent; it reduces emergency 
room visits and expense to the public by 36 percent and 
hospitalizations by 57 percent. In other words, investing a modest 
amount in HOPWA today saves us millions, if not billions of Federal 
taxpayer dollars in the future.
  HOPWA is the only Federal housing program to provide cities and 
States with dedicated resources to address the housing crisis facing 
people living with HIV/AIDS, and the program traditionally enjoys 
strong bipartisan support.
  Congressional support for HOPWA is clear in this legislation. While 
nearly every other program in the bill has been slashed by millions of 
dollars and often funded at levels below the point of actually 
functioning, HOPWA saw a slight increase in funding during the 
committee's consideration of the bill.
  Some hail the bill's slim $332 million for HOPWA as a victory. I also 
applaud any additional funding for HOPWA, but I cannot call it a 
victory to fund this program below its 2010 funding level when wait 
lists for HOPWA services continue to grow and thousands of Americans 
die on the streets and in shelters because we refuse to provide a few 
extra million dollars to provide them with the care they need.
  I will not claim that my amendment completely solves that problem. 
The National AIDS Housing Coalition estimates that, in FY16, they will 
need $364 million to provide HOPWA services to those who need them and 
to fund vital administrative support to improve the program.
  To reach that goal, we would need to find $32 million somewhere in 
this bill to transfer to HOPWA, but the funding levels we are 
considering today are so abysmally low, it is nearly impossible to move 
that much money without gutting other important programs.
  What we do, at the very least, is pass my amendment to restore HOPWA 
to its FY10 funding level of $335 million, a scant $3 million increase. 
That funding level makes only a small dent in HOPWA's real need, but it 
will give hundreds more people and families access to lifesaving 
services. It is a very small step, but it is in the right direction, 
and I believe if we have the chance to save even one life, let alone 
hundreds, we have a duty to act.
  To protect those living with HIV/AIDS and to stay within the House 
rules, my amendment offsets this additional funding to cuts to HUD's 
information technology fund.
  I recognize the importance of providing HUD with phones and computers 
and understand the chairman and ranking member's concerns about 
additional cuts to this account, but nothing is more important than, 
quite simply, saving lives.
  We must pass this amendment and give those families battling HIV/AIDS 
a fighting chance. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and 
I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of a point 
of order.
  The Acting CHAIR. The reservation of the point of order is withdrawn.
  Does any Member seek time in opposition?
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, let me inquire of the 
chairman, does he plan to claim the time in opposition?
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I will not be claiming the time in 
opposition.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, although, as a formality, 
I will then claim that time, although I am not opposed; I am 
enthusiastically in support of Mr. Nadler's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I do want to take a little 
extra time to mention some things connected to this that I think need 
to come to our colleagues' attention.
  First of all, this is not an ideal offset that Mr. Nadler has chosen. 
This is simply an example of the problem we have had all evening. Any 
funding amendment will fill only one hole by digging another, and so 
that is just the reality we are dealing with.
  I do support this amendment. It runs the risk of further delaying 
HUD's acquisition of improved IT systems. We are going to need to 
attend to that. In this bill, HUD's IT account is already $150 million 
below the fiscal year '15 level and $234 million below the President's 
request. This is not an account that has a lot to spare, so I hope we 
can revisit that.
  It may be relatively easy to target this funding line. We have got to 
provide HUD with the tools it needs to properly administer HOPWA and 
other programs.
  We need, of course, eventually, a bipartisan budget agreement that 
will allow for a more credible bill that will adequately fund HOPWA and 
HUD's IT account both, both of those.
  Let me say, Mr. Chairman, I, in addition, hope that the chairman and 
other longtime supporters of HOPWA are going to be able to work--we are 
all going to be able to work together moving forward to get this HOPWA 
formula updated once and for all.
  The formula hasn't been updated for the distribution of funds, the 
allocation of funds, that formula hasn't been updated since the 
inception of the program in the early nineties. Without an update, many 
Americans who are living with HIV in areas of the country with the 
fastest growing infection rates--namely, the South and rural America--
are not getting the housing support they desperately need.
  As a Member from a State with an AIDS death rate higher than the 
national average, this issue, getting this formula right, is a matter 
of life and death for many of my constituents.
  As we work on this bill in the months to come, try to get the funding 
levels where they need to be, we also very much need to address that 
formula issue, and I pledge my readiness to work with colleagues to 
have an equitable funding formula.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York has 1\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. I 
won't use it.
  I simply want to express my appreciation first to the ranking member 
for supporting the amendment, despite the very painful offset which he 
will have to deal with, which I won't have to deal with, except as a 
single Member of the House.
  I want to thank the chairman for not opposing this amendment. This 
amendment is a matter of life or death for a

[[Page 8607]]

large number of people, and I urge my colleagues to adopt it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                       community development fund

       For assistance to units of State and local government, and 
     to other entities, for economic and community development 
     activities, and for other purposes, $3,060,000,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2018, unless otherwise 
     specified: Provided, That of the total amount provided, 
     $3,000,000,000 is for carrying out the community development 
     block grant program under title I of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1974, as amended (``the Act'' 
     herein) (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.): Provided further, That 
     unless explicitly provided for under this heading, not to 
     exceed 20 percent of any grant made with funds appropriated 
     under this heading shall be expended for planning and 
     management development and administration: Provided further, 
     That a metropolitan city, urban county, unit of general local 
     government, or Indian tribe, or insular area that directly or 
     indirectly receives funds under this heading may not sell, 
     trade, or otherwise transfer all or any portion of such funds 
     to another such entity in exchange for any other funds, 
     credits or non-Federal considerations, but must use such 
     funds for activities eligible under title I of the Act: 
     Provided further, That notwithstanding section 105(e)(1) of 
     the Act, no funds provided under this heading may be provided 
     to a for-profit entity for an economic development project 
     under section 105(a)(17) unless such project has been 
     evaluated and selected in accordance with guidelines required 
     under subparagraph (e)(2): Provided further, That none of the 
     funds made available under this heading may be used for 
     grants for the Economic Development Initiative (``EDI'') or 
     Neighborhood Initiatives activities, Rural Innovation Fund, 
     or for grants pursuant to section 107 of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5307): Provided 
     further, That the Department shall notify grantees of their 
     formula allocation within 60 days of enactment of this Act: 
     Provided further, That of the total amount provided under 
     this heading $60,000,000 shall be for grants to Indian tribes 
     notwithstanding section 106(a)(1) of such Act, of which, 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law (including section 
     204 of this Act), up to $3,960,000 may be used for 
     emergencies that constitute imminent threats to health and 
     safety.

         community development loan guarantees program account

                         (including rescission)

       Subject to section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974, during fiscal year 2016, commitments to guarantee loans 
     under section 108 of the Housing and Community Development 
     Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5308), any part of which is 
     guaranteed, shall not exceed a total principal amount of 
     $300,000,000, notwithstanding any aggregate limitation on 
     outstanding obligations guaranteed in subsection (k) of such 
     section 108: Provided, That the Secretary shall collect fees 
     from borrowers, notwithstanding subsection (m) of such 
     section 108, to result in a credit subsidy cost of zero for 
     guaranteeing such loans, and any such fees shall be collected 
     in accordance with section 502(7) of the Congressional Budget 
     Act of 1974: Provided further, That all unobligated balances, 
     including recaptures and carryover, remaining from funds 
     appropriated to the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development under this heading are hereby permanently 
     rescinded.

                  home investment partnerships program

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the HOME investment partnerships program, as authorized 
     under title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act, as amended, $767,000,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2019: Provided, That notwithstanding the 
     amount made available under this heading, the threshold 
     reduction requirements in sections 216(10) and 217(b)(4) of 
     such Act shall not apply to allocations of such amount: 
     Provided further, That the requirements under provisos 2 
     through 6 under this heading for fiscal year 2012 and such 
     requirements applicable pursuant to the ``Full-Year 
     Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013'', shall not apply to any 
     project to which funds were committed on or after August 23, 
     2013, but such projects shall instead be governed by the 
     Final Rule titled ``Home Investment Partnerships Program; 
     Improving Performance and Accountability; Updating Property 
     Standards'' which became effective on such date: Provided 
     further, That notwithstanding paragraphs (1)(B)(i) or 
     (2)(B)(i) of section 1337(a) of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 4567(a)), amounts 
     allocated under such paragraphs shall be credited to, made 
     available, and merged with this account: Provided further, 
     That no amounts made available by any provision of law may be 
     transferred, reprogrammed, or credited to the Housing Trust 
     Fund.


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Al Green of Texas

  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       In the ``Department of Housing and Urban Development--
     Community Planning and Development--HOME Investment 
     Partnerships Program'' account, after the aggregate dollar 
     amount insert ``(increased by $293,000,000)''.
       In the ``Department of Housing and Urban Development--
     Community Planning and Development--HOME Investment 
     Partnerships Program'' account, strike the last two provisos.

  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas (during the reading). Mr. Chair, I ask 
unanimous consent that the amendment be considered as read.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman from Texas and a 
Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let me please start by 
acknowledging the Honorable Maxine Waters. What I present tonight is an 
amendment that she actually authored, and I would like to present it. 
In so doing, I want to remind us that this amendment deals with two 
programs that are near and dear to my heart, the affordable housing 
trust fund and the HOME program.
  These programs are near and dear to my heart because the greatness of 
a nation will not be measured by how we treat people who live in the 
suites of life, how we treat the well off, the well heeled, and the 
well to do.
  The greatness of a nation is often measured by how we treat people 
who live in the streets of life, those who are too often among the 
least, the last, and the lost.
  This amendment seeks to provide aid and comfort for those who, but 
for the grace of God, could be you or me, but those who find themselves 
living in the streets of life. This amendment, in dealing with the 
affordable housing trust fund, will restore it.
  The current bill would actually eliminate the affordable housing 
trust fund. This amendment provides some degree of aid and comfort for 
those who are living at 30 percent of the area median income, wherever 
they happen to live.
  In Ms. Maxine Waters' district, this would mean an annual income of 
$20,200 for a family of four. I would dare say that there are few among 
us who would dare attempt to live off of $20,200 as an individual. This 
helps a family of four with $20,200. This is what the affordable 
housing trust fund does. It helps people who are extremely low of 
income.
  My hope is that we will be able to prevent this elimination of the 
affordable housing trust fund, and this amendment does it.
  This amendment also will help those who can benefit from the HOME 
program. The HOME program can serve a family of four that earns up to 
$53,900 per year. This program is a partnership, if you will, between 
State, municipal, and Federal Government.
  It has been a program that has been of great benefit across the 
length and breadth of this country. There is not a State in the 
country, I would dare say, that has not benefited from the HOME 
program.
  It is my hope that we can meet the President's request for the HOME 
program. Right now, it is about $293 million short of the President's 
request. This amendment would add that $293 million that the President 
has requested.
  I started by indicating that these are two programs that are near and 
dear to me. Mr. Chairman, I believe that Ruth Meltzer was right when 
she indicated that some measure their lives by days and years, others 
by heartthrobs, passions, and tears; but the surest measure under God's 
sun is what for others in your lifetime have you done.

[[Page 8608]]

  These programs afford us an opportunity to do for others, to be a 
blessing to those that have not been as blessed as we. My hope is that 
we will find a way to salvage both of these programs, restore the HOME 
program to what the President has requested, and prevent the affordable 
housing trust fund from finding its way to the ash heap of history.
  I reserve the balance of my time.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I insist on my point of order.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes a net increase 
in budget authority in the bill.
  The amendment is not in order under section 3(d)3 of House Resolution 
5, 114th Congress, which states the following:
  ``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general 
appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the 
bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments 
proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority 
pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''
  The amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill 
in violation of such section.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order?
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. If I may, Mr. Chairman.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized on the point of order.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, on the point of order, 
understanding the rules, I still would beseech us, Mr. Chairman, to 
give some consideration to the salvation of these programs.
  Perhaps I will be able to work with the chairman and in some way help 
those who are not in a position to help themselves.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair is prepared to rule.
  The gentleman from Florida makes a point of order that the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Texas violates section 3(d)(3) of House 
Resolution 5.
  Section 3(d)(3) establishes a point of order against an amendment 
proposing a net increase in budget authority in the pending bill.
  As persuasively asserted by the gentleman from Florida, the amendment 
proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill. Therefore, the 
point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.

                              {time}  0000

  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

        self-help and assisted homeownership opportunity program

       For the Self-Help and Assisted Homeownership Opportunity 
     Program, as authorized under section 11 of the Housing 
     Opportunity Program Extension Act of 1996, as amended, 
     $50,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2018: 
     Provided, That of the total amount provided under this 
     heading, $10,000,000 shall be made available to the Self-Help 
     and Assisted Homeownership Opportunity Program as authorized 
     under section 11 of the Housing Opportunity Program Extension 
     Act of 1996, as amended: Provided further, That of the total 
     amount provided under this heading, $35,000,000 shall be made 
     available for the second, third, and fourth capacity building 
     activities authorized under section 4(a) of the HUD 
     Demonstration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 9816 note), of which not 
     less than $5,000,000 shall be made available for rural 
     capacity building activities: Provided further, That of the 
     total amount provided under this heading, $5,000,000 shall be 
     made available for capacity building by national rural 
     housing organizations with experience assessing national 
     rural conditions and providing financing, training, technical 
     assistance, information, and research to local nonprofits, 
     local governments and Indian Tribes serving high need rural 
     communities.

                       homeless assistance grants

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the emergency solutions grants program as authorized 
     under subtitle B of title IV of the McKinney-Vento Homeless 
     Assistance Act, as amended; the continuum of care program as 
     authorized under subtitle C of title IV of such Act; and the 
     rural housing stability assistance program as authorized 
     under subtitle D of title IV of such Act, $2,185,000,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2018: Provided, That any 
     rental assistance amounts that are recaptured under such 
     continuum of care program shall remain available until 
     expended: Provided further, That not less than $250,000,000 
     of the funds appropriated under this heading shall be 
     available for such emergency solutions grants program: 
     Provided further, That not less than $1,905,000,000 of the 
     funds appropriated under this heading shall be available for 
     such continuum of care and rural housing stability assistance 
     programs: Provided further, That up to $5,000,000 of the 
     funds appropriated under this heading shall be available for 
     the national homeless data analysis project: Provided 
     further, That all funds awarded for supportive services under 
     the continuum of care program and the rural housing stability 
     assistance program shall be matched by not less than 25 
     percent in cash or in kind by each grantee: Provided further, 
     That for all match requirements applicable to funds made 
     available under this heading for this fiscal year and prior 
     years, a grantee may use (or could have used) as a source of 
     match funds other funds administered by the Secretary and 
     other Federal agencies unless there is (or was) a specific 
     statutory prohibition on any such use of any such funds: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary shall establish minimum 
     project performance thresholds for each grantee under the 
     continuum of care program based on program performance data: 
     Provided further, That none of the funds provided under this 
     heading shall be available to renew any expiring contract or 
     amendment to a contract funded under the continuum of care 
     program unless the Secretary determines that the expiring 
     contract or amendment to a contract is needed under the 
     applicable continuum of care and meets appropriate program 
     requirements, financial standards, and performance measures, 
     including the minimum performance thresholds established in 
     the previous proviso: Provided further, That the Secretary 
     shall prioritize funding under the continuum of care program 
     to grant applications that demonstrate a capacity to 
     reallocate funding from lower performing projects to higher 
     performing projects: Provided further, That all awards of 
     assistance under this heading shall be required to coordinate 
     and integrate homeless programs with other mainstream health, 
     social services, and employment programs for which homeless 
     populations may be eligible: Provided further, That with 
     respect to funds provided under this heading for the 
     continuum of care program for fiscal years 2013, 2014, 2015, 
     and 2016 provision of permanent housing rental assistance may 
     be administered by private nonprofit organizations: Provided 
     further, That any unobligated amounts remaining from funds 
     appropriated under this heading in fiscal year 2012 and prior 
     years for project-based rental assistance for rehabilitation 
     projects with 10-year grant terms may be used for purposes 
     under this heading, notwithstanding the purposes for which 
     such funds were appropriated:  Provided further, That all 
     balances for Shelter Plus Care renewals previously funded 
     from the Shelter Plus Care Renewal account and transferred to 
     this account shall be available, if recaptured, for continuum 
     of care renewals in fiscal year 2016: Provided further, That 
     the Department shall notify grantees of their formula 
     allocation from amounts allocated (which may represent 
     initial or final amounts allocated) for the emergency 
     solutions grant program within 60 days of enactment of this 
     Act.

                            Housing Programs

                    project-based rental assistance

       For activities and assistance for the provision of project-
     based subsidy contracts under the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) (``the Act''), not otherwise 
     provided for, $10,254,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended, shall be available on October 1, 2015 (in addition 
     to the $400,000,000 previously appropriated under this 
     heading that became available October 1, 2015), and 
     $400,000,000, to remain available until expended, shall be 
     available on October 1, 2016: Provided, That the amounts made 
     available under this heading shall be available for expiring 
     or terminating section 8 project-based subsidy contracts 
     (including section 8 moderate rehabilitation contracts), for 
     amendments to section 8 project-based subsidy contracts 
     (including section 8 moderate rehabilitation contracts), for 
     contracts entered into pursuant to section 441 of the 
     McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11401), for 
     renewal of section 8 contracts for units in projects that are 
     subject to approved plans of action under the Emergency Low 
     Income Housing Preservation Act of 1987 or the Low-Income 
     Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990, 
     and for administrative and other expenses associated with 
     project-based activities and assistance funded under this 
     paragraph: Provided further, That of the total amounts 
     provided under this heading, not to exceed $150,000,000 shall 
     be available for performance-based contract administrators 
     for section 8 project-based assistance, for carrying out 42 
     U.S.C. 1437(f): Provided further, That the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development may also use such amounts in 
     the previous proviso for performance-based contract 
     administrators for the administration of: interest reduction 
     payments pursuant to section 236(a) of the National Housing

[[Page 8609]]

     Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1(a)); rent supplement payments pursuant 
     to section 101 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 
     1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s); section 236(f)(2) rental assistance 
     payments (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1(f)(2)); project rental assistance 
     contracts for the elderly under section 202(c)(2) of the 
     Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q); project rental 
     assistance contracts for supportive housing for persons with 
     disabilities under section 811(d)(2) of the Cranston-Gonzalez 
     National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013(d)(2)); 
     project assistance contracts pursuant to section 202(h) of 
     the Housing Act of 1959 (Public Law 86-372; 73 Stat. 667); 
     and loans under section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959 
     (Public Law 86-372; 73 Stat. 667): Provided further, That 
     amounts recaptured under this heading, the heading ``Annual 
     Contributions for Assisted Housing'', or the heading 
     ``Housing Certificate Fund'', may be used for renewals of or 
     amendments to section 8 project-based contracts or for 
     performance-based contract administrators, notwithstanding 
     the purposes for which such amounts were appropriated: 
     Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, upon the request of the Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development, project funds that are held in residual 
     receipts accounts for any project subject to a section 8 
     project-based Housing Assistance Payments contract that 
     authorizes HUD or a Housing Finance Agency to require that 
     surplus project funds be deposited in an interest-bearing 
     residual receipts account and that are in excess of an amount 
     to be determined by the Secretary, shall be remitted to the 
     Department and deposited in this account, to be available 
     until expended: Provided further, That amounts deposited 
     pursuant to the previous proviso shall be available in 
     addition to the amount otherwise provided by this heading for 
     uses authorized under this heading.

                        housing for the elderly

       For amendments to capital advance contracts for housing for 
     the elderly, as authorized by section 202 of the Housing Act 
     of 1959, as amended, and for project rental assistance for 
     the elderly under section 202(c)(2) of such Act, including 
     amendments to contracts for such assistance and renewal of 
     expiring contracts for such assistance for up to a 1-year 
     term, and for senior preservation rental assistance 
     contracts, including renewals, as authorized by section 
     811(e) of the American Housing and Economic Opportunity Act 
     of 2000, as amended, and for supportive services associated 
     with the housing, $414,000,000 to remain available until 
     September 30, 2019: Provided, That of the amount provided 
     under this heading, up to $77,000,000 shall be for service 
     coordinators and the continuation of existing congregate 
     service grants for residents of assisted housing projects: 
     Provided further, That amounts under this heading shall be 
     available for Real Estate Assessment Center inspections and 
     inspection-related activities associated with section 202 
     projects: Provided further, That the Secretary may waive the 
     provisions of section 202 governing the terms and conditions 
     of project rental assistance, except that the initial 
     contract term for such assistance shall not exceed 5 years in 
     duration: Provided further, That upon request of the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, project funds 
     that are held in residual receipts accounts for any project 
     subject to a section 202 project rental assistance contract, 
     and that upon termination of such contract are in excess of 
     an amount to be determined by the Secretary, shall be 
     remitted to the Department and deposited in this account, to 
     be available until September 30, 2019, for purposes under 
     this heading, and shall be in addition to the amounts 
     otherwise provided under this heading for such purposes: 
     Provided further, That in addition, of the prior year 
     unobligated balances of funds, including recaptures and 
     carryover, made available under this heading, $47,000,000 
     shall be used for an additional amount for the purposes 
     provided under this heading, notwithstanding any purpose for 
     which originally appropriated.


                    amendment offered by mr. grayson

  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 105, line 9, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $2,500,000)''.
       Page 113, line 6, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $2,500,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Florida and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, this amendment seeks to increase the 
housing for the elderly account in this bill by $2.5 million and 
decrease the policy development and research account within the 
Department of Housing and Urban Development by an equal amount.
  I hope my good friend from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart) across the aisle 
agrees with me on this one. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in 
support of this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Grayson).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                 housing for persons with disabilities

       For amendments to capital advance contracts for supportive 
     housing for persons with disabilities, as authorized by 
     section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
     Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013), for project rental assistance 
     for supportive housing for persons with disabilities under 
     section 811(d)(2) of such Act and for project assistance 
     contracts pursuant to section 202(h) of the Housing Act of 
     1959 (Public Law 86-372; 73 Stat. 667), including amendments 
     to contracts for such assistance and renewal of expiring 
     contracts for such assistance for up to a 1-year term, for 
     project rental assistance to State housing finance agencies 
     and other appropriate entities as authorized under section 
     811(b)(3) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Housing Act, and 
     for supportive services associated with the housing for 
     persons with disabilities as authorized by section 811(b)(1) 
     of such Act, $152,000,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2019: Provided, That amounts made available 
     under this heading shall be available for Real Estate 
     Assessment Center inspections and inspection-related 
     activities associated with section 811 projects: Provided 
     further, That, in this fiscal year, upon the request of the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, project funds 
     that are held in residual receipts accounts for any project 
     subject to a section 811 project rental assistance contract 
     and that upon termination of such contract are in excess of 
     an amount to be determined by the Secretary shall be remitted 
     to the Department and deposited in this account, to be 
     available until September 30, 2019: Provided further, That 
     amounts deposited in this account pursuant to the previous 
     proviso shall be available in addition to the amounts 
     otherwise provided by this heading for the purposes 
     authorized under this heading: Provided further, That 
     unobligated balances, including recaptures and carryover, 
     remaining from funds transferred to or appropriated under 
     this heading may be used for the current purposes authorized 
     under this heading notwithstanding the purposes for which 
     such funds originally were appropriated.

                     Housing Counseling Assistance

       For contracts, grants, and other assistance excluding 
     loans, as authorized under section 106 of the Housing and 
     Urban Development Act of 1968, as amended, $47,000,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2017, including up to 
     $4,500,000 for administrative contract services: Provided, 
     That grants made available from amounts provided under this 
     heading shall be awarded within 180 days of enactment of this 
     Act: Provided further, That funds shall be used for providing 
     counseling and advice to tenants and homeowners, both current 
     and prospective, with respect to property maintenance, 
     financial management/literacy, and such other matters as may 
     be appropriate to assist them in improving their housing 
     conditions, meeting their financial needs, and fulfilling the 
     responsibilities of tenancy or homeownership; for program 
     administration; and for housing counselor training: Provided 
     further, That for purposes of providing such grants from 
     amounts provided under this heading, the Secretary may enter 
     into multiyear agreements as is appropriate, subject to the 
     availability of annual appropriations.

                       rental housing assistance

       For amendments to contracts under section 101 of the 
     Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s) 
     and section 236(f)(2) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 
     1715z-1) in State-aided, noninsured rental housing projects, 
     $30,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That such amount, together with unobligated balances from 
     recaptured amounts appropriated prior to fiscal year 2006 
     from terminated contracts under such sections of law, and any 
     unobligated balances, including recaptures and carryover, 
     remaining from funds appropriated under this heading after 
     fiscal year 2005, shall also be available for extensions of 
     up to one year for expiring contracts under such sections of 
     law.

            payment to manufactured housing fees trust fund

       For necessary expenses as authorized by the National 
     Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 
     1974 (42 U.S.C. 5401 et seq.), up to $11,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended, of which $11,000,000 is to be 
     derived from the Manufactured Housing Fees Trust Fund: 
     Provided, That not to exceed the total amount appropriated 
     under this heading shall be available from the general fund 
     of the Treasury to the extent necessary to incur obligations 
     and make expenditures pending the receipt of collections to 
     the Fund pursuant to section 620 of such Act: Provided 
     further, That the amount made available under this heading 
     from the general fund shall be reduced as

[[Page 8610]]

     such collections are received during fiscal year 2016 so as 
     to result in a final fiscal year 2016 appropriation from the 
     general fund estimated at zero, and fees pursuant to such 
     section 620 shall be modified as necessary to ensure such a 
     final fiscal year 2016 appropriation: Provided further, That 
     for the dispute resolution and installation programs, the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may assess and 
     collect fees from any program participant: Provided further, 
     That such collections shall be deposited into the Fund, and 
     the Secretary, as provided herein, may use such collections, 
     as well as fees collected under section 620, for necessary 
     expenses of such Act: Provided further, That, notwithstanding 
     the requirements of section 620 of such Act, the Secretary 
     may carry out responsibilities of the Secretary under such 
     Act through the use of approved service providers that are 
     paid directly by the recipients of their services.

                     Federal Housing Administration

               mutual mortgage insurance program account

       New commitments to guarantee single family loans insured 
     under the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund shall not exceed 
     $400,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2017: Provided, That during fiscal year 2016, obligations to 
     make direct loans to carry out the purposes of section 204(g) 
     of the National Housing Act, as amended, shall not exceed 
     $5,000,000: Provided further, That the foregoing amount in 
     the previous proviso shall be for loans to nonprofit and 
     governmental entities in connection with sales of single 
     family real properties owned by the Secretary and formerly 
     insured under the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund: Provided 
     Further, That for administrative contract expenses of the 
     Federal Housing Administration, $130,000,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2017.

                general and special risk program account

       New commitments to guarantee loans insured under the 
     General and Special Risk Insurance Funds, as authorized by 
     sections 238 and 519 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 
     1715z-3 and 1735c), shall not exceed $30,000,000,000 in total 
     loan principal, any part of which is to be guaranteed, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2017: Provided, That 
     during fiscal year 2016, gross obligations for the principal 
     amount of direct loans, as authorized by sections 204(g), 
     207(l), 238, and 519(a) of the National Housing Act, shall 
     not exceed $5,000,000, which shall be for loans to nonprofit 
     and governmental entities in connection with the sale of 
     single family real properties owned by the Secretary and 
     formerly insured under such Act.

                Government National Mortgage Association

guarantees of mortgage-backed securities loan guarantee program account

       New commitments to issue guarantees to carry out the 
     purposes of section 306 of the National Housing Act, as 
     amended (12 U.S.C. 1721(g)), shall not exceed 
     $500,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2017: Provided, That $23,000,000 shall be available for 
     necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of Government 
     National Mortgage Association: Provided further, That 
     receipts from Commitment and Multiclass fees collected 
     pursuant to title III of the National Housing Act, as 
     amended, shall be credited as offsetting collections to this 
     account.

                    Policy Development and Research

                        research and technology

       For contracts, grants, and necessary expenses of programs 
     of research and studies relating to housing and urban 
     problems, not otherwise provided for, as authorized by title 
     V of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970 (12 U.S.C. 
     1701z-1 et seq.), including carrying out the functions of the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under section 
     1(a)(1)(i) of Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1968, $52,500,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2017: Provided, That 
     with respect to amounts made available under this heading, 
     notwithstanding section 204 of this title, the Secretary may 
     enter into cooperative agreements funded with philanthropic 
     entities, other Federal agencies, or State or local 
     governments and their agencies for research projects: 
     Provided further, That with respect to the previous proviso, 
     such partners to the cooperative agreements must contribute 
     at least a 50 percent match toward the cost of the project: 
     Provided further, That for non-competitive agreements entered 
     into in accordance with the previous two provisos, the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall comply with 
     section 2(b) of the Federal Funding Accountability and 
     Transparency Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-282, 31 U.S.C. note) 
     in lieu of compliance with section 102(a)(4)(C) with respect 
     to documentation of award decisions: Provided further, That 
     prior to obligation of technical assistance funding, the 
     Secretary shall submit a plan, for approval, to the House and 
     Senate Committees on Appropriations on how it will allocate 
     funding for this activity.

                   Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity

                        fair housing activities

       For contracts, grants, and other assistance, not otherwise 
     provided for, as authorized by title VIII of the Civil Rights 
     Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 
     1988, and section 561 of the Housing and Community 
     Development Act of 1987, as amended, $65,300,000, to remain 
     available until September 30, 2017: Provided, That 
     notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, the Secretary may assess and 
     collect fees to cover the costs of the Fair Housing Training 
     Academy, and may use such funds to provide such training: 
     Provided further, That no funds made available under this 
     heading shall be used to lobby the executive or legislative 
     branches of the Federal Government in connection with a 
     specific contract, grant, or loan: Provided further, That of 
     the funds made available under this heading, $300,000 shall 
     be available to the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development for the creation and promotion of translated 
     materials and other programs that support the assistance of 
     persons with limited English proficiency in utilizing the 
     services provided by the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development.


                    amendment offered by mr. stivers

  Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 114, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $28,375,000) (increased by $28,375,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Ohio and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Diaz-Balart as 
well as Ranking Member Price for their hard work on this bill and for 
preparing a bill that is the best we can do.
  I do rise in support of an amendment that seeks to curb lawsuit abuse 
and help fund our local governments. This creates congressional intent 
to redirect funds away from the private enforcement account to the 
administrative enforcement account.
  My amendment would decrease by $28.375 million the Private 
Enforcement Initiative and redirect those resources to the 
Administrative Enforcement Initiative in the Fair Housing Initiatives 
Program.
  I believe that the most efficient and effective way to protect Fair 
Housing is through the Administrative Enforcement Initiative of the 
Fair Housing Initiatives Program, which helps State and local 
governments who administer laws that include rights and remedies every 
day. They act to help Fair Housing. They know their communities, and 
they can enforce in their communities best.
  My amendment would help protect more consumers. In fact, I believe 
administrative enforcement is less expensive to taxpayers. It is more 
certain. It has faster resolution. It has less conflicts of interest 
than some of these nonprofit proxy agencies that use the Private 
Enforcement Initiative.
  In fact, there is a 1997 GAO study, Mr. Chairman, that revealed that 
more than half of the Private Enforcement Initiative dollars were 
concentrated in just 6 of the 27 awardees. I have asked the GAO to 
update that study and to look at private enforcement as far as its 
effectiveness because, as I said, it is slower and more expensive than 
administrative enforcement.
  Therefore, I would ask my colleagues to support my congressional 
intent amendment to redirect these resources to our State and local 
governments who can more effectively administer justice. I ask my 
colleagues to support this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in 
opposition to this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to 
this amendment. We have only recently received it, and I haven't fully 
analyzed it; but, on the face of it, it does appear to be shifting the 
support among private enforcement and public enforcement, the kind of 
private enforcement that involves community-based groups, that involves 
often more flexible ways of resolving conflicts and issues.
  I simply think it is ill advised here tonight to undertake that kind 
of internal shifting of funds and would suggest that we reject this, 
understanding that we can return to it and examine this more fully to 
see exactly what is

[[Page 8611]]

implied by this kind of internal shifting of funds within Fair Housing 
accounts.
  I suggest that we reject this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I would simply say to my colleague from 
North Carolina that administrative enforcement is more effective, it is 
more efficient. That is why we should redirect these resources 
internally inside Fair Housing. It doesn't change Fair Housing dollars 
one penny.
  It redirects the resources to more efficient and effective means of 
enforcement, from folks who enforce these laws every day and can do it 
faster and more effectively, to make sure the people that might be 
discriminated against get their redress sooner.
  I am excited about this amendment. I think it will lead to much more 
effective enforcement. It does so without the conflict of interest of 
these private organizations that can have conflicts of interest, and 
that has been another issue that I have asked the GAO to look at in my 
letter to them today.
  I apologize that the minority is just seeing this for the first time. 
I did talk about it at the Rules Committee the other day. It is 
something I have been working on just for a couple of days since that 
Rules Committee meeting when it came up. I apologized for not giving 
the gentleman from North Carolina more notice.
  I would urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Stivers).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Grayson

  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 114, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $150,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Florida and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chair, this amendment seeks to raise the cap on 
funding for the Limited English Proficiency Initiative under the Fair 
Housing and Equal Opportunity section of the bill by 50 percent.
  I want to highlight that we are not taking away anything from other 
programs. We are simply lifting the cap on this particular initiative. 
This amendment has passed by voice vote for the last 2 years, and it is 
my hope that it will do so again.
  There are more than 40 million Americans who do not speak English as 
their first language. This tiny, but vital program demonstrates to the 
American people that we have equal protection under the law, regardless 
of what language we speak.
  I hope to once again have the support of my friend from Florida and 
from the House as a whole.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Grayson).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

            Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes

                         lead hazard reduction

       For the Lead Hazard Reduction Program, as authorized by 
     section 1011 of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard 
     Reduction Act of 1992, $75,000,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2017: Provided, That up to $15,000,000 of that 
     amount shall be for the Healthy Homes Initiative, pursuant to 
     sections 501 and 502 of the Housing and Urban Development Act 
     of 1970 that shall include research, studies, testing, and 
     demonstration efforts, including education and outreach 
     concerning lead-based paint poisoning and other housing-
     related diseases and hazards: Provided further, That for 
     purposes of environmental review, pursuant to the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and 
     other provisions of the law that further the purposes of such 
     Act, a grant under the Healthy Homes Initiative, or the Lead 
     Technical Studies program under this heading or under prior 
     appropriations Acts for such purposes under this heading, 
     shall be considered to be funds for a special project for 
     purposes of section 305(c) of the Multifamily Housing 
     Property Disposition Reform Act of 1994: Provided further, 
     That amounts made available under this heading in this or 
     prior appropriations Acts, and that still remain available, 
     may be used for any purpose under this heading 
     notwithstanding the purpose for which such amounts were 
     appropriated if a program competition is undersubscribed and 
     there are other program competitions under this heading that 
     are oversubscribed.

                      information technology fund

       For the development of, modifications to, and 
     infrastructure for Department-wide and program-specific 
     information technology systems, for the continuing operation 
     and maintenance of both Department-wide and program-specific 
     information systems, and for program-related maintenance 
     activities, $100,000,000: Provided, That any amounts 
     transferred to this Fund under this Act shall remain 
     available until expended: Provided further, That any amounts 
     transferred to this Fund from amounts appropriated by 
     previously enacted appropriations Acts may be used for the 
     purposes specified under this Fund, in addition to any other 
     information technology purposes for which such amounts were 
     appropriated.

                      Office of Inspector General

       For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of 
     Inspector General in carrying out the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, as amended, $126,000,000: Provided, That the 
     Inspector General shall have independent authority over all 
     personnel issues within this office.

    General Provisions--Department of Housing and Urban Development

                        (including rescissions)

       Sec. 201.  Eighty five percent of the amounts of budget 
     authority, or in lieu thereof 85 percent of the cash amounts 
     associated with such budget authority, that are recaptured 
     from projects described in section 1012(a) of the Stewart B. 
     McKinney Homeless Assistance Amendments Act of 1988 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437 note) shall be rescinded or in the case of cash, 
     shall be remitted to the Treasury. Notwithstanding the 
     previous sentence, the Secretary may award up to 15 percent 
     of the budget authority or cash recaptured and not rescinded 
     or remitted to the Treasury to provide project owners with 
     incentives to refinance their project at a lower interest 
     rate. Any amounts of budget authority or cash recaptured and 
     not rescinded, returned to the Treasury, or otherwise awarded 
     by September 30, 2016 shall be rescinded or in the case of 
     cash, shall be remitted to the Treasury.
       Sec. 202.  None of the amounts made available under this 
     Act may be used during fiscal year 2016 to investigate or 
     prosecute under the Fair Housing Act any otherwise lawful 
     activity engaged in by one or more persons, including the 
     filing or maintaining of a nonfrivolous legal action, that is 
     engaged in solely for the purpose of achieving or preventing 
     action by a Government official or entity, or a court of 
     competent jurisdiction.
       Sec. 203.  Sections 203 and 209 of division C of Public Law 
     112-55 (125 Stat. 693-694) shall apply during fiscal year 
     2016 as if such sections were included in this title, except 
     that during such fiscal year such sections shall be applied 
     by substituting ``fiscal year 2016'' for ``fiscal year 2011'' 
     and for ``fiscal year 2012'' each place such terms appear, 
     and shall be amended to reflect revised delineations of 
     statistical areas established by the Office of Management and 
     Budget pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3504(e)(3), 31 U.S.C. 1104(d), 
     and Executive Order No. 10253.
       Sec. 204.  Except as explicitly provided in law, any grant, 
     cooperative agreement or other assistance made pursuant to 
     title II of this Act shall be made on a competitive basis and 
     in accordance with section 102 of the Department of Housing 
     and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 (42 U.S.C. 3545).
       Sec. 205.  Funds of the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development subject to the Government Corporation Control Act 
     or section 402 of the Housing Act of 1950 shall be available, 
     without regard to the limitations on administrative expenses, 
     for legal services on a contract or fee basis, and for 
     utilizing and making payment for the services and facilities 
     of the Federal National Mortgage Association, Government 
     National Mortgage Association, Federal Home Loan Mortgage 
     Corporation, Federal Financing Bank, Federal Reserve banks or 
     any member thereof, Federal Home Loan banks, and any insured 
     bank within the meaning of the Federal Deposit Insurance 
     Corporation Act, as amended (12 U.S.C. 1811-11).
       Sec. 206.  Unless otherwise provided for in this Act or 
     through a reprogramming of funds, no part of any 
     appropriation for the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development shall be available for any program, project or 
     activity in excess of amounts set forth in the budget 
     estimates submitted to Congress.
       Sec. 207.  Corporations and agencies of the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development which are subject to the 
     Government Corporation Control Act are hereby authorized to 
     make such expenditures, within the

[[Page 8612]]

     limits of funds and borrowing authority available to each 
     such corporation or agency and in accordance with law, and to 
     make such contracts and commitments without regard to fiscal 
     year limitations as provided by section 104 of such Act as 
     may be necessary in carrying out the programs set forth in 
     the budget for 2016 for such corporation or agency except as 
     hereinafter provided: Provided, That collections of these 
     corporations and agencies may be used for new loan or 
     mortgage purchase commitments only to the extent expressly 
     provided for in this Act (unless such loans are in support of 
     other forms of assistance provided for in this or prior 
     appropriations Acts), except that this proviso shall not 
     apply to the mortgage insurance or guaranty operations of 
     these corporations, or where loans or mortgage purchases are 
     necessary to protect the financial interest of the United 
     States Government.
       Sec. 208.  The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     shall provide quarterly reports to the House and Senate 
     Committees on Appropriations regarding all uncommitted, 
     unobligated, recaptured and excess funds in each program and 
     activity within the jurisdiction of the Department and shall 
     submit additional, updated budget information to these 
     Committees upon request.
       Sec. 209.  The President's formal budget request for fiscal 
     year 2017, as well as the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development's congressional budget justifications to be 
     submitted to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate, shall use the identical 
     account and sub-account structure provided under this Act.
       Sec. 210.  A public housing agency or such other entity 
     that administers Federal housing assistance for the Housing 
     Authority of the county of Los Angeles, California, and the 
     States of Alaska, Iowa, and Mississippi shall not be required 
     to include a resident of public housing or a recipient of 
     assistance provided under section 8 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 on the board of directors or a similar 
     governing board of such agency or entity as required under 
     section (2)(b) of such Act. Each public housing agency or 
     other entity that administers Federal housing assistance 
     under section 8 for the Housing Authority of the county of 
     Los Angeles, California and the States of Alaska, Iowa and 
     Mississippi that chooses not to include a resident of public 
     housing or a recipient of section 8 assistance on the board 
     of directors or a similar governing board shall establish an 
     advisory board of not less than six residents of public 
     housing or recipients of section 8 assistance to provide 
     advice and comment to the public housing agency or other 
     administering entity on issues related to public housing and 
     section 8. Such advisory board shall meet not less than 
     quarterly.
       Sec. 211.  No funds provided under this title may be used 
     for an audit of the Government National Mortgage Association 
     that makes applicable requirements under the Federal Credit 
     Reform Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 661 et seq.).
       Sec. 212. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     subject to the conditions listed under this section, for 
     fiscal years 2016 and 2017, the Secretary of Housing and 
     Urban Development may authorize the transfer of some or all 
     project-based assistance, debt held or insured by the 
     Secretary and statutorily required low-income and very low-
     income use restrictions if any, associated with one or more 
     multifamily housing project or projects to another 
     multifamily housing project or projects.
       (b) Transfers of project-based assistance under this 
     section may be done in phases to accommodate the financing 
     and other requirements related to rehabilitating or 
     constructing the project or projects to which the assistance 
     is transferred, to ensure that such project or projects meet 
     the standards under subsection (c).
       (c) The transfer authorized in subsection (a) is subject to 
     the following conditions:
       (1) Number and bedroom size of units.--
       (A) For occupied units in the transferring project: the 
     number of low-income and very low-income units and the 
     configuration (i.e., bedroom size) provided by the 
     transferring project shall be no less than when transferred 
     to the receiving project or projects and the net dollar 
     amount of Federal assistance provided to the transferring 
     project shall remain the same in the receiving project or 
     projects.
       (B) For unoccupied units in the transferring project: the 
     Secretary may authorize a reduction in the number of dwelling 
     units in the receiving project or projects to allow for a 
     reconfiguration of bedroom sizes to meet current market 
     demands, as determined by the Secretary and provided there is 
     no increase in the project-based assistance budget authority.
       (2) The transferring project shall, as determined by the 
     Secretary, be either physically obsolete or economically 
     nonviable.
       (3) The receiving project or projects shall meet or exceed 
     applicable physical standards established by the Secretary.
       (4) The owner or mortgagor of the transferring project 
     shall notify and consult with the tenants residing in the 
     transferring project and provide a certification of approval 
     by all appropriate local governmental officials.
       (5) The tenants of the transferring project who remain 
     eligible for assistance to be provided by the receiving 
     project or projects shall not be required to vacate their 
     units in the transferring project or projects until new units 
     in the receiving project are available for occupancy.
       (6) The Secretary determines that this transfer is in the 
     best interest of the tenants.
       (7) If either the transferring project or the receiving 
     project or projects meets the condition specified in 
     subsection (d)(2)(A), any lien on the receiving project 
     resulting from additional financing obtained by the owner 
     shall be subordinate to any FHA-insured mortgage lien 
     transferred to, or placed on, such project by the Secretary, 
     except that the Secretary may waive this requirement upon 
     determination that such a waiver is necessary to facilitate 
     the financing of acquisition, construction, and/or 
     rehabilitation of the receiving project or projects.
       (8) If the transferring project meets the requirements of 
     subsection (d)(2), the owner or mortgagor of the receiving 
     project or projects shall execute and record either a 
     continuation of the existing use agreement or a new use 
     agreement for the project where, in either case, any use 
     restrictions in such agreement are of no lesser duration than 
     the existing use restrictions.
       (9) The transfer does not increase the cost (as defined in 
     section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as 
     amended) of any FHA-insured mortgage, except to the extent 
     that appropriations are provided in advance for the amount of 
     any such increased cost.
       (d) For purposes of this section--
       (1) the terms ``low-income'' and ``very low-income'' shall 
     have the meanings provided by the statute and/or regulations 
     governing the program under which the project is insured or 
     assisted;
       (2) the term ``multifamily housing project'' means housing 
     that meets one of the following conditions--
       (A) housing that is subject to a mortgage insured under the 
     National Housing Act;
       (B) housing that has project-based assistance attached to 
     the structure including projects undergoing mark to market 
     debt restructuring under the Multifamily Assisted Housing 
     Reform and Affordability Housing Act;
       (C) housing that is assisted under section 202 of the 
     Housing Act of 1959, as amended by section 801 of the 
     Cranston-Gonzales National Affordable Housing Act;
       (D) housing that is assisted under section 202 of the 
     Housing Act of 1959, as such section existed before the 
     enactment of the Cranston-Gonzales National Affordable 
     Housing Act;
       (E) housing that is assisted under section 811 of the 
     Cranston-Gonzales National Affordable Housing Act; or
       (F) housing or vacant land that is subject to a use 
     agreement;
       (3) the term ``project-based assistance'' means--
       (A) assistance provided under section 8(b) of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937;
       (B) assistance for housing constructed or substantially 
     rehabilitated pursuant to assistance provided under section 
     8(b)(2) of such Act (as such section existed immediately 
     before October 1, 1983);
       (C) rent supplement payments under section 101 of the 
     Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965;
       (D) interest reduction payments under section 236 and/or 
     additional assistance payments under section 236(f)(2) of the 
     National Housing Act;
       (E) assistance payments made under section 202(c)(2) of the 
     Housing Act of 1959; and
       (F) assistance payments made under section 811(d)(2) of the 
     Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act;
       (4) the term ``receiving project or projects'' means the 
     multifamily housing project or projects to which some or all 
     of the project-based assistance, debt, and statutorily 
     required low-income and very low-income use restrictions are 
     to be transferred;
       (5) the term ``transferring project'' means the multifamily 
     housing project which is transferring some or all of the 
     project-based assistance, debt, and the statutorily required 
     low-income and very low-income use restrictions to the 
     receiving project or projects; and
       (6) the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development.
       (e) Public Notice and Research Report.--
       (1) The Secretary shall publish by notice in the Federal 
     Register the terms and conditions, including criteria for HUD 
     approval, of transfers pursuant to this section no later than 
     30 days before the effective date of such notice.
       (2) The Secretary shall conduct an evaluation of the 
     transfer authority under this section, including the effect 
     of such transfers on the operational efficiency, contract 
     rents, physical and financial conditions, and long-term 
     preservation of the affected properties.
       Sec. 213. (a) No assistance shall be provided under section 
     8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f) 
     to any individual who--
       (1) is enrolled as a student at an institution of higher 
     education (as defined under section 102 of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002));
       (2) is under 24 years of age;
       (3) is not a veteran;

[[Page 8613]]

       (4) is unmarried;
       (5) does not have a dependent child;
       (6) is not a person with disabilities, as such term is 
     defined in section 3(b)(3)(E) of the United States Housing 
     Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(3)(E)) and was not receiving 
     assistance under such section 8 as of November 30, 2005; and
       (7) is not otherwise individually eligible, or has parents 
     who, individually or jointly, are not eligible, to receive 
     assistance under section 8 of the United States Housing Act 
     of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f).
       (b) For purposes of determining the eligibility of a person 
     to receive assistance under section 8 of the United States 
     Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f), any financial 
     assistance (in excess of amounts received for tuition and any 
     other required fees and charges) that an individual receives 
     under the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 et 
     seq.), from private sources, or an institution of higher 
     education (as defined under the Higher Education Act of 1965 
     (20 U.S.C. 1002)), shall be considered income to that 
     individual, except for a person over the age of 23 with 
     dependent children.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the 
remainder of the bill through page 156, line 8 be considered read, 
printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  The text of the remainder of the bill through page 156, line 8, is as 
follows:

       Sec. 214.  The funds made available for Native Alaskans 
     under the heading ``Native American Housing Block Grants'' in 
     title II of this Act shall be allocated to the same Native 
     Alaskan housing block grant recipients that received funds in 
     fiscal year 2005.
       Sec. 215.  Notwithstanding the limitation in the first 
     sentence of section 255(g) of the National Housing Act (12 
     U.S.C. 1715z-20(g)), the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development may, until September 30, 2016, insure and enter 
     into commitments to insure mortgages under such section 255.
       Sec. 216.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in 
     fiscal year 2016, in managing and disposing of any 
     multifamily property that is owned or has a mortgage held by 
     the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and during 
     the process of foreclosure on any property with a contract 
     for rental assistance payments under section 8 of the United 
     States Housing Act of 1937 or other Federal programs, the 
     Secretary shall maintain any rental assistance payments under 
     section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 and other 
     programs that are attached to any dwelling units in the 
     property. To the extent the Secretary determines, in 
     consultation with the tenants and the local government, that 
     such a multifamily property owned or held by the Secretary is 
     not feasible for continued rental assistance payments under 
     such section 8 or other programs, based on consideration of 
     (1) the costs of rehabilitating and operating the property 
     and all available Federal, State, and local resources, 
     including rent adjustments under section 524 of the 
     Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 
     1997 (``MAHRAA'') and (2) environmental conditions that 
     cannot be remedied in a cost-effective fashion, the Secretary 
     may, in consultation with the tenants of that property, 
     contract for project-based rental assistance payments with an 
     owner or owners of other existing housing properties, or 
     provide other rental assistance. The Secretary shall also 
     take appropriate steps to ensure that project-based contracts 
     remain in effect prior to foreclosure, subject to the 
     exercise of contractual abatement remedies to assist 
     relocation of tenants for imminent major threats to health 
     and safety after written notice to and informed consent of 
     the affected tenants and use of other available remedies, 
     such as partial abatements or receivership. After disposition 
     of any multifamily property described under this section, the 
     contract and allowable rent levels on such properties shall 
     be subject to the requirements under section 524 of MAHRAA.
       Sec. 217.  The commitment authority funded by fees as 
     provided under the heading ``Community Development Loan 
     Guarantees Program Account'' may be used to guarantee, or 
     make commitments to guarantee, notes or other obligations 
     issued by any State on behalf of non-entitlement communities 
     in the State in accordance with the requirements of section 
     108 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974: 
     Provided, That any State receiving such a guarantee or 
     commitment shall distribute all funds subject to such 
     guarantee to the units of general local government in non-
     entitlement areas that received the commitment.
       Sec. 218.  Public housing agencies that own and operate 400 
     or fewer public housing units may elect to be exempt from any 
     asset management requirement imposed by the Secretary of 
     Housing and Urban Development in connection with the 
     operating fund rule: Provided, That an agency seeking a 
     discontinuance of a reduction of subsidy under the operating 
     fund formula shall not be exempt from asset management 
     requirements.
       Sec. 219.  With respect to the use of amounts provided in 
     this Act and in future Acts for the operation, capital 
     improvement and management of public housing as authorized by 
     sections 9(d) and 9(e) of the United States Housing Act of 
     1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437g(d) and (e)), the Secretary shall not 
     impose any requirement or guideline relating to asset 
     management that restricts or limits in any way the use of 
     capital funds for central office costs pursuant to section 
     9(g)(1) or 9(g)(2) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 
     (42 U.S.C. 1437g(g)(1), (2)): Provided, That a public housing 
     agency may not use capital funds authorized under section 
     9(d) for activities that are eligible under section 9(e) for 
     assistance with amounts from the operating fund in excess of 
     the amounts permitted under section 9(g)(1) or 9(g)(2).
       Sec. 220.  No official or employee of the Department of 
     Housing and Urban Development shall be designated as an 
     allotment holder unless the Office of the Chief Financial 
     Officer has determined that such allotment holder has 
     implemented an adequate system of funds control and has 
     received training in funds control procedures and directives. 
     The Chief Financial Officer shall ensure that there is a 
     trained allotment holder for each HUD sub-office under the 
     accounts ``Executive Offices'' and ``Administrative Support 
     Offices'', as well as each account receiving appropriations 
     for ``Program Office Salaries and Expenses'', ``Government 
     National Mortgage Association--Guarantees of Mortgage-Backed 
     Securities Loan Guarantee Program Account'', and ``Office of 
     Inspector General'' within the Department of Housing and 
     Urban Development.
       Sec. 221.  The Secretary of the Department of Housing and 
     Urban Development shall, for fiscal year 2016, notify the 
     public through the Federal Register and other means, as 
     determined appropriate, of the issuance of a notice of the 
     availability of assistance or notice of funding availability 
     (NOFA) for any program or discretionary fund administered by 
     the Secretary that is to be competitively awarded. 
     Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for fiscal year 
     2016, the Secretary may make the NOFA available only on the 
     Internet at the appropriate Government web site or through 
     other electronic media, as determined by the Secretary.
       Sec. 222.  Payment of attorney fees in program-related 
     litigation must be paid from the individual program office 
     and Office of General Counsel personnel funding. The annual 
     budget submissions for program offices and Office of General 
     Counsel personnel funding must include program-related 
     litigation costs for attorney fees as a separate line item 
     request.
       Sec. 223.  The Disaster Housing Assistance Programs, 
     administered by the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development, shall be considered a ``program of the 
     Department of Housing and Urban Development'' under section 
     904 of the McKinney Act for the purpose of income 
     verifications and matching.
       Sec. 224. (a) The Secretary of Housing and Urban 
     Development shall take the required actions under subsection 
     (b) when a multifamily housing project with a section 8 
     contract or contract for similar project-based assistance:
       (1) receives a Real Estate Assessment Center (REAC) score 
     of 30 or less; or
       (2) receives a REAC score between 31 and 59 and:
       (A) fails to certify in writing to HUD within 60 days that 
     all deficiencies have been corrected; or
       (B) receives consecutive scores of less than 60 on REAC 
     inspections.

     Such requirements shall apply to insured and noninsured 
     projects with assistance attached to the units under section 
     8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f), 
     but do not apply to such units assisted under section 
     8(o)(13) (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(13)) or to public housing units 
     assisted with capital or operating funds under section 9 of 
     the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437g).
       (b) The Secretary shall take the following required actions 
     as authorized under subsection (a)--
       (1) The Secretary shall notify the owner and provide an 
     opportunity for response within 30 days. If the violations 
     remain, the Secretary shall develop a Compliance, Disposition 
     and Enforcement Plan within 60 days, with a specified 
     timetable for correcting all deficiencies. The Secretary 
     shall provide notice of the Plan to the owner, tenants, the 
     local government, any mortgagees, and any contract 
     administrator.
       (2) At the end of the term of the Compliance, Disposition 
     and Enforcement Plan, if the owner fails to fully comply with 
     such plan, the Secretary may require immediate replacement of 
     project management with a management agent approved by the 
     Secretary, and shall take one or more of the following 
     actions, and provide additional notice of those actions to 
     the owner and the parties specified above:
       (A) impose civil money penalties;
       (B) abate the section 8 contract, including partial 
     abatement, as determined by the Secretary, until all 
     deficiencies have been corrected;
       (C) pursue transfer of the project to an owner, approved by 
     the Secretary under established procedures, which will be 
     obligated

[[Page 8614]]

     to promptly make all required repairs and to accept renewal 
     of the assistance contract as long as such renewal is 
     offered; or
       (D) seek judicial appointment of a receiver to manage the 
     property and cure all project deficiencies or seek a judicial 
     order of specific performance requiring the owner to cure all 
     project deficiencies.
       (c) The Secretary shall also take appropriate steps to 
     ensure that project-based contracts remain in effect, subject 
     to the exercise of contractual abatement remedies to assist 
     relocation of tenants for imminent major threats to health 
     and safety after written notice to and informed consent of 
     the affected tenants and use of other remedies set forth 
     above. To the extent the Secretary determines, in 
     consultation with the tenants and the local government, that 
     the property is not feasible for continued rental assistance 
     payments under such section 8 or other programs, based on 
     consideration of (1) the costs of rehabilitating and 
     operating the property and all available Federal, State, and 
     local resources, including rent adjustments under section 524 
     of the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability 
     Act of 1997 (``MAHRAA'') and (2) environmental conditions 
     that cannot be remedied in a cost-effective fashion, the 
     Secretary may, in consultation with the tenants of that 
     property, contract for project-based rental assistance 
     payments with an owner or owners of other existing housing 
     properties, or provide other rental assistance. The Secretary 
     shall report semi-annually on all properties covered by this 
     section that are assessed through the Real Estate Assessment 
     Center and have physical inspection scores of less than 30 or 
     have consecutive physical inspection scores of less than 60. 
     The report shall include:
       (1) The enforcement actions being taken to address such 
     conditions, including imposition of civil money penalties and 
     termination of subsidies, and identify properties that have 
     such conditions multiple times; and
       (2) Actions that the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development is taking to protect tenants of such identified 
     properties.
       Sec. 225.  None of the funds made available by this Act, or 
     any other Act, for purposes authorized under section 8 (only 
     with respect to the tenant-based rental assistance program) 
     and section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 
     U.S.C. 1437 et seq.), may be used by any public housing 
     agency for any amount of salary, including bonuses, for the 
     chief executive officer of which, or any other official or 
     employee of which, that exceeds the annual rate of basic pay 
     payable for a position at level IV of the Executive Schedule 
     at any time during any public housing agency fiscal year 
     2016.
       Sec. 226.  None of the funds in this Act may be available 
     for the doctoral dissertation research grant program at the 
     Department of Housing and Urban Development.
       Sec. 227.  None of the funds in this Act provided to the 
     Department of Housing and Urban Development may be used to 
     make a grant award unless the Secretary notifies the House 
     and Senate Committees on Appropriations not less than 3 full 
     business days before any project, State, locality, housing 
     authority, tribe, nonprofit organization, or other entity 
     selected to receive a grant award is announced by the 
     Department or its offices.
       Sec. 228.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to require or enforce the Physical Needs Assessment 
     (PNA).
       Sec. 229.  None of the funds made available in this Act 
     shall be used by the Federal Housing Administration, the 
     Government National Mortgage Administration, or the 
     Department of Housing and Urban Development to insure, 
     securitize, or establish a Federal guarantee of any mortgage 
     or mortgage backed security that refinances or otherwise 
     replaces a mortgage that has been subject to eminent domain 
     condemnation or seizure, by a state, municipality, or any 
     other political subdivision of a state.
       Sec. 230.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to terminate the status of a unit of general local 
     government as a metropolitan city (as defined in section 102 
     of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 
     U.S.C. 5302)) with respect to grants under section 106 of 
     such Act (42 U.S.C. 5306).
       Sec. 231.  Amounts made available under this Act which are 
     either appropriated, allocated, advanced on a reimbursable 
     basis, or transferred to the Office of Policy Development and 
     Research in the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
     and functions thereof, for research, evaluation, or 
     statistical purposes, and which are unexpended at the time of 
     completion of a contract, grant, or cooperative agreement, 
     may be deobligated and shall immediately become available and 
     may be reobligated in that fiscal year or the subsequent 
     fiscal year for the research, evaluation, or statistical 
     purposes for which the amounts are made available to that 
     Office subject to reprogramming requirements in Section 405 
     of this Act.
       Sec. 232.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to 
     require a recipient or sub-recipient of funding for the 
     purpose of land acquisition, affordable housing construction, 
     or affordable housing rehabilitation to meet Energy Star 
     standards or any other energy efficiency standards that 
     exceed the requirements of applicable State and local 
     building codes.
       Sec. 233.  Of the unobligated balances, including 
     recaptures and carryover, remaining from funds appropriated 
     in section 1497(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 
     Consumer Protection Act (Public Law 111-203; 42 U.S.C. 5301 
     note) and section 2301(a) of title III of division B of the 
     Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-
     289; 42 U.S.C. 5301 note), $7,000,000 is hereby rescinded.
       Sec. 234. (a) All unobligated balances, including 
     recaptures and carryover, remaining from funds appropriated 
     to the Department of Housing and Urban Development under the 
     heading ``Rural Housing and Economic Development'' are hereby 
     rescinded.
       (b) Effective October 1, 2015, all unobligated balances, 
     including recaptures and carryover, remaining from funds 
     appropriated to the Department of Housing and Urban 
     Development for accounts under the headings ``Management and 
     Administration'' and ``Program Office Salaries and Expenses'' 
     in division K of Public Law 113-235 are rescinded.
       This title may be cited as the ``Department of Housing and 
     Urban Development Appropriations Act, 2016''.

                      TITLE III--RELATED AGENCIES

                              Access Board

                         salaries and expenses

       For expenses necessary for the Access Board, as authorized 
     by section 502 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 
     $7,548,000: Provided, That, notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, there may be credited to this appropriation 
     funds received for publications and training expenses.

                      Federal Maritime Commission

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Maritime Commission 
     as authorized by section 201(d) of the Merchant Marine Act, 
     1936, as amended (46 U.S.C. 307), including services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; hire of passenger motor vehicles 
     as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343(b); and uniforms or 
     allowances therefore, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902, 
     $25,660,000: Provided, That not to exceed $2,000 shall be 
     available for official reception and representation expenses.

  National Railroad Passenger Corporation Office of Inspector General

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     for the National Railroad Passenger Corporation to carry out 
     the provisions of the Inspector General Act of 1978, as 
     amended, $23,999,000: Provided, That the Inspector General 
     shall have all necessary authority, in carrying out the 
     duties specified in the Inspector General Act, as amended (5 
     U.S.C. App. 3), to investigate allegations of fraud, 
     including false statements to the government (18 U.S.C. 
     1001), by any person or entity that is subject to regulation 
     by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation: Provided 
     further, That the Inspector General may enter into contracts 
     and other arrangements for audits, studies, analyses, and 
     other services with public agencies and with private persons, 
     subject to the applicable laws and regulations that govern 
     the obtaining of such services within the National Railroad 
     Passenger Corporation: Provided further, That the Inspector 
     General may select, appoint, and employ such officers and 
     employees as may be necessary for carrying out the functions, 
     powers, and duties of the Office of Inspector General, 
     subject to the applicable laws and regulations that govern 
     such selections, appointments, and employment within Amtrak: 
     Provided further, That concurrent with the President's budget 
     request for fiscal year 2017, the Inspector General shall 
     submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a 
     budget request for fiscal year 2017 in similar format and 
     substance to those submitted by executive agencies of the 
     Federal Government.

                  National Transportation Safety Board

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the National Transportation 
     Safety Board, including hire of passenger motor vehicles and 
     aircraft; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at 
     rates for individuals not to exceed the per diem rate 
     equivalent to the rate for a GS-15; uniforms, or allowances 
     therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-5902), 
     $103,981,000, of which not to exceed $2,000 may be used for 
     official reception and representation expenses. The amounts 
     made available to the National Transportation Safety Board in 
     this Act include amounts necessary to make lease payments on 
     an obligation incurred in fiscal year 2001 for a capital 
     lease.

                 Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation

          payment to the neighborhood reinvestment corporation

       For payment to the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation 
     for use in neighborhood reinvestment activities, as 
     authorized by the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 8101-8107), $135,000,000, of which $5,000,000 
     shall be for a multi-family rental housing program: Provided, 
     That in addition, $42,000,000 shall be made available until 
     expended to the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation for 
     mortgage foreclosure mitigation activities, under the 
     following terms and conditions:

[[Page 8615]]

       (1) The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation (NRC) shall 
     make grants to counseling intermediaries approved by the 
     Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) (with match 
     to be determined by NRC based on affordability and the 
     economic conditions of an area; a match also may be waived by 
     NRC based on the aforementioned conditions) to provide 
     mortgage foreclosure mitigation assistance primarily to 
     States and areas with high rates of defaults and foreclosures 
     to help eliminate the default and foreclosure of mortgages of 
     owner-occupied single-family homes that are at risk of such 
     foreclosure. Other than areas with high rates of defaults and 
     foreclosures, grants may also be provided to approved 
     counseling intermediaries based on a geographic analysis of 
     the Nation by NRC which determines where there is a 
     prevalence of mortgages that are risky and likely to fail, 
     including any trends for mortgages that are likely to default 
     and face foreclosure. A State Housing Finance Agency may also 
     be eligible where the State Housing Finance Agency meets all 
     the requirements under this paragraph. A HUD-approved 
     counseling intermediary shall meet certain mortgage 
     foreclosure mitigation assistance counseling requirements, as 
     determined by NRC, and shall be approved by HUD or NRC as 
     meeting these requirements.
       (2) Mortgage foreclosure mitigation assistance shall only 
     be made available to homeowners of owner-occupied homes with 
     mortgages in default or in danger of default. These mortgages 
     shall likely be subject to a foreclosure action and 
     homeowners will be provided such assistance that shall 
     consist of activities that are likely to prevent foreclosures 
     and result in the long-term affordability of the mortgage 
     retained pursuant to such activity or another positive 
     outcome for the homeowner. No funds made available under this 
     paragraph may be provided directly to lenders or homeowners 
     to discharge outstanding mortgage balances or for any other 
     direct debt reduction payments.
       (3) The use of mortgage foreclosure mitigation assistance 
     by approved counseling intermediaries and State Housing 
     Finance Agencies shall involve a reasonable analysis of the 
     borrower's financial situation, an evaluation of the current 
     value of the property that is subject to the mortgage, 
     counseling regarding the assumption of the mortgage by 
     another non-Federal party, counseling regarding the possible 
     purchase of the mortgage by a non-Federal third party, 
     counseling and advice of all likely restructuring and 
     refinancing strategies or the approval of a work-out strategy 
     by all interested parties.
       (4) NRC may provide up to 15 percent of the total funds 
     under this paragraph to its own charter members with 
     expertise in foreclosure prevention counseling, subject to a 
     certification by NRC that the procedures for selection do not 
     consist of any procedures or activities that could be 
     construed as a conflict of interest or have the appearance of 
     impropriety.
       (5) HUD-approved counseling entities and State Housing 
     Finance Agencies receiving funds under this paragraph shall 
     have demonstrated experience in successfully working with 
     financial institutions as well as borrowers facing default, 
     delinquency and foreclosure as well as documented counseling 
     capacity, outreach capacity, past successful performance and 
     positive outcomes with documented counseling plans (including 
     post mortgage foreclosure mitigation counseling), loan 
     workout agreements and loan modification agreements. NRC may 
     use other criteria to demonstrate capacity in underserved 
     areas.
       (6) Of the total amount made available under this 
     paragraph, up to $2,000,000 may be made available to build 
     the mortgage foreclosure and default mitigation counseling 
     capacity of counseling intermediaries through NRC training 
     courses with HUD-approved counseling intermediaries and their 
     partners, except that private financial institutions that 
     participate in NRC training shall pay market rates for such 
     training.
       (7) Of the total amount made available under this 
     paragraph, up to 5 percent may be used for associated 
     administrative expenses for NRC to carry out activities 
     provided under this section.
       (8) Mortgage foreclosure mitigation assistance grants may 
     include a budget for outreach and advertising, and training, 
     as determined by NRC.
       (9) NRC shall continue to report bi-annually to the House 
     and Senate Committees on Appropriations as well as the Senate 
     Banking Committee and House Financial Services Committee on 
     its efforts to mitigate mortgage default.

           United States Interagency Council on Homelessness

                           operating expenses

       For necessary expenses (including payment of salaries, 
     authorized travel, hire of passenger motor vehicles, the 
     rental of conference rooms, and the employment of experts and 
     consultants under section 3109 of title 5, United States 
     Code) of the United States Interagency Council on 
     Homelessness in carrying out the functions pursuant to title 
     II of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, as amended, 
     $3,530,000.

                                TITLE IV

                      GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS ACT

       Sec. 401.  None of the funds in this Act shall be used for 
     the planning or execution of any program to pay the expenses 
     of, or otherwise compensate, non-Federal parties intervening 
     in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act.
       Sec. 402.  None of the funds appropriated in this Act shall 
     remain available for obligation beyond the current fiscal 
     year, nor may any be transferred to other appropriations, 
     unless expressly so provided herein.
       Sec. 403.  The expenditure of any appropriation under this 
     Act for any consulting service through a procurement contract 
     pursuant to section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, 
     shall be limited to those contracts where such expenditures 
     are a matter of public record and available for public 
     inspection, except where otherwise provided under existing 
     law, or under existing Executive order issued pursuant to 
     existing law.
       Sec. 404. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act 
     may be obligated or expended for any employee training that--
       (1) does not meet identified needs for knowledge, skills, 
     and abilities bearing directly upon the performance of 
     official duties;
       (2) contains elements likely to induce high levels of 
     emotional response or psychological stress in some 
     participants;
       (3) does not require prior employee notification of the 
     content and methods to be used in the training and written 
     end of course evaluation;
       (4) contains any methods or content associated with 
     religious or quasi-religious belief systems or ``new age'' 
     belief systems as defined in Equal Employment Opportunity 
     Commission Notice N-915.022, dated September 2, 1988; or
       (5) is offensive to, or designed to change, participants' 
     personal values or lifestyle outside the workplace.
       (b) Nothing in this section shall prohibit, restrict, or 
     otherwise preclude an agency from conducting training bearing 
     directly upon the performance of official duties.
       Sec. 405. Except as otherwise provided in this Act, none of 
     the funds provided in this Act, provided by previous 
     appropriations Acts to the agencies or entities funded in 
     this Act that remain available for obligation or expenditure 
     in fiscal year 2016, or provided from any accounts in the 
     Treasury derived by the collection of fees and available to 
     the agencies funded by this Act, shall be available for 
     obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming of funds 
     that:
       (1) creates a new program;
       (2) eliminates a program, project, or activity;
       (3) increases funds or personnel for any program, project, 
     or activity for which funds have been denied or restricted by 
     the Congress;
       (4) proposes to use funds directed for a specific activity 
     by either the House or Senate Committees on Appropriations 
     for a different purpose;
       (5) augments existing programs, projects, or activities in 
     excess of $5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less;
       (6) reduces existing programs, projects, or activities by 
     $5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less; or
       (7) creates, reorganizes, or restructures a branch, 
     division, office, bureau, board, commission, agency, 
     administration, or department different from the budget 
     justifications submitted to the Committees on Appropriations 
     or the table accompanying the explanatory statement 
     accompanying this Act, whichever is more detailed, unless 
     prior approval is received from the House and Senate 
     Committees on Appropriations: Provided, That not later than 
     60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, each agency 
     funded by this Act shall submit a report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and of the House of 
     Representatives to establish the baseline for application of 
     reprogramming and transfer authorities for the current fiscal 
     year: Provided further, That the report shall include:
       (A) a table for each appropriation with a separate column 
     to display the prior year enacted level, the President's 
     budget request, adjustments made by Congress, adjustments due 
     to enacted rescissions, if appropriate, and the fiscal year 
     enacted level;
       (B) a delineation in the table for each appropriation and 
     its respective prior year enacted level by object class and 
     program, project, and activity as detailed in the budget 
     appendix for the respective appropriation; and
       (C) an identification of items of special congressional 
     interest.
       Sec. 406.  Except as otherwise specifically provided by 
     law, not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated balances 
     remaining available at the end of fiscal year 2016 from 
     appropriations made available for salaries and expenses for 
     fiscal year 2016 in this Act, shall remain available through 
     September 30, 2017, for each such account for the purposes 
     authorized: Provided, That a request shall be submitted to 
     the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations for 
     approval prior to the expenditure of such funds: Provided 
     further, That these requests shall be made in compliance with 
     reprogramming guidelines under section 405 of this Act.
       Sec. 407.  No funds in this Act may be used to support any 
     Federal, State, or local projects that seek to use the power 
     of eminent domain, unless eminent domain is employed only for 
     a public use: Provided, That

[[Page 8616]]

     for purposes of this section, public use shall not be 
     construed to include economic development that primarily 
     benefits private entities: Provided further, That any use of 
     funds for mass transit, railroad, airport, seaport or highway 
     projects, as well as utility projects which benefit or serve 
     the general public (including energy-related, communication-
     related, water-related and wastewater-related 
     infrastructure), other structures designated for use by the 
     general public or which have other common-carrier or public-
     utility functions that serve the general public and are 
     subject to regulation and oversight by the government, and 
     projects for the removal of an immediate threat to public 
     health and safety or brownfields as defined in the Small 
     Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act 
     (Public Law 107-118) shall be considered a public use for 
     purposes of eminent domain.
       Sec. 408.  None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality 
     of the United States Government, except pursuant to a 
     transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this Act 
     or any other appropriations Act.
       Sec. 409.  No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall be available to pay the salary for any person 
     filling a position, other than a temporary position, formerly 
     held by an employee who has left to enter the Armed Forces of 
     the United States and has satisfactorily completed his or her 
     period of active military or naval service, and has within 90 
     days after his or her release from such service or from 
     hospitalization continuing after discharge for a period of 
     not more than 1 year, made application for restoration to his 
     or her former position and has been certified by the Office 
     of Personnel Management as still qualified to perform the 
     duties of his or her former position and has not been 
     restored thereto.
       Sec. 410.  No funds appropriated pursuant to this Act may 
     be expended by an entity unless the entity agrees that in 
     expending the assistance the entity will comply with sections 
     2 through 4 of the Act of March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c, 
     popularly known as the ``Buy American Act'').
       Sec. 411.  No funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available under this Act shall be made available to any 
     person or entity that has been convicted of violating the Buy 
     American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c).
       Sec. 412.  None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used for first-class airline accommodations in 
     contravention of sections 301-10.122 and 301-10.123 of title 
     41, Code of Federal Regulations.
       Sec. 413. (a) None of the funds made available by this Act 
     may be used to approve a new foreign air carrier permit under 
     sections 41301 through 41305 of title 49, United States Code, 
     or exemption application under section 40109 of that title of 
     an air carrier already holding an air operators certificate 
     issued by a country that is party to the U.S.-E.U.-Iceland-
     Norway Air Transport Agreement where such approval would 
     contravene United States law or Article 17 bis of the U.S.-
     E.U.-Iceland-Norway Air Transport Agreement.
       (b) Nothing in this section shall prohibit, restrict or 
     otherwise preclude the Secretary of Transportation from 
     granting a foreign air carrier permit or an exemption to such 
     an air carrier where such authorization is consistent with 
     the U.S.-E.U.-Iceland-Norway Air Transport Agreement and 
     United States law.
       Sec. 414.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used by the Federal Maritime Commission or the 
     Administrator of the Maritime Administration to issue a 
     license or certificate for a commercial vessel that docked or 
     anchored within the previous 180 days within 7 miles of a 
     port on property that was confiscated, in whole or in part, 
     by the Cuban Government, as the terms confiscated, Cuban 
     Government, and property are defined in paragraphs (4), (5), 
     and (12)(A), respectively, of section 4 of the Cuban Liberty 
     and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996 (22 U.S.C. 
     6023).

  The Acting CHAIR. Are there any amendments to that portion of the 
bill?
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                       spending reduction account

       Sec. 415.  The amount by which the applicable allocation of 
     new budget authority made by the Committee on Appropriations 
     of the House of Representatives under Section 302(b) of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 exceeds the amount of 
     proposed new budget authority is $0.


                    amendment offered by mr. stivers

  Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used for the Private Enforcement Initiative of the Fair 
     Housing Initiatives Program under section 561(b) of the 
     Housing and Community Development Act of 1987 (42 U.S.C. 
     3616a(b)) and section 125.401 of the regulations of the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (24 C.F.R. 
     125.401).
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Ohio and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I will be fairly brief.
  This is a followup amendment. We have already accepted the 
congressional intent that we will have a preference toward 
administrative enforcement. This is a followup limitation amendment 
that basically says we will not, for this calendar year, use the 
Private Enforcement Initiative.
  As the gentleman from North Carolina said, we can always come back; 
but I think we need to have time for this GAO study that I have 
requested to come back because I would assert that administrative 
enforcement is less expensive to taxpayers than private enforcement.
  It creates more certainty. It happens faster. It has less conflict of 
interest than the Private Enforcement Initiative. I would ask that my 
colleagues support this limitation amendment on the Private Enforcement 
Initiative for this year period.
  I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  0015

  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to 
the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Again, Mr. Chairman, let me say how 
unfortunate I believe it is that we are dealing with this kind of 
amendment in this setting here tonight without really having much 
notice, much ability to understand the full implications.
  I do think that we need to appreciate the role of what the gentleman 
calls private organizations. We are really talking here about 
nonprofits, about mediators, about the kind of working out of 
complaints, working out of problems, informal work with landlords, the 
kind of thing that actually helps avoid legal action and avoid 
litigation. There is a lot that can be mediated, a lot of things can be 
worked out in the fair housing arena. There are many nonprofit groups 
that do a good job of doing that.
  Mr. Chairman, the gentleman apparently has lots of complaints about 
this, and there have been a couple of prominent cases. I am aware of 
that. But the notion that we would come in here tonight and make a 
change of this magnitude, of this importance, I simply don't think is 
responsible.
  So I will speak for myself. I am perfectly willing to look at this 
matter down the road. I understand there may be some issues here, but 
this is a pretty drastic amendment, and you are taking a whole area 
here of mediation and informal conciliation, things that actually keep 
things out of the courts, keep things out of the legal system and out 
of litigation. I don't know why we would want to do that. It seems 
reckless to me.
  I recommend that we reject this amendment and, at the same time, 
pledge to look at this carefully and work on it later.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Chair, does 
recognize that there are problems in the private enforcement 
initiative. He just admitted that. There is a lot of lawsuit abuse. In 
fact, many of these organizations sue first and ask questions later. 
They don't do their due diligence. They send interns in to actually 
look at these places and file lawsuits before they get the facts.
  The gentleman asserted that we shouldn't make these kind of changes. 
That is why the people sent us here, to make things better. We are 
supposed to do it every day, and when we see problems, we need to fix 
them. This is a temporary, 1-year halt of the private enforcement 
initiative with the GAO study that is not directed in this bill, but I 
asked for by letter through the GAO, and they are always good about 
doing those when you ask them to. They haven't looked at this program 
since 1997.

[[Page 8617]]

  Mr. Chairman, it is time to look at this program in detail. I would 
assert that our local and State governments can also do the mediation 
that the gentleman from North Carolina talked about, Mr. Chairman, and 
they can do it better, more efficiently, and without the conflicts of 
interest that some of these private organizations have done.
  So I think we ought to give it a try. That is the great thing about 
an annual appropriations bill. Guess what; we get to do it again next 
year. I am certainly willing to admit if I am wrong and we find out 
through a GAO study that the private enforcement has worked well. But 
there have been articles in the paper about some of the lawsuit abuse 
that we have seen all across the country, and I think we should just 
take a strategic pause here and give the money to our State and local 
governments who can better enforce our laws. They do it every day, and 
they can do it through the mediation and things that the gentleman 
asserts that these private enforcement initiatives can do so well.
  Mr. Chairman, I would urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I 
think it will help make our fair housing laws better, and it will 
protect more consumers.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Stivers).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio will be 
postponed.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Grayson

  Mr. GRAYSON. I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. ___. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to enter into a contract with any offeror or any of 
     its principals if the offeror certifies, as required by the 
     Federal Acquisition Regulation, that the offeror or any of 
     its principals--
       (1) within a three-year period preceding this offer has 
     been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against it 
     for: commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection 
     with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public 
     (Federal, State, or local) contract or subcontract; violation 
     of Federal or State antitrust statutes relating to the 
     submission of offers; or commission of embezzlement, theft, 
     forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, 
     making false statements, tax evasion, violating Federal 
     criminal tax laws, or receiving stolen property; or
       (2) are presently indicted for, or otherwise criminally or 
     civilly charged by a governmental entity with, commission of 
     any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (1); or
       (3) within a three-year period preceding this offer, has 
     been notified of any delinquent Federal taxes in an amount 
     that exceeds $3,000 for which the liability remains 
     unsatisfied.

  Mr. GRAYSON (during the reading). Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent 
that the reading be waived.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Florida and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chair, this amendment is identical to other 
amendments that have been inserted by voice vote into every 
appropriations bill considered under an open rule during the 113th and 
114th Congresses.
  My amendment would expand the list of parties with whom the Federal 
Government is prohibited from contracting due to serious misconduct on 
the part of that contractor. It is my hope that this amendment will be 
noncontroversial, as it always has been, and again passed unanimously 
by the House.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Grayson).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                  Amendment Offered by Mr. Fitzpatrick

  Mr. FITZPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. __.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used in contravention of section 121.584 of title 14, Code 
     of Federal Regulations.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. FITZPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, my amendment will ensure that the FAA 
is doing everything that it can to certify that our aircraft are 
protected during a moment that pilots, flight attendants, and Federal 
law enforcement officers have all said that the aircraft is vulnerable 
to terror hijackings. Despite the effort to safeguard the cockpit after 
the 9/11 terror attacks, today, operational experience has highlighted 
that a critical vulnerability remains when a pilot must open the 
hardened, reinforced cockpit doors to eat, rest, or use the bathroom 
during long flights. Even the FAA recognizes that, ``During this door 
transition, the flight deck is vulnerable.''
  Current FAA regulations require that the area outside the flight deck 
be secure before the reinforced cockpit door is opened. Currently, some 
airlines are using human shields or, in some cases, drink carts to try 
to block entry to the cockpit and claim it ``secure.'' But only one 
method has been thoroughly studied and proven to beat the threat of a 
trained hijacker exploiting this particular vulnerability, and that is 
an installed physical secondary barrier door. These barriers are light, 
inexpensive wire gates that are able to protect the flight deck long 
enough for the pilot to shut the reinforced door.
  This double door security procedure is something that Israeli 
airlines have been using for over a decade. They understand the risk 
and how to mitigate it. A Cato study has shown these secondary barrier 
doors to be the most cost-effective way to protect the cockpit door 
when the reinforced door is opened.
  This is not some hypothetical threat. We know for a fact that 
terrorists maintain their desire to exploit vulnerabilities in our 
aircraft safety protocols to bring down an airliner just like they did 
on September 11, 2001. A recent USA Today headline read, ``ISIS' Next 
Test Could Be a 9/11-Style Attack.'' In 2013, outgoing FBI Director 
Robert Mueller said that the terror scenario he fears most remains an 
attack with the use of an aircraft.
  Perhaps no one knows the consequences of terrorists hijacking our 
aircraft more so than my constituent, Ellen Saracini. The terror 
hijackings of September 11 took the life of her husband, Victor 
Saracini, Captain of United Flight 175, which was hijacked and flown 
into the South Tower of the World Trade Center by al Qaeda terrorists.
  Inspired by Ellen and the pilots and flight attendants that stand 
with her, I have been working with a bipartisan, bicameral group of 
lawmakers to have these commonsense, cost-effective security features 
installed on every single large passenger aircraft in the United States 
through my bill, H.R. 911, the Saracini Aviation Safety Act.
  Some have pointed to the ``layered security'' approach to aircraft 
security as proof that we don't need secondary barriers, but one only 
need to read current headlines to see the huge gaps in our layered 
security. As we recently learned, undercover agents, we saw, this week, 
were able to get weapons past the TSA 95 percent of the time.
  Mr. Chairman, a recent Advisory Circular issued by the FAA highlights 
the risk to the cockpit during door transition and calls for the use of 
effective protection measures. Support for this amendment today would 
build on this positive step used by the FAA by showing that Congress is 
serious about this issue and that installed physical secondary barriers 
are the only way that

[[Page 8618]]

we can guarantee, as FAA regulations do require, that the flight deck 
be secure prior to that reinforced door being opened.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fitzpatrick).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Grayson

  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the 
     following:
       Sec. ___. None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to make incentive payments pursuant to 48 CFR 16.4 to 
     contractors for contracts that are behind schedule under the 
     terms of the contract as prescribed by 48 CFR 52.211 or over 
     the contract amount indicated in Standard Form 33, box 20.

  Mr. GRAYSON (during the reading). Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent 
that the reading be waived.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman 
from Florida and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, this is a good government amendment the 
House passed by voice vote last year. It simply states that bonus 
payments should not be paid to contractors whose projects are behind 
schedule or over budget.
  I urge support for this amendment that combats waste, fraud, and 
abuse of taxpayer dollars, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Grayson).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Ms. 
Ros-Lehtinen) having assumed the chair, Mr. Collins of Georgia, Acting 
Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, 
reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill 
(H.R. 2577) making appropriations for the Departments of 
Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies 
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, and for other purposes, 
had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________