goes into effect in 2014. this is unacceptable. surely we can find a better way to pay for bills that lessens the tax burden on businesses than by increasing the tax burden on middle class and low-income families. to that end i ask my colleagues to support this measure but to consider an alternative way to way for this bill when the house resolves its differences with the senate. businesses everywhere are counting on us to come through for them as is the middle class. we can't afford to let them down. thank you, mr. speaker. with that i yield back the balance of my time. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from georgia, my cousin, mr. scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for two minutes. mr. scott: i'd like to thank the gentleman from south carolina, i look forward to visiting the family at christmas. mr. speaker, ladies and gentlemen of the house and this great country, as i traveled cities like covington this past week, the main issue i heard from constituents is their growing fear of the side size of government's regulatory burden

on their business and their way of life. now, i find it laughable that today democrats say that they didn't know this 1099 provision was in this bill. the fact is, this 1099 provision was part of a continuous assault by the democratic party on small businesses across this country. now, eliminating this provision will further reduce the government's burden placed on these small businesses and as a small business myself, i know that passing this resolution will allow employers the time knows focus on creating jobs rather than dealing with the burden of government paperwork. mr. speaker, i urge my fellow colleagues to vote in favor of repealing this overbearing burdensome job-killing 1099 provision that the democrats put into that bill and as thomas jefferson once said, when the people fear their government, there is tyranny. when the government fears the people there is liberty. mr. speaker, it is time to liberate our people, our small businesses from the burdens of this 1099 provision. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time.

the gentleman from controls his time. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: parliamentary inquiry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman state his inquiry. mr. polis: section 4 of h.r. 4 violate the rules of the house by proposing a tax increase? the speaker pro tempore: is the gentleman asking about the underlying bill or the resolution? mr. polis: the inquiry is regarding the underlying bill. the speaker pro tempore: the bill is not yet pending. the gentleman is asking for an advisory opinion. the chair will not issue such an opinion. mr. polis: i thank the gentleman and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. polis: i thank the gentleman. so, you know, i think this is a question of how cleverly or perhaps deeveously the majority party constructed the ruleses of the house with regard to a test

of whether presenting a family earning $80,000 a year with a bill for $3,000 from the i.r.s. is a tax increase or not. it would take some pretty tansy -- fancy tap dancing to say that a $3,000 or $4,000 bill from the i.r.s. to a middle class family is not a tax increase. if it looks like a tax increase, if it smells like a tax increase it is a tax increase and it is contrary to the rules of the house to allow a tax increase in this kind of bill. now, i understand there's some fancy dancing and semantics around it but i think the american people and the voters of this country have a great deal of common sense with regard to this matter. when you get a $3,000 bill from the i.r.s. that you have to pay and if you don't pay, as my colleagues on the other side of the aisle like to point out during the debate on the health care bill, you could face going to prison, that's a tax increase. that's a tax increase.

what this bill does is tell hundreds of thousands of middle class families, particularly right on that cusp, we talk about this 400% of poverty rate, geven, that's an arbitrary level but it's a real level for families, it's x dollars. it depends on the size of the family and the state, but we're talking $80,000, $90,000 a year, right in that range. you earn $250 more, the i.r.s. sends you a bill $3,000, $4,000, $5,000 and if you don't pay it you face going to prison. i yield to my friend from new york. >> i thank the gentleman. i was attempting to ask the gentleman from georgia to yield so i could ask him a question. mr. crowley: what part of what i said about the family of four earning $88,000 and getting a bonus of $250 and their exposure then to $446 in taxes was untrue? he was on a diatribe of his talking points about small businesses. we understand small businesses,

the burden that was placed there. we were trying to remove that from them. but not to place it on the backs of the middle class. understanding he wanted to remove the burden from small business, but to the place it on the backs of the middle class, that was the question i was asked. and by the way, i haven't heard one colleague from the other side of the aisle refute what i said about that family of four. not one person has stood up and said, you're wrong, mr. crowley, that will not take place. that will not take place if this bill passes. the silence is deafening from the other side. they know it's a tax increase on the middle class. mr. polis: reclaiming my time, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from illinois. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for two minutes. kinskins thank you, mr. speaker. -- mr. mckinley: thank you, mr. speaker.

it's very interesting to -- mr. kinsinger: these small business owners were fired up. this is exactly what they're saying is wrong with washington. more and more government regulation, more and more paperwork and this is exactly what we have to clean up now after four years of what we've been dealing with. mr. chairman, as a new member i was not in the body when this previous -- the democrat majority passed this job-detroying -- job-destroying regulation. taxes on every sector of our economy. but as i did go around i heard from businesses in my district and heard about the illogical burden that this would place on them. the people they'd have to hire just to take care of this requirement. one of the most illogical requirements i can say of the health care bill. it doesn't make a heck of a lot of sense. the 1099 requirement impacts small businesses disproportionately by rirg them to file and collect 1099 tax forms for any business transaction, any one, over $600

or more per year. these new requirements at a time when businesses can't afford it. actually, if you'd allow me to keep speaking i would appreciate that. i'm proud to be a co-sponsor of this legislation to strip the 1099 requirement on business. this body will continue to remove the undue burden on small businesses, the undue burden on society in general that was placed out of this body for the last four years. it is high time that the republican majority comes in here and begins to fight for small business and -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has already indicated he does not wish to yield. mr. crowley: mr. speaker, not to you, he indicated directly to me. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has indicated his unwillingness to yield time. the gentleman shall continue. mr. kinzinger: thank you. it is time now for the republican majority, and for many of your colleagues that have said it's time to make small business work again, it's time to give them the freedom to hire people back and it's time to take our country back, get

people back to work, rein in government spending and put government where it should be, limited, effective and efficient. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: i yield 20 seconds to my friend from new york. mr. crowley: i ask the gentleman to yield, he refused to yield because he has no answer but i'm correct. the example that i gave of a family of four making $88,000 would have a huge tax increase because of this bill. of $4,460. you reficed to yield because you know you cannot refute what i'm stating here on the floor. mr. polis: ask can i ask the other side how many remaining speakers they have. mr. scott: we have four. mr. polis: i'm the last speaker. it's possible we'll have one more but i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: mr. speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from illinois, mr. hultgren.

mr. hultgren: today i rise in support of h.r. 4. this bill will repeal one of the most egregious and antijobs, antigrowth provisions contained in last year's health care law. this 1099 provision threatens our small business owners with an avalanche of paperwork and bureaucracy. when congress should instead be doing everything in our power to help employers create jobs. my constituents have told me loud and clear what this means to them. one small business owner in my district told me that just last year alone she had more than 500 transactions that she would have had to report thunderstorm provision and the expense and enormous regulatory burden on her and her employees. she called it ridiculous and i think she's understating things. i hope congress will overwhelmingly pass this bill. let's liberate our small business owners from the mountain of paperwork and instead let them get back to work creating jobs, moving our economy forward. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. polis: reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado reserves

his time. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield one minute of my time to the gentleman from nevada, dr. heck. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from nevada is recognized. mr. heck: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you to the gentleman from south carolina. mr. speaker, today i also rise in support of h.r. 4, the small business paperwork mandate elimination act of 2011. there is no doubt this job-killing 1099 hidden tax deves repeal. nevada's unemployment rate is a nation high 14.5%. we need to create jobs. 80% of nevada's employees work for small businesses. so i ask small business owners, what the government should do to create jobs? paul, a small business owner operates midas shops through the southern nevada, buys multiple auto parts, says regulations and hidden taxes like the 1099 hidden tax, keep him from hiring new workers. you know what? more than 170 small business organizations nationwide agree with paul and have called for the 1099 hidden tax repeal --

no, i shall not yield. washington said it wants to hear job-creating ideas from the business community. here's one that they are screaming about. nevada's families are hurting, american families are hurting, it's time to end the job-killing 1099 hidden tax and get nevadans back to work. and i yield the balance. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: the gentleman from new york has been unable to enter into a colloquy with several gentlemen that he has sought, to i yield 45 seconds to the gentleman from new york. mr. crowley: i appreciate the time from the gentleman from colorado. i've attempted to ask two more gentlemen from the other side of the aisle to yield for the purposes of answering a question. i've noticed that not with single one as of yet has refuted the example that i gave of a family of four earning $88,000 a year, getting a $250 bonus being pumped up over the 401 percent aisle of the poverty level and

be exposed to a $4,460 tax. i wonder when the gentleman out campaigning last year and talking to small businesses, did you talk to the middle class? did you talk to the middle class about the increase in the tax that you would propose when you came to the floor of the house? one of the first bills, number 4, the fourth bill to increase taxes on the middle class. did you talk to those folks? did you let them know what you were doing to them? i suspect not. you have two more speakers who can now refute what i said. i'm waiting. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from virginia, mr. regal. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for two minutes. mr. rigell: thank you, mr. speaker. as business owner for more than 20 years, i know firsthand that excessive tax paperwork and compliance matters are already major expenses to our small businesses and the new reporting requirements included in the

health care law will substantially increase those costs. these new requirements impose yet another burden on small businesses, forcing them to devote more resources to filing taxes instead of going out and doing what they do best, which is to create jobs. you know, in virginia alone, small businesses make up nearly 98% of all business establishments -- mr. crowley: will the gentleman yield? mr. rigell: no, i will not. the gentleman's question is not germane. and account for more than 75% of new job growth. and according to a study by the small business administration, the cost of complying with the tax code is 66% higher -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman refuses to yield. mr. rigell: these reporting requirements are a classic example of laws that are passed by people who have no clue what it means to go out and to create a job, to put appreciate cap -- precious capital at risk.

they're met by people who are have never met with a banker and been told by a banker, no, i can't help you. this bill, h.r. 4, is a step in the right direction to help our small business owners. i strongly urge my colleagues to stand with me and vote in favor of it. i yield back and thank the gentleman for yielding. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: after continuing to be amazed that the gentleman from virginia somehow said a tax increase is not a tax increase is not germane, i'm happy to yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from new york. mr. crowley: not germane. that's the answer. a $4,460 tax increase is not germane to the debate we're having right now. what is? the $25 billion doesn't fall out of the sky, out of the air. it has to come from swrfment it is a tax increase -- somewhere. it is a tax increase on the middle class. we all know it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from maryland, dr.

harris. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana is recognized for two minutes. mr. harris: thank you very much, mr. speaker. you know, as if businesses weren't struggling enough with the worst recession since the great depression, some washington bureaucrat decided it was a good idea to distract the real job creators of our country from doing what they do best, create jobs. to the gentleman from new york, that's what this debate is about. whether that hypothetical family actually has a job. whether they should be distracted from creating jobs by requiring them to fill out -- mr. crowley: will the gentleman yield? mr. harris: obviously the individual who came up with this brilliant idea has never had to meet a payroll ordeal with the day to day operations -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman controls his time. the gentleman by his silence is not willing to yield. mr. crowley: point of parliamentary inquiry. mr. harris: small business owners all over my country have told me that the 1099 provision would hurt their business.

trish paige said it would be, quote, an administrative nightmare that would cost me thousands to implement. last year, she used over 250 individual vendors that will now require 1099 forms to be printed, copied, mailed, completed and sent to the vendors and the i.r.s. her small, family-owned business doesn't have the capacity to handle this regulation. another business owner, aaron ortel, whose family owns an operates the harris' crab house on the eastern shore said this would be, yet, overwhelmingly burdensome on my family business. mr. speaker, the 1099 provision is simply a job-destroying regulation that wastes precious time, labor, and money. if we want to create jobs

tomorrow, i urge my colleagues to join me in repealing this awful provision now by supporting h.r. 4. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland yields back. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina. >> i yield five minutes to the gentleman from california, mr. dreier. mr. dreier: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. let me first say that we all know why we're here. there's a bipartisan consensus that the 1099 provision in this bill is flawed. it's a mistake. and what it says to me is that the health care bill is badly flawed. we all recall the very famous statement that was made, we have to pass this bill before we can understand what's in it. i'm trying to remember who said that. somebody said that. somebody very prominent said that.

so here we have a measure that is badly flawed. there's bipartisan consensus, 278 co-sponsors of mr. lungren's bill and as mr. lungren said at the jut set, democrats were discouraged from co-sponsoring it because by co-sponsoring the measure they admitted this outrageous health care bill was flawed. well it got to the point where the pd of the united states in his news conference right after the election said, the bill needs to be fixed, the 1099 provision needs to be fixed. he was acknowledging it was fixed. we have a big debate on cut-go, and i would be happy to yield to my friend to ask the question i know he's going to ask me because i've heard it a million times. mr. crowley: mr. speaker, for the purposes of a parliamentary inquiry. mr. dreier: i'm yielding to my friend.

mr. crowley: the reason i'm asking for my colleagues to yield was to inquire as to the procedures of the house that when i ask the speaker for a -- mr. dreier: reclaiming my time, i asked him to ask me the question he was asking. mr. crowley: what of the example i gave you of a family of four earning $88,000 a year who gets a bonus, how many here have heard of a bonus of $250. that gets a bonus because they work hard. they're in the -- they get a bill from the i.r.s. for $4,460. what part of that -- >> mr. dreier: reclaiming my time. i will say it's a subsidy that provided that tun for that taxpayer. that's a subsidy. this is scored by the congressional budget office. could i finish the answer to the question? i know the gentleman has been interrupt regular petedly members and i usually, as i ask

people to yield try not to do it more than thee time the gentleman has asked three, four, five times for members to yield when they're doing one-minute speeches. let me just say, this is scored by the congressional budget office, mr. speaker. it is scored as not as a tax increase, it is scored as a spending cut. and i know what the joint committee on taxation has said but they relien the congressional budget office as they look to this and so the fact is, what this comes down to is returning an improper government subsidy and that is not a tax increase. so if i can complete my statement, mr. speaker, now that i've answered the question posed by the gentleman, this bill itself is in fact a badly flawed measure, the obama health care bill, and for that reason, for that reason, it is absolutely eensrble -- essential that we provide the

kind of relief that -- that we provide the kind of relief that every small business in this country deserves. so we're in a position where we have done this in, i believe, the most proper way. the gentleman's amendment doesn't comply with the cut-go provision that we have. for that, mr. speaker, for that reason, mr. speaker, i'm going to encourage my colleagues to support this rule and with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: does the gentleman have remaining speakers? mr. scott: we do not. mr. polis: then i yield myself such time as i may consume. the last thing we want to do in a bad economic climate is punish people for getting a few extra dollars or working an extra job. this bill is intended to help small businesses. i ran a small business before i was elected to congress. there's great support from both sides of the aisle to making sure we reduce the 1099

reporting rirments for small businesses an people who happen to have a rental home. but this situation of thanks, but no thanks. thanks for saying i don't have to fill out an extra form because i bought a $600 refrigerator for my rental property but no thanks because you're sending me a $5,000 bill. an average middle class family could find out in scran that they have to come up with $12,000 to send in with their tax return. an extra $100 in overtime here or some holiday pay there could send them to tax court. the republicans complain about being left out of the process but even though we can't have an open rule, bills came to the floor under a structured rule.

mr. lungren said why don't reremove the pay-far and see if we can pass it on that ground? why not allow the amendment from my friend from new york that would repeal the middle class tax increase. the crowley amendment would protect the middle class and retain the bipartisan agreement we had last year. we all abrie the 1099 provisions need to be addressed. there's been excellent points made in that regard from members on both sides of the aisle. but this is not the way to do it. not with tax hike in a recession. republicans are proposing a substantial tax hike to the middle class. not only is that bad policy but it's also a violation of the pledge that many of them signed committing to oppose all tax increases. a tax increase is a tax increase. when you get a $3,000 or $4,000 or $5,000 bill from the inch r.s., it's called a tax increase. a tax increase. there's nothing else to call

it. no fancy dancing, no fancy word, can change the fact that a bill from the i.r.s. is a tax increase and families making $ 0,000 or $90,000 a year will receive substantial tax increases. if we defeat the previous question, i'll offer an amendment to the rule to make in order mr. crowley's amendment to the bill and that amendment says that nothing in the bill will apply if it will result in a tax increase on anyone's whose income is less than 500% of the federal poverty line. i ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the peeves question. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. polis: thank you. i urge a no vote on the rule. i yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from new york. mr. crowley: i appreciate the gentleman from colorado. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time is expired. mr. polis: i urge a no vote and yield back the balance of my time. the gentleman from fwea. mr. scott: we have heard a lot

today about the cost and about taxes. about tax increases. we must be working from very different mathematical systems. we keep saying that we are raising tacks and there's nothing further from the truth than the statements i've heard from the left. it is consistent -- i will not yield. you have consistently interrupted many of our speakers so i will not yield. you have consistently posed the question that all of america needs an answer to, is this in fact a tax increase? well, according to the joint committee on taxation, this is in fact a net tax cut. of over $20 billion over the next 10 years. and it will reduce the deficit by $166 million over the same period of time. also keep in mind that these cost savings come from the government recouping mune -- he is hard of hearing, the answer is no, i will not yield.

from the government recouping the money that recipients should not have gotten in the first place. that is not a tax increase. let me say it one more time, that's not a tax increase. we are looking for the way to actually get rid of this problem, there's a simple way. let's repeal the entire health care law. the problem that we see today comes in the package of the health care law itself. so consistent with reality is the fact that the democrats have put us in this position. so we are working in a bipartisan fashion through the 1099 repeal to eliminate this problem. finally, we should all bear in mind that while this resolution is a closed rule, the opposition was offered an opportunity to submit a substitute bill. they declined. we have also expanded debate to two and a half hours. i yield back the balance of my time and i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back.

the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. polis: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> by direction of the committee on rules, i call up house resolution 128 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar --res. resolution 28, resolved that upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider the bill h r. 662,

to provide an extension of federal aid highway, highway safety, motor carrier safety, transit and other programs funded out of the highway trust fund. pending enactment of a multiyear law re-authorizing such programs. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. the bill shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. the previous question shall be considered as order on the bill and in the amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except, one, one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the me on transportation and infrastructure, two, the amendment printed in the report of the committee on rules, ea companying thisres. lugs if offered by representative mica of florida or his designee, which shall be in order without intervention of any point of order, shall be considered as read, shall be separately debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opobe

and shall not be subject to mand for a division of the question and three, one megs to recommit with or without instructions. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one hour. mr. sessions: i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from florida, mr. hastings, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. during consideration of this resolution all time yielded is for purpose of debate only. i ask that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. sessions: house resolution 128 provided for a construction rule of h.r. 662. this rule provides for ample debate and opportunities for members on both sides of the aisle, both of the majority and minority, to make sure that they have ample time to participate, come to the floor and express

their ideas which is what this new republican majority is enabling members to do. i rise today in support of the rule and the underlying bill. the underlying legislation is a simple extension of service transportation programs through september 30 of this year. this legislation was introduced by the distinguished chairman of the transportation committee, chairman mica, on february 11, 2011, with ranking member rahall as an original co-sponsor. it was reported out of the committee on transportation and infrastructure by voice vote on february 28, 2011. this legislation went through regular order with bipartisan support. this is a clean, straight, tension of current law providing a -- extension of current law provides a hard freeze at 2009 spending levels through the end

of this fiscal year. without this legislation the spending levels would expire on friday, march 4, 2011. in an effort to provide more transparency and accountability of how this body has been run, which is different than how this body has been run for the past four years, the republican conference adopted a policy that would no longer permit extensions of programs on a continuing resolution or any other appropriations bills. this allows members a straight up or down vote on an issue at hand and in this case it is surface transportation. the surface transportation extension act of 2011 continues the authorization of federal highway, transit and highway safety programs through the end of this fiscal year at the same program funding levels established for fiscal year 2009.

this authorization is essential to allow funds that had been included in transportation appropriations legislation to flow to states and local transit agencies. we are not trying to get in the way of decisions that need to be made locally, we are simply trying to make sure that they are legally executed. should this straight extension of transportation funding not be signed into law before march 4 deadline, the impact would be severe and immediate. a shutdown would result in immediate furloughs and suspension of payments to states which would hamper the federal highway administration's ability to pay contractors. this would jeopardize the state's transportation funding to a tune of $154 million a day, killing ongoing projects, things which had been agreed on and are being done locally. this level of funding was extended by the previous congress sex times starting in

october of 2009. continuing this funding at 2009 levels allows for the appropriate funding for states to complete and manage their transportation projects. with an extension through the fiscal year it will allow the new chairman of the transportation committee, my dear friend, the gentleman from -- the gentleman, the favorite son of florida, mr. mica, the appropriate time to hold necessary hearings to review and reestimate -- re-estimate the funding for states to carry on their transportation projects. the congressional budget office which is also known as the c.b.o. has concluded that the underlying bill today does not affect direct spending or revenues. further, the c.b.o. determined that, and i quote, the nontax provisions of h.r. 662 contain no intergovernmental or private sector mandates as defined in the unfunded mandates reform act and would impose no cost on

state, local or tribunal governments, end of quote. additionally, according to the department of transportation, service transportation allows for international trade which helps sustain and create jobs that support our national economy. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert recent data from the department of transportation's bureau of transportation's statistics to support this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. sessions: the data reported in the past 10 years says that u.s. service transportation trade between the united states, canada and mexico has increased 48.6%, a 13.8% increase in the past year alone. in december, 2010, imports were up from 41.9% compared to december, 2000, which imports were up 57.7%. currently this trade is valued

at $66 billion annually, in an ever-increasing global market, the united states needs to ensure that our surface infrastructure can sustain the tremendous growth rate of trade so that we can maintain international competitiveness, create jobs and encourage economic growth in the united states of america. once again, mr. speaker, i rise in support of this rule and the underlying legislation. i applaud the republican leadership for following regular order, for the bipartisan nature of this bill, for republicans and democrats working together through the entire process and including the gentleman from, mr. dreier, the chairman of the rules committee, extending an unusual amount of time so that every single member has an opportunity to come to this body and not only voice what they believe is important to them,

but also the time where they can come down and speak to important matters of this congress. the chairman and ranking member continue to work together to provide a necessary extension that will get us through the rest of the year and i look forward to an open and transparent process for the re-authorization for next year's funding also. i have confidence in not only chairman mica but also john boehner and eric cantor as they lead this house of representatives on transportation issues to do what's right for a beautiful country that expects congress to have an open and apparent process that is good for all members. i encourage my colleagues to vote yes on the rule and yes on the underlying bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i thank my good friend from texas for yielding the time. mr. speaker, h.r. 66 , the surface -- 662, the surface

transportation extension act of 2011, prevents our nation aye's highways, transit and -- our nation's highways, transit and safety programs from expiring ahead of the upcoming construction season, by extending them at fiscal year 2010 funding levels through september 30 of this year. my friend from texas referenced the fact that it would be bad if we did not do this before march 4 and i agree with him thoroughly. i'm hopeful that he has the same attitude with reference to the overall aspect of any kind of shutdown of the government, a shutdown would be bad in any of its particulars and not just as he referenced it, that i agree with, in the area of transportation and infrastructure. this extension allows states to

continue signing contracts, managing planning and construction and paying for vital transportation and infrastructure projects while we finalize a multiyear authorization to update our network. as all of us know, our interstate choice, roads and bridges are in desperate need of repairs and improvements and all you have to do is drive around washington to prove that. according to the american society of civil engineers in their 2009 report card, which rates the operational condition and future capacity of dams, levees, railways, roads and bridges, our nation's surface infrastructure is rated at a d.

this is deplorable and frankly it's embarrassing. embarrassing for several reasons. i came here in 1992. we were advocating on both sides of the aisle that we should be about the business of repairing bridges in this country and the multiples are enormous from that time we were talking 14,000 bridges. more than 26% of our nation's today are either structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. with the number of such bridges in urban areas on the rise, and we've seen what disasters can occur when a bridge collapses. existing rail capacity is inadequate to handle future freight and passenger rail growth without significant

investment. last year i took the amtrak to new york and when returning to washington i looked at the rail underbed. i group up near a railroad in florida. and the rail bed in that time, where i grew up in the 1940's, was 100% better than the rail bed just outside of this city on the amtrak line. that's ridiculous. our interstate highway program has changed little since it was created in the 1950's by the distinguished president, dwight eisenhower's vision. with ever-increasing congestion and we see it right around here and improvement costs, our nation's roads were even poorer, at a d-minus, in 2009. 1/3 of america's roads are in

poor orer conditions and 45 -- or mediocre conditions and 45% of major urban highways are congested. just last january the main road in and out of one of the cities that i'm privileged to represent, the city of pejoke, was closed for 17 days, because of sunken asphalt. now, that may not sound like much, a little old town being cut off, but a collapsed culvert had created a two-inch dip measuring 252 square feet in size on the north-bound lane of state road 715. this resulted in hours-long detours for commuters and trucks, stymied local and regional business and regrettably reduced access to

glades general hospital and the airport. similar stories can be found throughout my home state of florida and indeed in communities across this nation. we can and we must do better. just as routine and preventive health care costs much less than a trip to the emergency room, regular maintenance and improvements cost less than major overhauls and replacements. according to transportation for america, for every dollar that we spend today on maintenance, we avoid $14 in future costs. h.r. 662 obligates up to $42.5 billion for federal aid highway programs and $639 million for the equity bonus programs to ensure that states receive in federal highway funds a certain

portion of the gasoline taxes that they contribute. investing in our nation's roads is about more than getting from point a to point b. -- b faster. which would be in many respects reason enough for many commuters. it's about having more time, about having more money, about having more opportunities to work and play and live and enjoy life. americans spend $4.-- 4.2 billion a year stuck in traffic at a cost to the economy of $78.2 billion. that averages to $710 per motorist. furthermore poor conditions cause motorists $67 billion a year in repairs and operating costs. one way to ease congestion is

getting more people to use public transit. in fact, transit use increased 25% between 1995 and 2005. faster than any other mode of transportation. however, nearly half of american households do not have access to bus or rail transit. and only 25% have what they consider to be a good alternative. on that note, increasing the capacity of our transportation and infrastructure network means nothing if our roads are not safe. each year thousands of people die in road crashes in the united states and millions more are injured or disabled. as co-chair of the congressional caucus on global road safety, i recognize that global crash fatalities and

disabilities represents a global concern. this measure adds millions of dollars, as well as $597 million for the truck motor carrier association to help save lives and minimize crash related injuries. safe, dependable, and efficient transportation is essential to our economic recovery and our nation's competitiveness. at a time when unemployment in the construction industry is double the national rate, the extension provides much-needed market stability to create and sustain thousands of jobs. transportation sector has played a crucial role in building the u.s. economy, most recently through the recovery act, which provided $27.5

billion in few nund -- in new funding for surface transportation programs through the existing federal aid highway program and $8.4 billion off of transit. in addition, $1.5 billion and $600 million were made available in two rounds respectively by the discretionary grant program known as tiger, the transportation investments generating economic recovery. extending these highway transit and other surface transportation programs is not only essential to our nation's continued economic recovery, but to our long-term prosperity and future. today, we find ourselves on the cusp of a great opportunity. the opportunity to make meaningful investments in the future of this country, improve our quality of life, and cut future debt. we need a truly intersected,

multimodal system that effectively utilizes high speed rail, light rail, street cars, vans, motor carriers by water, efficient buses, cars and bikes. one that helps ensure that lower income workers can also get to and hold down jobs. one that gets people where they need to go, increases our energy independence through new sources and innovative technologies, improves air quality, redeuces traffic deaths and injuries and creates jobs by supporting america's hard-hit construction and manufacturing sector. it is imperative that we not only extend the surface transportation program through the end of the current fiscal year but also pass a multiyear, yes, multiyear, as many as six-year, re-authorization as soon as possible. a new multiyear surface

transportation authorization will create even more jobs and ensure that we can meet our growing transportation needs in the 21st century in a way that is affordable, efficient, innovative, resilient, sustainable, and accountable. in this country, highways, roads, business and transit are neither democratic nor republican. they serve all americans and help bring us closer together, literally. i reserve the plans of of -- -- of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves his time the gentleman from texas. mr. sessions: at this time, i'd like to yield to the gentleman from carlsbad, california, five minutes to mr. bilbray. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. bilbray: i rise in support of the rule and i'd like to say that i think this is an opportunity for all of us, both democrats and republicans, to

talk openly and frankly about the fact that we're at a point in our history where we need to not only spend money but we've got to be smarter, too. i think too often in washington, we're thinking that our degree of efficiency or compassion is based on how much we spend, not how well we accomplish our goals. i would only ask my colleague that just addressed us to join with some of us that say that we need to be smart and as a former member of the air resources board in california, i can show you studies that have been done by very noted research people that really point out one study alone that says is we can reduce fuel and emissions problems by 22.6%. but we could do that, we don't have to a-- we we have to address what is the private sector doing in detroit in building cars, but what is the

government sector doing in controlling those cars when they're on the road and one of the biggest problems we have is that washington sends money out for projects, but we do not hold those projects to a standard that's beenup graded to the 21st semplingry standards. i'll give you an example. studies have shown that 97% of all stop signs that you and i stop for every day, mr. speaker, don't have to be stop signs. those could be yield signs. granted, there are those sites with sight distance problems where you have to have stop signs but when we drive out of our homes tomorrow morning, think about why are you stopping? it's not for safety. it's not for fuel consumption or environmental conditioner is vation, it's because the law says you have to stop, even though there is a cost in economic and environmental impact. and that the safety factor is not the fact that that can determine. it's easier for a local government to give you a ticket

on a stop sign, at least that per is there. when the yield sign is just as enforceable. a good example, why is a four-way stop always the easiest and cheapest way for a government to be table o-- to be able to control inter sections when everybody knows a roundabout has been proven a major source is of safety and environmental -- environmental and economic benefit. communities that have tried new traffic controlled lights and roundabouts and traffic circles prove it reduces traffic, it also eliminates the pollution that stop signs cause than allowing someone to drive through an intersection at low speed but it elimbs nazz the gentleman who just spoke, the safety factor. a roundabout eliminates

t-boning. we can address not only fuel con sums and mugs but make our roads safety -- safer. i call on my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, let's look at make sure, when we send this money over to the states an cities and county, i was a mayor. i ran a transit system, the san diego trolley system, we helped build that system. but we need to make sure we are doing the right thing in government. one of the things that we're not doing in government that we can do and the example if we truly care about public safety, environmental protection and fuel efficiency, if we want to lead, let's not man tait on the private sector that they have to do something if we're not willing to look at our colleagues and say we have to reform ourselves. i call on my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, let's work together, let's start saying, look, local governments, towns an city the environmental, economic and safety impacts of you notup grading your traffic control is

costing our economy 22% more than it should. it's costing the environment 22.6% that it shouldn't and the fact is, we don't know how many lives we could save until we're willing to do that. i yield back, mr. sherman -- mr. chairman, let's get together and work on this. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. mr. hastings: i say to my friend and colleague, sign me up. at this time, mr. speaker, i'm pleased to yield four minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from florida, the ranking member of the railroad subcommittee, and my classmate, we came here together, ms. brown. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is reck used -- recognized for four minutes. ms. brown: thank you, mr. speaker, and thank you, classmate, for giving me four minutes. i rise to speak on the rule. i would like to begin by discussing the importance of re-authorizing the surface transportation bill. it's been a long time since we had a bill, since 2005, in

fact, i cannot overemphasize the importance of completing this bill as soon as possible. not only to reveal -- renew our nation's infrastructure but the desperately kneed jobs it will create. trpping projects are a national economic development tool. the department of transportation has indicated for every $1 billion we invest in transportation, it creates 42,000 permanent jobs and $2.1 billion in economic activity. it also saves 1.4 people's live. you can't argument with -- argue with those numbers. transportation fund is a win-wip for every involved. states get to improve their transportation infrastructure, create economic development, put people back to work, enhance safety and improve local communities yet in delaying the passing of this much-needed legislation any further, we are doing a disservice to the driving population and the nation as a whole.

the states are battling red ink, wanting to see this bill passed. the construction companies who are laying off this employees want to see this passed. sit is zens waiting in traffic jams like my constituents along i-4 in central florida want to see this bill passed. if this congress fails to pass a real transportation funding bill, our nation's transportation infrastructure and the citizens who use it will suffer for years to come. there are numerous studies that came out documenting the current state of affairs and many indicated that the american society of civil engineers have found that this country's infrastructure ranked d, barely passing, certainly not acceptable for a superpower like the united states. so we immediate to really pass this bill and really pass a full six-year re-authorization bill so the states can plan and the communities can play for

the transportation needs. i have to take a moment to talk about high speed rail because come friday, it's a very sad state of affairers in people of florida. because the governor of florida, rick scott, has indicated he's going to turn down $2.5 billion for federal high-speed rail funding. that's very sad for the people of florida because we worked for a number of years across the aisle, mr. mica and i have worked and when i was first elected, for every dollar we spent to washington, we are receiving 77 cents in florida, transportation dollars. i worked to change that formula and now we get 92 cents, that's $5 billion. for once, florida is in the opportunity to get some of their tax gs lean dollars back and to put floridians to work. we have a 12% unemployment and

in fact the 90% funding from the federal government and the 10% private that would generate over 60,000 jobs. but it is so sad and it's really a no brainer for the governor. he indicated he spent over $100 million to be the governor of the state of florida and he indicated he wanted to put floridians to work. mr. governor, how are you going to put them to work in what are you going to work them on besides talk? what really puts people to work is transportation an infrastructure and it is a no brainer, the high speed rail project that the communities have worked on in fact in 1980, bob gramm, then the governor, appointed me to a committee to work on high speed rail. let me just say, when there is no vision the people perish and the people of florida -- mr. hastings: if the gentlelady will suspend, i yield the

gentlelady an additional minute and i would also take this opportunity if she would yield to me to ask her a question. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for an additional question. ms. brown: what's your question, sir? mr. hastings: the previous safety lue measure provided funding for the high speed corridor, this one does not. but am i correct that if we were to do the high speed rail project that the lowest estimate is it would provide 30,000 jobs? mr. brown: that is the lowest but it will provide not just 60,000 jobs because you're not just looking at the construction, but everywhere you build a station, it's economic development and it's jobs. let me just say this is a public-private, in other words, we would be contracting the jobs out. companies, private companies would be building these stations.

in fact, over eight different companies have indicated that they want to be partners with this. it's the way we build airport the federal government goes in and puts the major infrastructure down and then private operate it. mr. hastings: i yield the gentleman -- gentlelady an additional 30 seconds. ms. brown: i've been elected for 30 years and this is in my opinion the worst politics i have ever seen. the bible says, without vision the people perish. the people of florida are going to suffer. we have a 12% unemployment rate and that's -- when i say 12%, that's over two million people unemployed. this is the opportunity to put 60,000 people to work and that translates not just in jobs, if you have a job, you can pay your mortgage so the foreclosures go down an it goes on and on. i want to thank the president, the vice president, the mayors and all the communities that have worked together for this

project. thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. . mr. somethingses: thank you. i enjoy my colleagues coming to the 234r50r and talk to us being without a vision. the people are perishing across our country because of the excessive spending that this administration, that the previous two congresses have placed upon the people. excessive debt. this year the president is estimating we'll have $1.6 trillion debt. as best i can tell you, some sense of reality and dose of discipline must be invoked upon this congress. mr. hastings: will my colleague yield? mr. sessions: not only by this bill today but also following regular order. allowing members of congress to come and speak very clearly on the floor. by allowing an open process. things which were never allowed

in the previous two congresses. so i appreciate members coming to the floor and talking about what's in the best interest of the country. madam speaker, the bottom line is that the republican majority is going to do something about jobs, going to do something about spending. we will bring discipline, authority, responsibility, and actions directly to the floor of the house of representatives as opposed to spending which was out of control. ideas which ran amuck. and a lack of vision and clarity for our future. so i'm very proud of what we are doing here today. i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: i'm going to be the last speaker. do you have additional speakers? mr. sessions: i appreciate the gentleman inquiring. i have no further speakers. mr. hastings: i'm prepared to close at this time. madam speaker, when ms. brown was speaking about the light

rail program that may expire on friday, and i'm hopeful that our governor will understand that, a retort came from my friend from texas about her saying about a lack of vision is what causes these kinds of matters. ms. brown was talking about light rail. i recall my friend from texas being upset when we did light rail in houston and i was for that. i might add all of us know that we need to move people as best we can in other methodologies as i described earlier. madam speaker, democrats and republicans must work together to invest more in our nation's aging transportation infrastructure network, invest more not less. we have a vision for america's

future transportation infrastructure. now we need the leadership to make it a reality. i shudder to think what would have happened to this nation's overall national security had dwight eisenhower not had the vision and those congresspersons who were here and the american people did not agree that we would have an interstate highway system. i understand that it takes money to do these things, but let's look at minnesota as a for example. when the bridge collapsed in minneapolis, tragically lives were lost. and a system that was a nation -- a city's lifeblood had to be repaired. it has been repaired. but wouldn't it have been so much better not just to avoid the tragedy, that's obvious, but

could we not have as we do see in some of these situations that these bridges need repaired, these levees need repaired. the congresspersons from louisiana were talking about the levees that were blown away during katrina 10 years before that happened. i stand here today and talk about a levee in the everglades that unless it's repaired it is going to cause a disaster. so you either pay me now or -- on these things or you pay a whole lot later. we are not talking about not spending, not investing. we are talking about doing it wisely and with accountability. i support the underlying bill, and i'd like to express my disappointment at the closed process. my colleague comes down here and talks about all the members will get a chance to come down here and they are going to get a chance to express their ideas.

there may be some members that may have had an amendment that might innovate something, might improve our transportation system. my friends, mr. sessions, will claim that this is technically not a closed rule. it's true that the rule did allow one, one amendment. by chairman mica, who wrote the underlying bill that i support. you heard that correctly. the only member who was allowed to offer an amendment is the same member who wrote the bill. on january 5 the distinguished speaker for whom i have great respect, and he is a friend of mine of this house stated the following, above all else we will welcome the battle of ideas, encourage it and engage it, openly, honestly, and respectfully. as the chamber closest to the people, the house works best when it is allowed to work its

will. my colleague, mr. mcgovern, offered a motion for an open rule so these important matters could be debated openly on the house floor, but this amendment was defeated last night, or yesterday in a party line rule. in addition shall -- in addition, i also made a motion to amend the rule and make in order an amendment by delegate holmes norton of washington, d.c., and co-sponsored by mr. moran of virginia which would simply have permitted the district of columbia to spend its own money after march 4, in other words this coming friday, in the event of a government shutdown. that was defeated on a party line. i ask you, madam speaker, does this sound like an open process to you? i urge my colleagues to vote no on this rule and instead pass this much needed extension through a truly open process that allows all members to offer

amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas. mr. sessions: thank you, madam speaker. you know i will say that this process that we have had as opposed to having just mixed in a resolution allows for a motion to recommit for the gentleman and his party. and it's my hope that they will take up that open process that we talked about where we'll see what their ideas are in a few minutes, we'll find out when they make that choice. but, madam speaker, we have heard a lot of things during this debate. up to and including thoughts and ideas about shutting down the government that looms ahead of us, not one republican, not one republican is talking about shutting down the government. it is an issue that republican leadership, including the gentleman, mr. boehner, the speaker of this house, has openly talked about that we will do every single thing that we

can do to avoid a government shutdown. it's my hope that this body would recognize we are not offering that as a threat to the american people. we are opened for doing business. we are trying to make sure we not only address this issue weeks ahead of time, but that we are forthright about how we would go about giving options, opportunities, how we would work with the president and the senate to make sure that we avoid this from happening. secondly, we heard about a vision statement, a vision statement that evidently is lacking now from republicans. the facts of the case are very simple and that is the vision that our country sees ahead right now is diminishment of jobs, a free enterprise system that is overburdened by rules and regulations, a policy that comes from this administration that is about destroying jobs, whether it be from the

environmental protection agency to securities and exchange commission, or governmentwide an assault on the free enterprise system and upon employers. so what we are trying to do is to offer some reassurance today that we will go ahead and re-authorize not only the surface transportation bill but with the understanding that the gentleman, the fabulous chairman of the committee, john mica from florida, will in fact lead on a bipartisan effort with ranking member rahall an opportunity to make sure that there is public involvement, open hearings are held, that we in committee talk about this and that every member be given a chance to participate. that is what republicans are now willing to do. regular order. open processes and a chance to make sure that as it finds its way here to the floor, every

single bill we want, where possible, to allow a democrat motion to recommit. and so, madam speaker, you heard me say earlier today that my republican colleagues and i are committed to an open process and far, far more accountability, transparency, and an open process than what our friends have ever allowed us for the last four years. today's legislation is a step in the right direction. the underlying bill has bipartisan support even up at the rules committee where republicans and democrats supported this underlying legislation. went through regular order, a structure which worked. open debate on the floor. this is just the first step in the necessary transportation funding. open dialogue with the american people, city, states, counties, and it's essential that sprorgs infrastructure committee take the time, review where they are, come up with recommendations, and allowing that the future will--this funding gives the

states the tools they need. we are working as chairman mica is with counties, cities, states, elected officials all across the country. the hard work that he is doing, pays off again today. i will predict that we will pass this rule and this bill on a bipartisan basis because of the way not only our speaker, john boehner, and our majority leader, eric cantor, but also the great chairman, john mica, insists on making sure that the floor is run and the openness for the body. i look forward to working with chairman mica and the rest of the committee on that endeavor and i yield back the balance of my time and i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: all time has been yielded back. without objection, the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the resolution. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the resolution is adopted. mr. hastings: i ask for a recorded vote.

the speaker pro tempore: a the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: i demand the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, this 15-minute vote on adopting house resolution 128 will be followed by five-minute votes on ordering the previous question on house resolution 129, and adopting house resolution 129,

for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that when the house adjourns today it adjourn to meet at 10:00 a.m. tomorrow. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the house will be in order. the house will be in order.

the chair lays before the house the physical lowing communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir, on february 16, 2011, pursuant to the provisions of 40 united states code 307, the committee on transportation and infrastructure met in open session to consider a resolution relating to the general services administration's f.y. 2011 capital investment and leasing program. the resolution authorizes the consolidation of the operations of the national gallery of art and the federal trade commission that will result in savings to the federal government. the committee adopted the resolution by a voice vote with a quorum present. enclosed is a copy of the resolution adopted by the committee on february 16, 2011,

signed, john l. mica, chairman. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the committee on appropriations. the house will be in order. will members and staff take your conversations to the back of the chamber or off the house floor, please. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i'd like to call up house resolution 662 for its consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 9, 46r789 r. -- h.r. 662, a bill to provide an extension of federal aid, highway, motor carrier safety, transit and other programs funded out of the highway trust fund pending enactment of a

multiyear law re-authorizing such programs. the speaker pro tempore: after one hour of debate on the bill, pursuant to haas resolution 128, the bill is considered read. after one hour of debate on the bill it shall be in order to consider the amendment printed in house report 112-20, if offered by the quelt from florida, mr. mica, or his designee, which shall be considered read and shall be separately debatable -- divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent. the gentleman from florida, mr. mica, and the gentleman from west virginia, have rahall, each will control 30 minutes. the gentleman from florida. mr. mica: madam speaker, first of all, i'd like to ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.r. 662.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection so ordered. will the gentleman suspend for a moment. the house will be in order. the gentleman may proceed. mr. mica: thank you, madam chair and speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mica: thank you again. i come to the floor today to pass the extension of our major surface transportation legislation. that's h.r. 662. first of all, i ask unanimous consent that an exchange of letters with the committee on ways and means be submitted to the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mica: thank you. i'd like to first lead off by informing the members and the speaker that this extension is

a spending freeze at 2010 levels through september 30. we find ourselves in a situation where the major transportation legislation that authorizes all of the policies of various projects, all the funding levels, all of the activities that are so important to job creation, to building this nation's infrastructure, that legislation expired september 30, 2009. in the past congress and since that time we have passed a number of short-term extensions. we're now on the sixth extension of that legislation. what happens when the congress does this is we end up sending the worst message and the worst policy possible across the

nation and across the land to our states and our localities that are trying to build the nation's infrastructure and trying to determine what federal policy, what their partnership and funding relationship will be with the federal government. right now, in a time in which across this nation we're experiencing some of the worst unemployment, in my district, i have some areas with 17% unemployment. where is that unemployment? that's in the construction industry. so it's critical that we pass an extension of the current legislation and extension that we're on, the sixth extension we're on, and we do that before friday. friday is when the current extension expires. again, this is important for jobs. why? our state transportation

departments have only been able to do small projects. now they've dobe some sidewalks and they've done some repaving and they've done minor construction projects but because they don't have a dependable federal partner and the hiccup manner in which we've provided funding direction as far as major transportation projects, because it's been done in such a helter-skelter fashion, people are not moed, projects do not move forward. s the worst time that this could happen. i'm determined that that won't happen again. i might like to do a short-term extension and some people have said we should do that but the responsible thing for us to do now is to pass through the fiscal year and this extension takes us to september 30, so

states can plan, people can get back to work, so we have some semblance of policy regarding building the nation's infrastructure in place now. people are crying out for jobs across this country. we may not pass any other piece of legislation this year but our transportation and infrastructure legislation, this and the highway re-authorize igs, i said highway, i meant f.a.a. re-authorize, in addition to highway and surface and all the other modes, our f.a.a. extensions have become almost the saddest commentary you can have on building, again, the nation's important infrastructure. we have done 17 extensions of the f.a.a. legislation. so our airports and other plans. we're not going to let that happen under our watch. we are going to set policy today and extend until the end of this fiscal year in a

responsible manner. some people on the conservative side of the aisle, and i'll match my credentials with any of them, want to know about the money that's being spent. this is not money that is general revenue, this is entirely within the trust fund, the federal highway and transit trust fund. when we came here, we also said, we weren't going -- we were going to force the congress to spend more money in cren revenue than we had in that fund and this extension adheres to that policy, that we won't be reckless in spend, we won't spend beyond what we have in the fund, and this extension only extends funds from within that trust fund. so i want my c friends, and i consider myself in the conservative fiscal corner, responsible corner in spending, to know that this is

the way this is crafted. again, i think we have an obligation to move forward, we're doing it on a sound basis, we're freezing at the 2010 levels and we will be able, at least until september, to get people to work. now, i know sometimes i can move legislation along in this body and i work hard sometimes to do that. but i can tell you, i cannot pass a full authorization bill by this friday. we just took over some of these responsibilities a few weeks ago. we've had six extensions, i don't want to get again into a situation where we're doing these short-term job-killing extensions. so that's the reason that we're here. that's the responsibility that we have as a congress in moving forward and again setting that policy and setting a timeframe in which our states and others who actually do these projects can operate. and again it's been doing within

the responsible parameters that this new congress and the house of representatives has set forward. i do want to say, finally, that i thank my colleague, mr. rahall, who is the ranking member, for his interest in moving forward with a long-term bill, in reaching out we held the first of our hearings and we're doing these around the country, we've done more than a dozen from the atlantic to the pacific. but we started in west virginia a little over a week ago, in the hometown of the ranking member. because we want our permanent election legislation to be long-term -- legislation to be long-term, to have in place sound policy, we want it done on a bipartisan basis. and ensure also that it's done on a bicameral basis, we did an almost unprecedented hearing with senator boxer, the

gentlelady from california, who chaired the environment and public works committee of the united states senate. we did a joint bicameral, bipartisan hearing in los angeles last week to kick off our larger effort to again have in place the very best policy regarding our infrastructure for the nation. so, with that, with those comments, again, i want to thank folks that we have an agreement here to move forward, we need to do that, we need to get people working in this country and do it in a responsible fashion and i believe that h.r. 662 will do that and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rahall: madam speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 662, the surface transportation extension act of 2011.

as my chairman has said, this legislation extends the federal aid and highway public transit and motor carryway safety program through the end of the year. i commend the chairman of the committee, mr. mica, for his bringing this bill before us today. i also associate myself with the remarks that he has just said in support thereof. i commend him for the listening tour that he has embarked around the country, as well as a few formal hearings thrown in his listening tour. this gives the country and you members of body an opportunity to learn a great deal about what re-authorization of our transportation program really means when it comes to jobs and when it comes to infrastructure, particularly within each member of congress' congressional district. extending these programs is absolutely critical to keep our economy on the road to recovery, excuse me, and i strongly

support this bill. as did my colleagues on both sides of the aisle when we passed it out of the transportation and infrastructure committee two weeks ago by unanimous consent. i also want to support and commend our ranking member of the highways and transit subcommittee, mr. defazio, for his tremendous work in previous years and on bringing the current bill before us as well and we'll hear from him in a moment. while i do strongly support this bill, madam speaker, what i contribute support are republican attempts to gut -- cannot support are republican attempts to gut growing our economy. the republican spending bill that passed two weeks ago will destroy over 300,000 good-paying transportation jobs, jobs lost in every state of this great country. what i cannot support is dangerous and draconian cuts across the board that invest in america's future and these cuts coming just at a time that our economy is turning the corner. and what i cannot support is

cutting the job-creating muscle of our budget. which investment in our infrastructure is. when we should be focusing on trimming the fat. in order to keep the pace with india, china, and other international competitors, we need to invest more, not less, in america's infrastructure. if we stop investing in the future there's simply no way we can retire the debt of the past. the bill before us today is identical to legislation that the house passed last fall, regrettably at that time republicans objected to it and the senate republican leadership insisted that surface transportation programs expire on march 4, 2011. i'm glad that my republican colleagues have now come around and recognized the need to extend these vital programs through the fiscal year. i hope all members will vote for this bipartisan extension to keep america's economy moving. if congress does not extend the surface transportation programs, the u.s. department of transportation will stop reimbursing states for

expenditures on approved projects and thousands of construction projects across the nation could come to a screeching halt. according to the d.o.t., a delay in enactment of this bill will shut down more than $800 million next week in highway reimbursements and transit grants to states and urban areas, endangering more than 28,000 jobs and multimillion-dollar construction projects across the country. this bill provides a certainty that the construction industry needs to continue the slow climb back from the greatest recession since world war ii. it also enables congress the necessary time to work toward passage of a long-term surface transportation authorization bill later this year. enactment of this extension act will enable us to redirect our focus to developing a long-term bill that begins to address the nation's enormous infrastructure needs and will create millions of family wage jobs. i also today call upon the administration to join us in this effort, to get behind this

re-authorization bill and give it the necessary support from the executive branch that it needs. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting h.r. 662 and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. mica: thank you, madam speaker. and i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from tennessee who is one of the primary leaders in the transportation infrastructure committee, the chair of the highways and transit subcommittee, mr. duncan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee is recognized for two minutes. mr. duncan: thank you, madam speaker. and i thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. h.r. 662, the surface transportation extension act of 2011, extends the highway transit and highway safety programs through the end of the fiscal year at the 2010 funding levels. it does not make any problematic or policy changes but instead only continues what is currently in law. i'm proud to be an original co-sponsor of this bill with the chairman, my subcommittee vice

chair, mr. hanna, ranking member rahall and subcommittee ranking member defazio. i want to commend chairman mica for his hearings and listening sessions that he's done all over this country. i had the privilege of attending several of those and we heard from local and state officials all over this nation about their needs. without this extension these programs are set to expire on friday. this extension will allow the highway and transit programs to continue to operate as the spring construction season kicks off. with unemployment in the construction industry at an all-time high, it is imperative that we extend the surface transportation programs through the end of the fiscal year. a front page story in "u.s.a. today" last week said that gas would soon go to $5 a gallon or higher. we need more domestic oil production in this country, we simply cannot allow or let environment radicals drive the price of gas to $5 or higher.

this will hurt many poor and lower income and working people and stop our recovery in its tracks. and this bill is important to our economy. additionally this extension will provide a level of predictability for state d.o.t.'s and local transit agencies to embark on major construction projects that will create jobs and, as i said, it will certainly stimulate the economy. i support the passage of this legislation and urge my colleagues to do the same and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: madam speaker, i yield five minutes to the distinguished gentleman from oregon, the ranking member of our highways and transit subcommittee, mr. defazio. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for five minutes. mr. defazio: i thank the ranking member of the chairman of the full committee and subcommittee and others who support this important legislation. it's kind of sad that we're

actually in this position. you know, we are looking at the seventh extension of the surface transportation re-authorization because of events in the last congress, lack of support from the administration, opposition from others and basically no action on the senate side, we ground to a halt in ru authorizing this vital legislation -- re-authorizing this vital legislation. that's too bad. had we taken a fraction of the money spent in the so-called stimulus and instead invested it in fully funding a six-year surface transportation authorization, we could have created millions of jobs. not just construction jobs, engineering jobs, manufacturing jobs, high-tech jobs, because we have the most effective buy america requirements on our transportation acquisitions in this country. so, for instance, oregon iron works building the first made in america street car in 70 years,

all of the components that go into that are being made here in the united states of america. a very skilled work -- very skilled workers, a very sophisticated product. you buy a bus made in america, the tires, everything's got to be made in america. you build a bridge, the steel has to come from america, except for a few loopholes in the law which we need to plug. if we begin to deal honestly with our backlog, 150,000 bridges on the national highway system are substandard and in need of either significant repair or replacement. that's a lot of steel. that's a lot of work. that's also a lot of detours for trucks and others trying to use the national highway system. then you can look at the surface of our national highway system itself, not just the bridges. 40% of the pavement is in fair to poor condition, you all experience that, potholes,

blowing out tires, breaking axels, causing higher fuel consumption, accidents, all kinds of problems. that needs to be taken care of. then we have a our transit system, right here in wark, they're killing people on metro because they haven't the money to make the capital investments they need to have a modern light rail system in this city. and they're running cars that shouldn't be on the tracks anymore. so, we are at really a crisis point. and i have taken to giving speeches about how we were falling to the third world status for infrastructure and my colleague, mr. blumenauer from oregon, actually came up to me after a speech once and said, he says, that's kind of, you know, that's insulting and it's wrong. i said, well, no, you know the problems. he said, no, to say that we're third world. most third world countries are investing a much greater percentage of their gross domestic product in transportation and infrastructure than we are in the united states of america.

so i have taken to calling us fourth world. formerly first world, vaulting over to the back of the line here to have the worst infrastructure of any modern nation on earth. it's not right, it doesn't serve our businesses or our communities well. the obama administration did not take up this campaign adequately in the last congress. i tried valiantly, they got hung up on the idea that we need to invest more money, we do need to invest more money. we have two commissions that were constituted when the republicans controlled the house, the white house and the senate and both commissions came to the same conclusion. we're spending about -- somewhere around 30% to 40% of what we need on an annual basis to have a 21st century transportation system. we're spending about 30% less than we need to maintain the deteriorated rate of infrastructure in this country. we're not even maintaining the eisenhower legacy. come on, let's get real. now, unfortunately on the republican side of the aisle, they've adopted an arbitrary

rule, no new revenues for anything. now, they ought to rethink that. let's think about capital budgets. you build a bridge, it lasts 100 years. we could justify borrowing money for that, maybe we could justify raising some revenues to pay for that, perhaps from the oil companies, who knows? and put a lot of people to work and improve our infrastructure. but that's a nonstarter so far, i hope that changes. if we look at this as way to put america back to work, to make us more competitive in the international economy, we should be talking about rebuilding our infrastructure. . it's the last place we should cut and some have been proposed and made in transportation. that's not where we should be cutting and those who advocate further cuts are wrong. this is a trust-funded program. the program itself, 96% of the funding in this extension comes from the gas taskes every

american has paid, diesel, every trucker has paid and money that has been paid in other taxes. we need this bill today. it's a starting point for a robust re-authorization later this year and i look forward to working with the new chairman of the subcommittee on this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from florida. mr. mica: i yield to another leader of the transportation and infrastructure committee, the chair of the rail subcommittee, the gentleman from pennsylvania, for a period of three minutes, mr. shuster. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. shuster: i thank the chairman for yielding. here we are again, seventh time for an extension and i agree with my friend from oregon who pointed out that this administration stopped us from passing a transportation bill under chairman oberstar and mr. mica was ranking member. so here we are again, seventh

extension on the highway bill. as the chairman pointed out, this freezes the authorizing funds at fiscal year 2010 levels and will go until september 30, to give us the time necessary to craft a new transportation bill. i want to point out, this is a clean extension to what's in current law. there are no policy or program changes and this does not contain any stimulus funding. this extension, coupled with the c.r., is going to reduce spending by $1 billion. we are going to cut reduction in new starts by over $400 million and eliminate unauthorized transit programs by $200 million and unauthorized tiger grants by $600 million. significant reductions. and this current extension has to be passed by friday. if we don't move this forward, we are going to feel it throughout the economy, throughout this nation.

today, this week, in the past couple of weeks, state d.o.t.'s have been letting contracts and putting bids out to get the bids in place. contracts in place to start in the spring, summer and fall contracting season. and if we shut down this program, there will be immediate furloughs and suspension of payments to states. i would like to remind my colleagues especially on my side of the aisle, this is money that is being reimbursed to states to the tune of $150 million a day is going out to be able to pay the contractors to keep them working and building bridges and roads around this country. so we are in an extremely difficult time to put these payments in jeopardy. it gives us the time to craft a transportation bill by september 30 to put out there. and when we do that, we're going to go through this transportation bill and cut and reform and change -- some of you

may have seen the g.a.o. report. i haven't looked at it completely, but there are many programs in the department of transportation and across the government that duplicate efforts and we don't know where the money is going and some of these programs, we aren't sure who is watching the spending of it, can't account for it. this transportation bill we move in september is going to do all of those types of things to improve what we do here in washington and be a good partner to the states when it comes to building and maintaining a national transportation system. i urge my colleagues to support this extension. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: i yield three minutes to the distinguished the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. blumenauer: thank you. i come to the floor to support this extension. i appreciated the comments from the chair talking about the

involvement with the senate and the house together and the listening sessions that are taking place around the country. i am absolutely convince that had my friend, mr. mica, is sincere in his interest in infrastructure. i had the pleasure of working with mr. rahall, mr. duncan and mr. defazio. there is a team in place, people interested in moving this forward. it is absolutely imperative that we extend the re-authorization through this construction cycle and making the decision now, setting it at work, people can plan. it's not as good as a re-authorization by any stretch of the imagination but gets us through the construction cycle and avoids an unfortunate situation. we are 7.5 years into a six-year authorization. no one is happy about that. it is the tenor of the times. i was on the committee when we

were struggling with 12 extensions in the last re-authorization. we need to do better. i'm all for looking at squeezing out any inefficiency, examining programs to focus them, make them work better, but the simple fact is, we need to spend more on infrastructure, not less. those -- the nonbipartisan independent commissions that my friend, mr. defazio referenced, government leaders at other levels, organized labor, very focused on this and documented the need to do more. the fact is that the american public is already paying a huge cost in addition to the road fees in wasting their time and damage to their vehicles and interrupting the flow of commerce. we're already paying the price. my personal goal as a member of the budget committee and ways

and means is to work with the authorizing committee to have the resources. we have people from the chamber of commerce, organized labor, local governments, a.a.a., truckers, the women's federal rated garden club of america, all coming together to provide support for the resources. and we need to work this dance out between the house, the senate and the administration to be able to have the resources so that the committee can put forth a robust bill for our future. now, it's true, we're not going to re-authorize this bill in this week. we aren't going to re-authorize it this spring. it will be a stretch to re-authorize it before this extension expires. but the time to get busy is now. i appreciate the approach that's being taken by the committee bringing people together.

i am hopeful that instead of -- may have one additional minute? mr. rahall: the gentleman has one additional minute. mr. blumenauer: instead of cutting transportation, which is envisioned in the c.r. that would cost us 200,000 or 300,000 jobs at precisely the time we need economic activity, i am hopeful that we can have a truce on the budget wars and acknowledge that we'll have a tight and focused re-authorization meeting with the wide range of transportation needs, a a deal with how we rebuild and renew america, get the economy started again, strengthen the quality of life in our communities and make our families safer, health year and more economically secure. it starts by approving this extension today. thank you. and i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. mica: i'm pleased to yield 2 1/2 minutes to another outstanding member and a new member of our committee who has great local government experience as a former mayor in pennsylvania, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. barletta 2 1/2 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. barletta: madam speaker, i rise today to urge the passage of h.r. 662, surface transportation extension act of 2011. as i heard from my friends and neighbors back home, job creation and rebuilding our economy is the most important issue facing us and transportation funding means not only construction jobs, but also for surveyors, heavy machineists, asphalt companies, grossers, hotels and restaurants.

studies have shown that every dollar spent on investment and infrastructure, the gross domestic product grows by $1.59. and for every $1 million spent on highways, 47 jobs are created. poor roads and congestion are costing my constituents. the american association of state highway and transportation officials estimates that poor road conditions cost this country $355 billion annually. h.r. 662 is a clean extension that would fund ongoing operations through september 30, 2011. failing to extend this bill would hurt my district in terms of jobs, safety and costs to my constituents in wasted fuel and lost productivity. the 2011 construction season is just getting under way. any disruption in funding will

delay the construction industry's ability to create jobs and complete much needed improvement projects. with unemployment in the construction sector at a staggering 22.5%, we must pass the extension and put more hard-working americans back to work. as a member of the committee on transportation and infrastructure, i look forward to working with my colleagues to pass a long-term legislation that will meet our future transportation needs. this extension gives congress the time and ability to produce a smart, fiscally responsible bill. i urge support of 662. and yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: madam speaker, i yield three minutes to the gentleman from tennessee, mr. cohen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes.

mr. cohen: i want to thank ranking member rahall for the time and i rise in support of h.r. 662, the surface transportation surface transportation act of 2011. last friday i was in tennessee and joined with chairman mica and mr. fincher on a transportation bill listening session. and chairman mica went across the country and we heard from all kinds of folks hearing how important this is for the future of our country, getting goods to market and the session focused on a new surface transportation and while the legislation is another extension of safetea-lu. my home is h.r. 662 will be the final short-term extension congress uses to extend safetea-lu because this congress needs a long-term surface transportation and chairman has promised we aren't going to have more extensions but pass the

bill like the f.a.a. seven extensions was enough. we need to move this country forward and get the programs started. by not passing authorization, congress has created uncertainty which is the limited ability to invest. the importance of the immediate passage cannot be emphasized more. jobs are needed and have been neglected and provide a known dedicated funding stream that will address the dire need in the nation's transportation system. the budget proposal of 2012, president obama lays h lays out a bold vision. the president understands the united states will not maintain its mantle as the greatest nation in the world without a system that enables people to compete in the 21 century economies. and has called for $566 billion with up to $50 billion to jump

start job creation. as the president said in the state of the union, now is not the time to stand pat. we need to pass the surface transportation bill that will increase revenue and makes investment and high-speed rail and transportation systems. i appreciate chairman mica including including the language in the f.a.a. bill and look forward to seeing the same language which was discussed in memphis. as "new york times" columnist said, we must win the future, not eat it. i look forward to working with chairman mica, subcommittee chairman duncan, the ranking members, rahall and defazio and see we pass the authorization that strengthens our infrastructure, spurs innovation, creates jobs, ensures safety and wins the future. we are winners. thank you. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the

balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. mica: i would like to inquire as to the balance of time on each side. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida has 15 minutes remaining and the gentleman from west virginia has 14 minutes remaining. mr. mica: i continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: i yield five fints to the gentlelady from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. . ms. richardson: i rise in support of this act. i'm hopeful that passing this extension will give us the adequate time that we all need on the committee to pass a full six-year re-authorization. last year the committee initiated a very good start. in fact, we suggested spending a minimum of $500 billion of investment and the administration recently released budget calls for approximately that same amount of $556 billion over the next six years.

this includes an extra $50 billion to boost next year, to provide for an immediate economic stimulus that we all know that we need. i heard one of my colleagues on the other side reference unemployment in construction. in my district it's over 40%. so this has got to be done and it's got to be done now. while the president's budget calls for a significant increase in our spending, we should all remember that it falls well short of the $225 billion per year investment that's really required that has been noted by sources, noted as the transportation policy and revenues study commission, that was a bipartisan commission, created by congress to study this very issue. our infrastructure is in a state of disrepair and congestion costs are costing us more than $78 billion per year. the quality of our transportation system is deteriorating. almost 61,000 miles, 37% of our roads, are in poor or fair

condition. more than 152,000 bridges, 25%, are structurally deficient. so when we talk about cutting, we're all mindful of the need to make adjustments and to be good stewards of these dollars. but we shouldn't cut for just cutting's sake. that is the wrong approach and the wrong thing to do. in my district, home to four major highways, a transit system, three airports and a district that covers more than 40% of our entire nation's cargo, these congested roads and crumbling bridges are in dire need and we need help now. a robust surface transportation re-authorization bill will help the people in my district and across this country where they need to go, to improve safety and to get to work. now, i was talking to some of my colleagues and they were telling me that the former mr. shuster, when he was the chair of this committee, he worked on both sides of the aisle. i was told when we had that very

difficult vote he worked on this side and we got forward a very successful bill. so in that spirit, when mr. mica mentioned that he was going to have his listening tours, i took him at his word and i've attended two and i intend upon attending one more. we've heard a lot of things from people. one of the things i'd like to suggest that we continue is really an open discussion, an open discussion about h.m.t., an open discussion about really implementing a true national goods movement strategy. all of which my staff and i have worked and have brought forward very thoughtful legislation that i hope will be sincerely considered. the gas tax alone will not work. and i urge mr. mica to please work with us as we are working with you today. many people asked me today, you're going to vote for this rule? i said, yes. because i'm willing to work across the aisle with mr. mica to get this done and mr. shuster as well.

we're going to have to consider new ideas to be able to help institute this public-private partnership that we all know needs to be a part of this discussion. i urge my colleagues to support h.r. 662 which should be really the building block of our six-year re-authorization, that deserves bipartisan support of this congress and the american people. mr. rahall, i appreciate all of the efforts you've done so far. i know you're very committed to getting this done and i look forward to all of the hard work in your new leadership, as well as also our ranking member, mr. defazio. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from florida. mr. mica: at this time i have no further speakers but i'll continue to yield to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. mr. mica: i mean reserve to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from west virginia. mr. rahall: thank you, madam speaker, and i'm prepared to close on our side of the aisle. i do appreciate once again the

work of chairman mica in bringing this extension to the floor of the house. as he has already noted, the sixth extension of safetealu. this will take us through the end of the fiscal year. it will give us the spring and the summer to work together, to continue to work together in a bipartisan spirit with which chairman mica has started his tenure as chairman of our committee. and i do look forward to continuing to work with him. i once again call upon the administration to work with us as well under the very capable leadership of secretary lahood. i'm sure that the administration will work with us if they'll just give us some proposals and put some concrete ideas, excuse the pun, on the table with which we can work in a bipartisan and bicameral measure. so this is a job-saving piece of

legislation, it helps provide some degree, although a permanent re-authorization would provide much more degree of certainty to industry, to our construction industry, so they can plan and invest in what is not short-term jobs but good, long-paying family wage jobs for our people. that's what we're talking about when we talk about investments in infrastructure, that's what we're talking about in this legislation and i urge my colleagues as i conclude to support this in a bipartisan fashion. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. mica: i yield myself the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mica: each of us that are sent to congress, madam speaker, have certain responsibilities. first we have a responsibility to our constituents in our districts, then we're sent here and by the grace of the good lord on our side the steering committee, approval by

leadership, and our colleagues, we get to do certain tasks. mine is now to try to shepherd forward transportation policy for our country. that's an important responsibility, again, because we have millions of americans who don't have jobs, probably the hardest thing that i face when i get home or talk to folks across the country and my district are people that have lost their homes, can't make their mortgage payments or are struggling and they want to go to work, most of them i've talked to, and they don't have an opportunity. i know a new congress has come and that new congress has santa very clear message about spending -- has sent a very clear message about spending and resources here and i think the congress gets it and the

american people have mandated that approach. we can also be here many times doing things that might prove a political point, but from time to time we have to step back and we have to do something for the very good of the country. i think this is one of those times that we have an important obligation. what will happen friday if we don't act accordingly today and pass the h.r. 662 is literally a disaster because we will shut down all of the transportation projects across the land, any that have any connection to the federal government. now, we've also said that we can't pass in continuing resolutions authorization for

legislation, so that's the situation we find ourselves in today. we have a bipartisan agreement to move forward, we have an opportunity to actually expand and define the time in which we can accomplish the important work of government. and some people say, well, these are just transportation projects, but you go back to the very basic beginning of the nation and they came together first for national security, but then the founding fathers, washington, jefferson, they were pretty smart and they wanted also to be able to do infrastructure projects that transcended arbitrary political boundaries. i love to read about washington and his vision to open the canals and the post roads and some of the first work of the congress was to authorize transportation and infrastructure projects for the nation and the vision of people like lincoln to connect the con

nent, that in-- the continent, that kind of leadership has come from people in the past and we have that responsibility today to move forward. so i think the people can go home after they vote for this and say, i did something positive, we acted in a fiscal, responsible way, we're dealing within the trust funds, the money that people paid when they put a gallon of gasoline in their car, they paid 18.4 cents that went into the trust fund. we didn't spend recklessly, but we did act responsibly and we're getting people working again. and we did it in a period of time, not the hiccup and the sporadic six past extensions, in a time frame in which we can actually get major infrastructure projects, people working again. so i think we can all take heart in the bipartisan effort that we've had here.

the congress can work and the people's work can get done by people coming together. i know we still have disagreements on policy and i've pledged to work on both sides, i even offered to buy the beer and pizza when we finished the listening tours and with senator boxer, she wanted i think fruit drippings and i'll even throw those in, too, -- drinks and i'll even throw those in too if we can come together and find sound policy for the nation. so infrastructure can move forward and we can do it. we can -- i really think we can do it. so we have six months definition, we have six months to get the rest of the job done, but i'm confident that everybody here today can join and we can make a difference, a difference for those people wanting us to be responsible and do what they sent us here for. so, with that i'm pleased to yield back the baffle my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time for debate on the bill has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? mr. mica: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will -- the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: offered by mr. mica of florida. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 128, the gentleman from florida, mr. mica, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. mica: thank you, madam speaker. again, this is a purely technical amendment and reviewed by both sides of the aisle and both bodies. we found three technical changes to correct drafting errors in h.r. 662. we want this to go to the president, we want it signed and we want to make certain that as

all the -- it has all the technical provisions necessary in clear language. so the amendment adds two comas to the bill on page 12 -- commas to the bill on page 12 and another on 15. on 15 it also strikes an authorization in the current extension that h.r. 662 failed to strike. so it's purely technical in nature, but we do want to correct and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. does the gentleman from west virginia rise in opposition? mr. rahall: no, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman claim the time in opposition? mr. rahall: no. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. rahall: thank you. i rise in support of the manager's amendment, the chairman has adequately explained it and i fully concur and urge its adoption. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman reserve? the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. mica: with that i conclude and yield back the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment by the gentleman from florida, mr. mica. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: madam speaker, on that i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays

the gentleman may proceed. mr. polis: many members of the body use this as an example of wasteful spending. mr. neugebauer stated while some fund worthy projects, there are some that are wasteful uses of taxpayer money. mr. pence said all spending bills passed in 2007 included hundreds of marcs. that of course followed the infamous bridge to nowhere the p the 2005 highway bill, enquote. here we have a wasteful expenditure that not only had its origin as an earmark but has been used as the very example of a wasteful earmark. if alaska wants to build a bridge to nowhere, go ahead and do it but without federal tax dollars. .

mr. wahlberg said his constituents are tired of paying for things that go nowhere. this funding doesn't fund a hippie museum. but by passing this amendment will allow $153 million of taxpayer money to be spent for bridges to nowhere and wasteful spending we can't afford despite claims the earmarks were eliminated alaska spent $71 million of federal money. in 2006 when the republicans lost their majority, mr. kearn, the leader, said the republicans have become a party to the bridge to nowhere. mr. speaker, looks like too little has changed. unless this amendment passes, the republicans once again will become a party lost on the bridge to nowhere. this motion rescinds all remaining funds, about $183 million for the planning, design and construction for the two bridges.

the amendment prohibits the use of the funds -- mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized -- the gentleman is correct. the house will be in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman may proceed. mr. polis: this is a very simple choice. there's no politics in this. we're not changing other parts of the bill, trying to catch people off, we're not putting up a vote to trap people for 30-second spots to say they're for pornography as has been done in previous sessions while the bill is gutted elsewhere. what we're providing is a clean vote on the bridge to nowhere. according to the c.b.o. this motion will reduce the deficit by $160 million by eliminating funding for these two bridges, nothing else. listen, for us to have the credibility as a congress to make the tough cuts we need to to balance the budget, to work together to pass a c.r. that cuts spending, to reduce spending in future years, congress must have moral standings. mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is correct.

the gentleman may proceed. mr. polis: continuing to provide funding to be used for these bridges, the infamous alaska bridge to nowhere which most americans like me were already dead is not the way for congress to build trust with the american people. so we have a choice today, we can vote to -- >> the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. mr. polis: thank you, mr. speaker. we have a choice. we can vote to continue these most egregious earmarks or stand by our words and values and vote for this amendment and finally put an end to wasteful spending and pet projects. let me close with words of wisdom from my colleague from west virginia, shelley moore capito, quote, the days of members slipping in the bridge to nowhere in the dead of night are over, end quote. i urge my colleagues to shine the light of date on this insidious example of pork.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. polis: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? >> i rise in opposition to the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. mica: welcome to the era of smoke and mirrors and that's what this motion is and i urge its defeat. you heard the gentleman describing bridges and he again is trying to mislead the entire house on this particular motion to recommit. it is smoke and mirrors . and i urge the defeat of the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. the question is on the motion. those in favor say aye.

those opposed, no. the noes have it. the motion -- mr. poll us: on that i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman ask for a recorded vote? mr. polis: yes. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. those in favor of a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20 the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time for electronic vote on the question

the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the house will be in order. if members could please remove their conversations from the floor.

the house will be in order. the chair is prepared to entertain one-minute requests. without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized. >> thank you so much, mr. speaker. ms. ros-lehtinen: i rise to recognize women of tomorrow, which is is holding their annual gala celebrating 10 years in florida. their goal was to help at-risk

young women live up to their full potential. the result is a truly unique organization that pairs successful women with at-risk teenage girls in high school. the members are lawyers, doctors, and entrepreneurs and public servants. they show their men tees that anything is -- their meantees that anything is possible -- their mentees that anything is possible. congratulations on 10 amazing years and i know the next 10 will be even better. thank you, mr. speaker, for the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon rise? >> i request permission to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. blumenauer: there's a lot of talk about what the american public wants or thinks. this week, survey research came

out commissioned by the public broadcasting system and conducted by a bipartisan survey research team from hart research and american viewpoint that is powerful evidence that while americans are concerned about the budget and budget deficits, they are -- public broadcasting is a higher priority. support for public broadcasting transcends party affiliation. more than 2/3 of all voters oppose elimination of federal funding for public broadcasting, as approved by my republican friends. what is most interesting, nearly eight in 10 voters believe that pbs should receive the same amount of government funding or more than it currently receives. it's not just democrats, 92% favor the same amount or mor, it's not just independents, 75%

favor the same amount or more. 2/3 of the republicans fare the same or more money for public broadcasting. they're still trying to climb off the ledge. the senate should stand tall and the house should reverse itself. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. thompson: i i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute without objection. mr. thompson: my constituents are perplexed with washington, mr. speaker. the public demands washington tighten its belt. despite this year's $1.6 trillion deficit, the president refuses to change course and reduce spending. president obama created the bipartisan national commission on fiscal responsibility and reform by executive order. the commission's mission, according to the executive order, was to, quote, i'd foy policies to improve fiscal situation in the medium term and to achieve fiscal

sustainability over the long run. unfortunately, the president's f.y. 2012 budget ignores every essential observation and proposal advanced by the commission, doubles debt held by the public by the end of its term while adding on $13 trillion in new debt. erskine bowles, the democratic chairman of the fiscal commission stated the white house budget goes nowhere near they will have to go to restore our fiscal nightmare. mr. speaker, my constituents and i agree, despite the need to rein in our run away debt, the president's budget is more of the same. it's time we take the economists and constituents seriously and get serious on the debt and ask my colleagues to join me in heeding their call. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you. i ask unanimous consent here because i rise today to shed light on a very serious

problem. skyrocketing gasoline prices. in new york the prices average $3.50 per gallon. nationally the average price is $3.38 per gallon and continues to rise. mr. tonko: due to the conflict in north africa and the middle east oil is over $100 per barrel and appears to be no end in sight. for the rise in oil, america sends an additional $40 billion overseas yearly. how can we expect to turn around our economy and create jobs when we are sending this much money to our enemies? plain and simple, we must start thinking outside the barrel to create jobs and protect our national security. we as americans are better than the ancient fuel that we put into our vehicles, using 19th and 20th century oil subsidies in this 21st century is outdated and foolish. we are literally giving away hard earned taxpayer money to big oil companies setting record profits.

what do we get in return? sticker shock at the pump. mr. speaker, this is unfair to hard-working americans that play by the rules. we deserve better. let's stop the sticker shock. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. poe: mr. speaker, last thursday was just a normal day in houston, texas. seven families left their babies at jackie's childcare and went to work just as they did every day. a daycare is supposed to be a place where parents trust caregivers with the safety of their kids. after all, that is what they are supposed to do, keep children safe. the owner, however, jessica tata, left the children by themselves and carelessly drove off to target. meanwhile, the pot of oil she'd left on the electric stove caught fire and those seven babies burned in a massive fire. elizabeth koja, kendall stafford, elias castillo and samaris dickerson all burned to

death and all under the age of 3. it took several days for the authorities to get their act together to file charges, meanwhile, tata was able to three -- flee to nigeria, the good book said you flee in no one pursueth. in doubt in our minds jessica tata should be held responsible for this crime. the law needs to return her to texas and let the jury decide what to do with the baby killer because justice is what we do and it's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition from mississippi? >> i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks, address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> last week while most of us were working for our districts a newspaper article entitled combat troops to get gay sensitivity training was published. the article explains how our combat forces on the front lines of afghanistan will soon be required to take a time-out from their mission to be forced

to parlingts pate 5 -- participate in the pentagon's homosexuality training. regardless of your opinion on that issue, it is remarkable the courageous men and women that voluntarily put themselves in harm's way are being subjected to such insane distractions while the war rages on around them. our nation is at war against an enemy that wants nothing more than the complete destruction of our way of life. for the president and pentagon to dangerously distract the attention of our troops and operating bases away from the enemy and towards homosexual sensitive training is outrageous. mr. pal assesso -- mr. palazzo: to the men and women, i pray you return home safe and sound. i want to win the war on terror because we've certainly lost a war of common sense. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise?

>> i ask unanimous to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i'm glad my colleague came up to speak to talk about the high energy prices. we have consistently tried on this side of the aisle to talk about an all above energy tragedy. mr. shimkus: we are held captive to crude oil. we're stuck in a one-fuel technology and an above all energy strategy we envision a world where you go to a filling station and you have a fuel competing. you have coal to liquid technologies, you have liquid fuel by natural gas, you have renewable fuels by biomass, all these issues to help decrease our lines on imported crude oil. we have the capability for oil sand pipeline from canada. we really can be independent on

our energy needs based upon north american energy resources. we have to be about that. for the administration to celebrate opening up one permit in the gulf coast is a joke. we ought to get our drilling rigs back operating. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. are there further one-minute requests? under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the gentlewoman from the virgin islands, mrs. christensen, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mrs. christensen: thank you, mr. speaker. i wanted to thank the democratic leadership for giving the congressional black caucus this time to stand in solidarity with our sisters and brothers in wisconsin as well as those in ohio and indiana and anywhere the rights of workers are being trampled upon. the similarities in what is going on here in the nation's capital and the wisconsin

capital are not only striking, but it's the kind of coordinated attack against working men and women that we have become accustomed to seeing from republican legislators and governors. i don't understand why governor walker can't take yes for an answer. the unions have agreed to most, if not all of the concessions he asked for. but rightly they will not and should not give up their rights to collective bargaining. no one knows better than the african-american community what unions have done to lift people out of poverty to ensure them a decent job with decent wages and protections in the workplace. but not only african-americans but all americans have benefited from the work of our labor union. what governor walker is doing is not about balancing a budget or reducing a deficit anymore than the cuts in spending up here are. it's about busting unions. and thus making it possible for

companies to run ram shod over workers' rights, a circumstance no one in this country should allow us to go back to. for the life of me i can't understand what republicans have against children, or the poor and middle class children. the governor and his allies in the state legislature would rather take teachers out of the classroom, killing jobs, and would rather jeopardize the education of wisconsin's children than raise property taxes just a little bit to help cover the costs of providing a quality education even after the teachers have agreed to give in on some of their health and pension benefits negotiated in their contract. in fact, it's my understanding that just like the republicans insisted on tax cuts for the wealthy who did not need it, here before anything could be done to help struggling families, governor walker also enacted tax cuts as soon as he came into office. the spending cuts, as i

understand it, would not have been necessary in wisconsin if those tax cuts were not enacted and the devastating cuts in health care, education, communicate by, economic development, and job creation programs and homeland security and public safety would not be needed here if we had not given the wealthy a tax giveaway in december. with that, mr. speaker, i'd like to yield such time as she might consume to the former chair of the congressional black caucus who is always here standing for the rights of workers, for the rights of children, for the rights of people everywhere, congresswoman barbara lee of california. ms. lee: thank you very much, mr. speaker, and let me thank the gentlelady from the virgin islands for once again, for coming to the floor and organizing us to make sure we sound the alarm, to make sure that we put out the facts about what has taken place. tonight, of course, we're talking about the union busting efforts of governor walker in wisconsin. so thank you, congresswoman

christensen, for your leadership and tireless work. i am pleased to participate in this special order tonight as we provide some perspective about the importance of preserving and respecting the process of collective bargaining and supporting the rights of public employees to protect union benefits, one, by virtue of the blood, sweat and tears of unionized workers. we are talking about the implications of the union-busting efforts undertaken by wisconsin governor walker. but the reality is there is a sweeping anti-union sentiment overtaking our nation, and public employees who are union workers are being used as scapegoats to balance state budgets. this practice is not only wrong, it is cruel and it's calculated. let's take a look at the facts. in wisconsin, for example, governor walker is attempting to ram through legislation that cuts state employee benefits

and strips unions of their collective bargaining rights by allowing them to bargain only on wages, keeping benefits and other issues off the table. severely limiting union's say on hiring, firing, assignments and other work rules. the governor appears ready to rush through radical changes that would take away rights from workers without making any effort, any effort to talk to those workers, much less negotiate a fair agreement with them. governor walker is calling public employee unions unreasonable, but his administration has made absolutely no efforts to work with or even contact any of the unions he is attacking. he's demonizing public employees protesting at the capitol. that's why 74% of the wisconsin residents oppose scott walker -- excuse me, oppose this and the republicans' bill to take away these rights from struggling, middle-income, struggling, middle-income, middle-