mr. rahall: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rahall: mr. speaker, i had hoped the legislation today that would be laser focused on creating jobs, on creating jobs and making our aviation system safer, more efficient, and more accessible for our flying public. instead, much of the drama over the f.a.a. re-authorization for the last year, and there's been plenty of that drama, erupted over a provision of the house passed bill that would have changed how the national mediation board, that is the n.m.b., counts votes at elections at airlines and railroads. let me be clear, as i stated in our -- -- in our one single only conference meeting on this issue that that provision had no place, these labor provisions before the national mediation board, have no place in f.a.a. re-authorization because it has nothing to do with improving safety or creating jobs. instead it was a salvo aimed by the majority in this house at our america

mr. rahall: just read the bill. mr. petri: mr. speaker, i yield one minute to my colleague from wisconsin, representative baldwin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from wisconsin is recognized for one minute. ms. baldwin: i rise today in strong support of the st. croix river crossing project authorization act. this past november i had a chance to visit the 181 year old stillwater bridge and i met with community leaders. after seeing this bridge for myself and listening to arguments, i'm convinced that this legislation is necessary, reasonable and time-sensitive. the bridge project will support thousands of construction jobs in both wisconsin and minnesota. in addition, the new bridge will help shorten travel times reduce traffic congestion and most important improve safety and perhaps it will even save some lives. the stories i heard from people who use this bridge every day are truly startling. i heard sfr some folks who literally fear for their safety and afraid that something similar to the i-35 bridge collapse could hap

mr. rahall's inquiry last night in committee. that's why we're allowing for the time so members can review such a big bill. a bill that means so many jobs to so many americans. i hope the gentleman will work with us. this american infrastructure, energy, and jobs act is this just -- is just that. it is a jobs bill. it can provide certainty to contractors torque our community, so we can start to grow again and see jobs proliferate. but i find it ironic that the gentleman complained about paying for it. because he talks about the ways of our wanting to open up our resources. our resources offshore. our resources in anwr. as number one, an attempt to allow america to develop, finally, a national energy policy, but to also promote jobs. the gentleman knows, as i do, the energy sector provides an awful lot of jobs in plenty of parts of this country and can do a lot more, and is willing. private capital. willing to deploy to create jobs. but i find it also ironic, mr. speaker, that the gentleman complains that there's no bipartisanship

mr. rahall's inquiry last night in committee. that's why we're allowing for the time so members can review ch a big bill. a bi that means so many jobs to so many americans. i hope the gentleman will work with us. this american infrastructure, energy, and jobs act is this just -- is just that. it is a jobs bill. it can provide certainty to contractors torque our community, so we can start to grow again and see jobs proliferate. but i find it ironic that the gentleman complned about paying for it. because he talks about the ways of our wanting to open up our resources. our resources offshore. our resources in anwr. as number one, an attempt to allow america to develop, finally, a national energy policy, but to also promote jobs. the gentleman kns, as i do, the energy sector provides an ful lot of jobs in plenty of parts of this country and can do lot more, and is willing. private capital. willing to deploy to create jobs. but i find it also ironic, mr. spear, that the gentleman complains that there's no bipartisanship. because some

mr. rahall, talking about c.b.o.'s prediction that this would bankrupt the highway trust fund. i also want to point out to my colleagues from utah and florida, under this bill, utah would lose $159 million over five years in highway funding, according to the federal highway administration. that, according to economists is 5,531 jobs. in florida, there would be a cut of $880 million over five years and compared to current law and according to economists that would destroy 30,637 jobs. now granted, this thing is over 1,000 pages so i could forgive my colleagues for not reading the fine print on the bill but if they read the fine print and they were advocating these kinds of reductions for their states, let me just say i'm glad they're not my congressman. that the point, i want to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from the district of columbia, ms. norton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. ms. norton: i thank the gentleman for yielding. madam speaker, this bill is a tragic exercise, it's a waste of time and here's why. this is probably the

mr. rahall, the rankin mber, asked all the memrs of the transportation committee, when the bill was put one their hand if they read the bill. do you know how many people raised their hand? that's a rhetorical question, because the gentleman probably hasn't inquired of this, none. 800-page bill. not a person raised their hand. that they had read the bl. there was a lot discussion about reading the bill. reading the bill. now if they had read this bill, there was, of course, as you know a bipartisan no vote, one of the senior members voted against it, this is in stark contrast to the unanimous vote that occurred in the united states senate. on the bill. the committee on natural resources also completed a controversial markup on opening anwr to drilling. as i understand, you're going to p that in the infrastructure bill. with the clear knowledge that at is a very controversial item that will not pass the united states senate. you may have the votes here, that is similar to what happened on the payroll tax cut just last december. if you're going to work in a -- on a bipartin basis, we ought to