[Pages H5198-H5213]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION FUNDING ACT OF 2015, PART II

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 362, I call up
the bill (H.R. 3038) to provide an extension of Federal-aid highway,
highway safety, motor carrier safety, transit, and other programs
funded out of the Highway Trust Fund, and for other purposes, and ask
for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 362, the bill
is considered read.
The text of the bill is as follows:

H.R. 3038

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

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

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Highway
and Transportation Funding Act of 2015, Part II''.
(b) Reconciliation of Funds.--The Secretary of
Transportation shall reduce the amount apportioned or
allocated for a program, project, or activity under this Act
in fiscal year 2015 by amounts apportioned or allocated
pursuant to the Highway and Transportation Funding Act of
2014 and the Highway and Transportation Funding Act of 2015,
including the amendments made by such Acts, for the period
beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015.
(c) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:

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

TITLE I--SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM EXTENSION

Subtitle A--Federal-Aid Highways

Sec. 1001. Extension of Federal-aid highway programs.
Sec. 1002. Administrative expenses.

Subtitle B--Extension of Highway Safety Programs

Sec. 1101. Extension of National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
highway safety programs.
Sec. 1102. Extension of Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
programs.
Sec. 1103. Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act.

Subtitle C--Public Transportation Programs

Sec. 1201. Formula grants for rural areas.
Sec. 1202. Apportionment of appropriations for formula grants.
Sec. 1203. Authorizations for public transportation.
Sec. 1204. Bus and bus facilities formula grants.

Subtitle D--Hazardous Materials

Sec. 1301. Authorization of appropriations.

TITLE II--REVENUE PROVISIONS

Sec. 2001. Extension of Highway Trust Fund expenditure authority.
Sec. 2002. Funding of Highway Trust Fund.
Sec. 2003. Modification of mortgage reporting requirements.
Sec. 2004. Consistent basis reporting between estate and person
acquiring property from decedent.
Sec. 2005. Clarification of 6-year statute of limitations in case of
overstatement of basis.
Sec. 2006. Tax return due dates.
Sec. 2007. Transfers of excess pension assets to retiree health
accounts.
Sec. 2008. Equalization of Highway Trust Fund excise taxes on liquefied
natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, and compressed
natural gas.

TITLE III--ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 3001. Service fees.

TITLE I--SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM EXTENSION

Subtitle A--Federal-Aid Highways

SEC. 1001. EXTENSION OF FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAY PROGRAMS.

(a) In General.--Section 1001(a) of the Highway and
Transportation Funding Act of 2014 (128 Stat. 1840) is
amended by striking ``July 31, 2015'' and inserting
``December 18, 2015''.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--
(1) Highway trust fund.--Section 1001(b)(1) of the Highway
and Transportation Funding Act of 2014 (128 Stat. 1840) is
amended to read as follows:
``(1) Highway trust fund.--Except as provided in section
1002, there is authorized to be appropriated out of the
Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account)--
``(A) for fiscal year 2015, a sum equal to the total amount
authorized to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund
(other than the Mass Transit Account) for programs, projects,
and activities for fiscal year 2014 under divisions A and E
of MAP-21 (Public Law 112-141) and title 23, United States
Code (excluding chapter 4 of that title); and
``(B) for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and
ending on December 18, 2015, \79/366\ of the total amount
authorized to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust Fund
(other than the Mass Transit Account) for programs, projects,
and activities for fiscal year 2015 under divisions A and E
of MAP-21 (Public Law 112-141) and title 23, United States
Code (excluding chapter 4 of that title).''.
(2) General fund.--Section 1123(h)(1) of MAP-21 (23 U.S.C.
202 note) is amended by striking ``each of fiscal years 2013
and 2014 and $24,986,301 out of the general fund of the
Treasury to carry out the program for the period beginning on
October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015'' and inserting
``each of fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and $6,475,410 out
of the general fund of the Treasury to carry out the program
for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and ending on
December 18, 2015''.
(c) Use of Funds.--
(1) In general.--Section 1001(c)(1) of the Highway and
Transportation Funding Act of 2014 (128 Stat. 1840) is
amended by striking ``(1) In general.--'' and all that
follows through ``to carry out programs'' and inserting the
following:
``(1) In general.--Except as otherwise expressly provided
in this subtitle, funds authorized to be appropriated under
subsection (b)(1)--
``(A) for fiscal year 2015 shall be distributed,
administered, limited, and made available for obligation in
the same manner and at the same levels as the amounts of
funds authorized to be appropriated out of the Highway Trust
Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) for fiscal year
2014; and
``(B) for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and
ending on December 18, 2015, shall be distributed,
administered, limited, and made available for obligation in
the same manner and at the same levels as \79/366\ of the
amounts of funds authorized to be appropriated out of the
Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) for
fiscal year 2015,

to carry out programs''.
(2) Obligation ceiling.--Section 1102 of MAP-21 (23 U.S.C.
104 note) is amended--
(A) in subsection (a)--
(i) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (2); and
(ii) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``(3) $40,256,000,000 for fiscal year 2015; and

[[Page H5199]]

``(4) $8,689,136,612 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015.'';
(B) in subsection (b)(12)--
(i) by striking ``each of fiscal years 2013 through 2014''
and inserting ``each of fiscal years 2013 through 2015''; and
(ii) by striking ``, and for the period beginning on
October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015, only in an
amount equal to $639,000,000, less any reductions that would
have otherwise been required for that year by section 251A of
the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985
(2 U.S.C. 901a), then multiplied by \304/365\ for that
period'' and inserting ``, and for the period beginning on
October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18, 2015, only in an
amount equal to $639,000,000, less any reductions that would
have otherwise been required for that year by section 251A of
the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985
(2 U.S.C. 901a), then multiplied by \79/366\ for that
period'';
(C) in subsection (c)--
(i) in the matter preceding paragraph (1) by striking
``each of fiscal years 2013 through 2014 and for the period
beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015''
and inserting ``each of fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and
for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and ending on
December 18, 2015''; and
(ii) in paragraph (2) in the matter preceding subparagraph
(A) by striking ``for the period beginning on October 1,
2014, and ending on July 31, 2015, that is equal to \304/365\
of such unobligated balance'' and inserting ``for the period
beginning on October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18,
2015, that is equal to \79/366\ of such unobligated
balance'';
(D) in subsection (d) in the matter preceding paragraph (1)
by striking ``2015'' and inserting ``2016''; and
(E) in subsection (f)(1) in the matter preceding
subparagraph (A) by striking ``each of fiscal years 2013
through 2014 and for the period beginning on October 1, 2014,
and ending on July 31, 2015'' and inserting ``each of fiscal
years 2013 through 2015 and for the period beginning on
October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18, 2015''.

SEC. 1002. ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.

Section 1002 of the Highway and Transportation Funding Act
of 2014 (128 Stat. 1842) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) by striking ``for administrative
expenses of the Federal-aid highway program $366,465,753 for
the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July
31, 2015.'' and inserting ``for administrative expenses of
the Federal-aid highway program--
``(1) $440,000,000 for fiscal year 2015; and
``(2) $94,972,678 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015.''; and
(2) by striking subsection (b)(2) and inserting the
following:
``(2) for fiscal year 2015 and for the period beginning on
October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18, 2015, subject to
the limitations on administrative expenses under the heading
`Federal Highway Administration' in appropriations Acts that
apply, respectively, to that fiscal year and period.''.

Subtitle B--Extension of Highway Safety Programs

SEC. 1101. EXTENSION OF NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY
ADMINISTRATION HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAMS.

(a) Extension of Programs.--
(1) Highway safety programs.--Section 31101(a)(1) of MAP-21
(126 Stat. 733) is amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B); and
(B) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the
following:
``(C) $235,000,000 for fiscal year 2015; and
``(D) $50,724,044 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015.''.
(2) Highway safety research and development.--Section
31101(a)(2) of MAP-21 (126 Stat. 733) is amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B); and
(B) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the
following:
``(C) $113,500,000 for fiscal year 2015; and
``(D) $24,498,634 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015.''.
(3) National priority safety programs.--Section 31101(a)(3)
of MAP-21 (126 Stat. 733) is amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B); and
(B) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the
following:
``(C) $272,000,000 for fiscal year 2015; and
``(D) $58,710,383 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015.''.
(4) National driver register.--Section 31101(a)(4) of MAP-
21 (126 Stat. 733) is amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B); and
(B) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the
following:
``(C) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2015; and
``(D) $1,079,235 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015.''.
(5) High visibility enforcement program.--
(A) Authorization of appropriations.--Section 31101(a)(5)
of MAP-21 (126 Stat. 733) is amended--
(i) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B); and
(ii) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the
following:
``(C) $29,000,000 for fiscal year 2015; and
``(D) $6,259,563 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015.''.
(B) Law enforcement campaigns.--Section 2009(a) of SAFETEA-
LU (23 U.S.C. 402 note) is amended--
(i) in the first sentence by striking ``each of fiscal
years 2013 and 2014 and in the period beginning on October 1,
2014, and ending on July 31, 2015'' and inserting ``each of
fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and in the period beginning on
October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18, 2015''; and
(ii) in the second sentence by striking ``each of fiscal
years 2013 and 2014 and in the period beginning on October 1,
2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,'' and inserting ``each of
fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and in the period beginning on
October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18, 2015,''.
(6) Administrative expenses.--Section 31101(a)(6) of MAP-21
(126 Stat. 733) is amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B); and
(B) by striking subparagraph (C) and inserting the
following:
``(C) $25,500,000 for fiscal year 2015; and
``(D) $5,504,098 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015.''.
(b) Cooperative Research and Evaluation.--Section 403(f)(1)
of title 23, United States Code, is amended by striking
``each fiscal year ending before October 1, 2014, and
$2,082,192 of the total amount available for apportionment to
the States for highway safety programs under section 402(c)
in the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on
July 31, 2015,'' and inserting ``each fiscal year ending
before October 1, 2015, and $539,617 of the total amount
available for apportionment to the States for highway safety
programs under section 402(c) in the period beginning on
October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18, 2015,''.
(c) Applicability of Title 23.--Section 31101(c) of MAP-21
(126 Stat. 733) is amended by striking ``fiscal years 2013
and 2014 and for the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and
ending on July 31, 2015,'' and inserting ``each of fiscal
years 2013 through 2015 and for the period beginning on
October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18, 2015,''.

SEC. 1102. EXTENSION OF FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY
ADMINISTRATION PROGRAMS.

(a) Motor Carrier Safety Grants.--Section 31104(a) of title
49, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (9); and
(2) by striking paragraph (10) and inserting the following:
``(10) $218,000,000 for fiscal year 2015; and
``(11) $47,054,645 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015.''.
(b) Administrative Expenses.--Section 31104(i)(1) of title
49, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (I); and
(2) by striking subparagraph (J) and inserting the
following:
``(J) $259,000,000 for fiscal year 2015; and
``(K) $55,904,372 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015.''.
(c) Grant Programs.--
(1) Commercial driver's license program improvement
grants.--Section 4101(c)(1) of SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1715) is
amended by striking ``each of fiscal years 2013 and 2014 and
$24,986,301 for the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and
ending on July 31, 2015'' and inserting ``each of fiscal
years 2013 through 2015 and $6,475,410 for the period
beginning on October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18,
2015''.
(2) Border enforcement grants.--Section 4101(c)(2) of
SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1715) is amended by striking ``each of
fiscal years 2013 and 2014 and $26,652,055 for the period
beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015''
and inserting ``each of fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and
$6,907,104 for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and
ending on December 18, 2015''.
(3) Performance and registration information system
management grant program.--Section 4101(c)(3) of SAFETEA-LU
(119 Stat. 1715) is amended by striking ``each of fiscal
years 2013 and 2014 and $4,164,384 for the period beginning
on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015'' and
inserting ``each of fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and
$1,079,235 for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and
ending on December 18, 2015''.
(4) Commercial vehicle information systems and networks
deployment program.--Section 4101(c)(4) of SAFETEA-LU (119
Stat. 1715) is amended by striking ``each of fiscal years
2013 and 2014 and $20,821,918 for the period beginning on
October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015'' and inserting
``each of fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and $5,396,175 for
the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and ending on
December 18, 2015''.
(5) Safety data improvement grants.--Section 4101(c)(5) of
SAFETEA-LU (119 Stat. 1715) is amended by striking ``each of
fiscal years 2013 and 2014 and $2,498,630 for the period
beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015''
and inserting ``each of fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and
$647,541 for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and
ending on December 18, 2015''.
(d) High-priority Activities.--Section 31104(k)(2) of title
49, United States Code, is

[[Page H5200]]

amended by striking ``each of fiscal years 2006 through 2014
and up to $12,493,151 for the period beginning on October 1,
2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,'' and inserting ``each of
fiscal years 2006 through 2015 and up to $3,237,705 for the
period beginning on October 1, 2015, and ending on December
18, 2015,''.
(e) New Entrant Audits.--Section 31144(g)(5)(B) of title
49, United States Code, is amended by striking ``per fiscal
year and up to $26,652,055 for the period beginning on
October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,'' and inserting
``per fiscal year and up to $6,907,104 for the period
beginning on October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18,
2015,''.
(f) Outreach and Education.--Section 4127(e) of SAFETEA-LU
(119 Stat. 1741) is amended by striking ``each of fiscal
years 2013 and 2014 and $3,331,507 to the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration for the period beginning on
October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,'' and inserting
``each of fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and $863,388 to the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration for the period
beginning on October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18,
2015,''.
(g) Grant Program for Commercial Motor Vehicle Operators.--
Section 4134(c) of SAFETEA-LU (49 U.S.C. 31301 note) is
amended by striking ``each of fiscal years 2005 through 2014
and $832,877 for the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and
ending on July 31, 2015,'' and inserting ``each of fiscal
years 2005 through 2015 and $215,847 for the period beginning
on October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18, 2015,''.

SEC. 1103. DINGELL-JOHNSON SPORT FISH RESTORATION ACT.

Section 4 of the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act
(16 U.S.C. 777c) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) in the matter preceding paragraph (1)
by striking ``each fiscal year through 2014 and for the
period beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31,
2015'' and inserting ``each fiscal year through 2015 and for
the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and ending on
December 18, 2015''; and
(2) in subsection (b)(1)(A) by striking ``for each fiscal
year ending before October 1, 2014, and for the period
beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,''
and inserting ``for each fiscal year ending before October 1,
2015, and for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and
ending on December 18, 2015,''.

Subtitle C--Public Transportation Programs

SEC. 1201. FORMULA GRANTS FOR RURAL AREAS.

Section 5311(c)(1) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A) by striking ``for each fiscal year
ending before October 1, 2014, and $4,164,384 for the period
beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,''
and inserting ``for each fiscal year ending before October 1,
2015, and $1,079,235 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015,''; and
(2) in subparagraph (B) by striking ``for each fiscal year
ending before October 1, 2014, and $20,821,918 for the period
beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,''
and inserting ``for each fiscal year ending before October 1,
2015, and $5,396,175 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015,''.

SEC. 1202. APPORTIONMENT OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR FORMULA
GRANTS.

Section 5336(h)(1) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``for each fiscal year ending before
October 1, 2014, and $24,986,301 for the period beginning on
October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,'' and inserting
``for each fiscal year ending before October 1, 2015, and
$6,475,410 for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and
ending on December 18, 2015,''.

SEC. 1203. AUTHORIZATIONS FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.

(a) Formula Grants.--Section 5338(a) of title 49, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1) by striking ``and $7,158,575,342 for
the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July
31, 2015'' and inserting ``$8,595,000,000 for fiscal year
2015, and $1,855,204,918 for the period beginning on October
1, 2015, and ending on December 18, 2015'';
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A) by striking ``and $107,274,521 for
the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July
31, 2015,'' and inserting ``$128,800,000 for fiscal 2015, and
$27,801,093 for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and
ending on December 18, 2015,'';
(B) in subparagraph (B) by striking ``for each of fiscal
years 2013 and 2014 and $8,328,767 for the period beginning
on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,'' and
inserting ``for each of fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and
$2,158,470 for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and
ending on December 18, 2015,'';
(C) in subparagraph (C) by striking ``and $3,713,505,753
for the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on
July 31, 2015,'' and inserting ``$4,458,650,000 for fiscal
year 2015, and $962,386,202 for the period beginning on
October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18, 2015,'';
(D) in subparagraph (D) by striking ``and $215,132,055 for
the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July
31, 2015,'' and inserting ``$258,300,000 for fiscal year
2015, and $55,753,279 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015,'';
(E) in subparagraph (E)--
(i) by striking ``and $506,222,466 for the period beginning
on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,'' and
inserting ``$607,800,000 for fiscal year 2015, and
$131,191,803 for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and
ending on December 18, 2015,'';
(ii) by striking ``and $24,986,301 for the period beginning
on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,'' and
inserting ``$30,000,000 for fiscal year 2015, and $6,475,410
for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and ending on
December 18, 2015,''; and
(iii) by striking ``and $16,657,534 for the period
beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,''
and inserting ``$20,000,000 for fiscal year 2015, and
$4,316,940 for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and
ending on December 18, 2015,'';
(F) in subparagraph (F) by striking ``each of fiscal years
2013 and 2014 and $2,498,630 for the period beginning on
October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,'' and inserting
``each of fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and $647,541 for the
period beginning on October 1, 2015, and ending on December
18, 2015,'';
(G) in subparagraph (G) by striking ``each of fiscal years
2013 and 2014 and $4,164,384 for the period beginning on
October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,'' and inserting
``each of fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and $1,079,235 for
the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and ending on
December 18, 2015,'';
(H) in subparagraph (H) by striking ``each of fiscal years
2013 and 2014 and $3,206,575 for the period beginning on
October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,'' and inserting
``each of fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and $831,011 for the
period beginning on October 1, 2015, and ending on December
18, 2015,'';
(I) in subparagraph (I) by striking ``and $1,803,927,671
for the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on
July 31, 2015,'' and inserting ``$2,165,900,000 for fiscal
year 2015, and $467,503,005 for the period beginning on
October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18, 2015,'';
(J) in subparagraph (J) by striking ``and $356,304,658 for
the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July
31, 2015,'' and inserting ``$427,800,000 for fiscal year
2015, and $92,339,344 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015,''; and
(K) in subparagraph (K) by striking ``and $438,009,863 for
the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July
31, 2015,'' and inserting ``$525,900,000 for fiscal year
2015, and $113,513,934 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015,''.
(b) Research, Development Demonstration and Deployment
Projects.--Section 5338(b) of title 49, United States Code,
is amended by striking ``and $58,301,370 for the period
beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015''
and inserting ``$70,000,000 for fiscal year 2015, and
$15,109,290 for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and
ending on December 18, 2015''.
(c) Transit Cooperative Research Program.--Section 5338(c)
of title 49, United States Code, is amended by striking ``and
$5,830,137 for the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and
ending on July 31, 2015'' and inserting ``$7,000,000 for
fiscal year 2015, and $1,510,929 for the period beginning on
October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18, 2015''.
(d) Technical Assistance and Standards Development.--
Section 5338(d) of title 49, United States Code, is amended
by striking ``and $5,830,137 for the period beginning on
October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015'' and inserting
``$7,000,000 for fiscal year 2015, and $1,510,929 for the
period beginning on October 1, 2015, and ending on December
18, 2015''.
(e) Human Resources and Training.--Section 5338(e) of title
49, United States Code, is amended by striking ``and
$4,164,384 for the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and
ending on July 31, 2015'' and inserting ``$5,000,000 for
fiscal year 2015, and $1,079,235 for the period beginning on
October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18, 2015''.
(f) Capital Investment Grants.--Section 5338(g) of title
49, United States Code, is amended by striking ``and
$1,558,295,890 for the period beginning on October 1, 2014,
and ending on July 31, 2015'' and inserting ``$1,907,000,000
for fiscal year 2015, and $411,620,219 for the period
beginning on October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18,
2015''.
(g) Administration.--Section 5338(h) of title 49, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1) by striking ``and $86,619,178 for the
period beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31,
2015'' and inserting ``$104,000,000 for fiscal year 2015, and
$22,448,087 for the period beginning on October 1, 2015, and
ending on December 18, 2015'';
(2) in paragraph (2) by striking ``each of fiscal years
2013 and 2014 and not less than $4,164,384 for the period
beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,''
and inserting ``each of fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and
not less than $1,079,235 for the period beginning on October
1, 2015, and ending on December 18, 2015,''; and
(3) in paragraph (3) by striking ``each of fiscal years
2013 and 2014 and not less than $832,877 for the period
beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July 31, 2015,''
and inserting ``each of fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and
not less than $215,847 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015,''.

SEC. 1204. BUS AND BUS FACILITIES FORMULA GRANTS.

Section 5339(d)(1) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by striking ``each of fiscal years 2013 and 2014 and
$54,553,425 for the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and
ending on July

[[Page H5201]]

31, 2015,'' and inserting ``each of fiscal years 2013 through
2015 and $14,137,978 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015,'';
(2) by striking ``$1,041,096 for such period'' and
inserting ``$269,809 for such period''; and
(3) by striking ``$416,438 for such period'' and inserting
``$107,923 for such period''.

Subtitle D--Hazardous Materials

SEC. 1301. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) In General.--Section 5128(a) of title 49, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (2); and
(2) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``(3) $42,762,000 for fiscal year 2015; and
``(4) $9,230,049 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015.''.
(b) Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness Fund.--
Section 5128(b) of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in the paragraph heading by striking ``Fiscal years
2013 and 2014'' and inserting ``Fiscal years 2013 through
2015''; and
(B) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) by striking
``fiscal years 2013 and 2014'' and inserting ``fiscal years
2013 through 2015''; and
(2) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
``(2) Fiscal year 2016.--From the Hazardous Materials
Emergency Preparedness Fund established under section
5116(i), the Secretary may expend for the period beginning on
October 1, 2015, and ending on December 18, 2015--
``(A) $40,579 to carry out section 5115;
``(B) $4,705,464 to carry out subsections (a) and (b) of
section 5116, of which not less than $2,946,311 shall be
available to carry out section 5116(b);
``(C) $32,377 to carry out section 5116(f);
``(D) $134,904 to publish and distribute the Emergency
Response Guidebook under section 5116(i)(3); and
``(E) $215,847 to carry out section 5116(j).''.
(c) Hazardous Materials Training Grants.--Section 5128(c)
of title 49, United States Code, is amended by striking
``each of the fiscal years 2013 and 2014 and $3,331,507 for
the period beginning on October 1, 2014, and ending on July
31, 2015,'' and inserting ``each of fiscal years 2013 through
2015 and $863,388 for the period beginning on October 1,
2015, and ending on December 18, 2015,''.

TITLE II--REVENUE PROVISIONS

SEC. 2001. EXTENSION OF HIGHWAY TRUST FUND EXPENDITURE
AUTHORITY.

(a) Highway Trust Fund.--Section 9503 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) by striking ``August 1, 2015'' in subsections
(b)(6)(B), (c)(1), and (e)(3) and inserting ``December 19,
2015'', and
(2) by striking ``Highway and Transportation Funding Act of
2015'' in subsections (c)(1) and (e)(3) and inserting
``Highway and Transportation Funding Act of 2015, Part II''.
(b) Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund.--Section
9504 of such Code is amended--
(1) by striking ``Highway and Transportation Funding Act of
2015'' each place it appears in subsection (b)(2) and
inserting ``Highway and Transportation Funding Act of 2015,
Part II'', and
(2) by striking ``August 1, 2015'' in subsection (d)(2) and
inserting ``December 19, 2015''.
(c) Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund.--Section
9508(e)(2) of such Code is amended by striking ``August 1,
2015'' and inserting ``December 19, 2015''.

SEC. 2002. FUNDING OF HIGHWAY TRUST FUND.

Section 9503(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended by redesignating paragraph (7) as paragraph (8) and
by inserting after paragraph (6) the following new paragraph:
``(7) Additional sums.--Out of money in the Treasury not
otherwise appropriated, there is hereby appropriated--
``(A) $6,068,000,000 to the Highway Account (as defined in
subsection (e)(5)(B)) in the Highway Trust Fund; and
``(B) $2,000,000,000 to the Mass Transit Account in the
Highway Trust Fund.''.

SEC. 2003. MODIFICATION OF MORTGAGE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

(a) Information Return Requirements.--Section 6050H(b)(2)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking
``and'' at the end of subparagraph (C), by redesignating
subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (G) and by inserting after
subparagraph (C) the following new subparagraphs:
``(D) the amount of outstanding principal on the mortgage
as of the beginning of such calendar year,
``(E) the date of the origination of the mortgage,
``(F) the address (or other description in the case of
property without an address) of the property which secures
the mortgage, and''.
(b) Statements to Individuals.--Section 6050H(d)(2) of such
Code is amended by striking ``subsection (b)(2)(C)'' and
inserting ``subparagraphs (C), (D), (E), and (F) of
subsection (b)(2)''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to returns required to be made, and statements
required to be furnished, after December 31, 2016.

SEC. 2004. CONSISTENT BASIS REPORTING BETWEEN ESTATE AND
PERSON ACQUIRING PROPERTY FROM DECEDENT.

(a) Property Acquired From a Decedent.--Section 1014 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end
the following new subsection:
``(f) Basis Must Be Consistent With Estate Tax Return.--For
purposes of this section--
``(1) In general.--The basis of any property to which
subsection (a) applies shall not exceed--
``(A) in the case of property the final value of which has
been determined for purposes of the tax imposed by chapter 11
on the estate of such decedent, such value, and
``(B) in the case of property not described in subparagraph
(A) and with respect to which a statement has been furnished
under section 6035(a) identifying the value of such property,
such value.
``(2) Exception.--Paragraph (1) shall only apply to any
property whose inclusion in the decedent's estate increased
the liability for the tax imposed by chapter 11 (reduced by
credits allowable against such tax) on such estate.
``(3) Determination.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the
basis of property has been determined for purposes of the tax
imposed by chapter 11 if--
``(A) the value of such property is shown on a return under
section 6018 and such value is not contested by the Secretary
before the expiration of the time for assessing a tax under
chapter 11,
``(B) in a case not described in subparagraph (A), the
value is specified by the Secretary and such value is not
timely contested by the executor of the estate, or
``(C) the value is determined by a court or pursuant to a
settlement agreement with the Secretary.
``(4) Regulations.--The Secretary may by regulations
provide exceptions to the application of this subsection.''.
(b) Information Reporting.--
(1) In general.--Subpart A of part III of subchapter A of
chapter 61 of such Code is amended by inserting after section
6034A the following new section:

``SEC. 6035. BASIS INFORMATION TO PERSONS ACQUIRING PROPERTY
FROM DECEDENT.

``(a) Information With Respect to Property Acquired From
Decedents.--
``(1) In general.--The executor of any estate required to
file a return under section 6018(a) shall furnish to the
Secretary and to each person acquiring any interest in
property included in the decedent's gross estate for Federal
estate tax purposes a statement identifying the value of each
interest in such property as reported on such return and such
other information with respect to such interest as the
Secretary may prescribe.
``(2) Statements by beneficiaries.--Each person required to
file a return under section 6018(b) shall furnish to the
Secretary and to each other person who holds a legal or
beneficial interest in the property to which such return
relates a statement identifying the information described in
paragraph (1).
``(3) Time for furnishing statement.--
``(A) In general.--Each statement required to be furnished
under paragraph (1) or (2) shall be furnished at such time as
the Secretary may prescribe, but in no case at a time later
than the earlier of--
``(i) the date which is 30 days after the date on which the
return under section 6018 was required to be filed (including
extensions, if any), or
``(ii) the date which is 30 days after the date such return
is filed.
``(B) Adjustments.--In any case in which there is an
adjustment to the information required to be included on a
statement filed under paragraph (1) or (2) after such
statement has been filed, a supplemental statement under such
paragraph shall be filed not later than the date which is 30
days after such adjustment is made.
``(b) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such
regulations as necessary to carry out this section, including
regulations relating to--
``(1) the application of this section to property with
regard to which no estate tax return is required to be filed,
and
``(2) situations in which the surviving joint tenant or
other recipient may have better information than the executor
regarding the basis or fair market value of the property.''.
(2) Penalty for failure to file.--
(A) Return.--Section 6724(d)(1) of such Code is amended by
striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B), by striking
the period at the end of subparagraph (C) and inserting ``,
and'', and by adding at the end the following new
subparagraph:
``(D) any statement required to be filed with the Secretary
under section 6035.''.
(B) Statement.--Section 6724(d)(2) of such Code is amended
by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (GG), by
striking the period at the end of subparagraph (HH) and
inserting ``, or'', and by adding at the end the following
new subparagraph:
``(II) section 6035 (other than a statement described in
paragraph (1)(D)).''.
(3) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections for subpart
A of part III of subchapter A of chapter 61 of such Code is
amended by inserting after the item relating to section 6034A
the following new item:

``Sec. 6035. Basis information to persons acquiring property from
decedent.''.

[[Page H5202]]

(1) In general.--Section 6662(b) of such Code is amended by
inserting after paragraph (7) the following new paragraph:
``(8) Any inconsistent estate basis.''.
(2) Inconsistent basis reporting.--Section 6662 of such
Code is amended by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
``(k) Inconsistent Estate Basis Reporting.--For purposes of
this section, there is an `inconsistent estate basis' if the
basis of property claimed on a return exceeds the basis as
determined under section 1014(f).''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property with respect to which an estate tax
return is filed after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 2005. CLARIFICATION OF 6-YEAR STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS IN
CASE OF OVERSTATEMENT OF BASIS.

(a) In General.--Section 6501(e)(1)(B) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (i), by
redesignating clause (ii) as clause (iii), and by inserting
after clause (i) the following new clause:
``(ii) An understatement of gross income by reason of an
overstatement of unrecovered cost or other basis is an
omission from gross income; and'', and
(2) by inserting ``(other than in the case of an
overstatement of unrecovered cost or other basis)'' in clause
(iii) (as so redesignated) after ``In determining the amount
omitted from gross income''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to--
(1) returns filed after the date of the enactment of this
Act, and
(2) returns filed on or before such date if the period
specified in section 6501 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 (determined without regard to such amendments) for
assessment of the taxes with respect to which such return
relates has not expired as of such date.

SEC. 2006. TAX RETURN DUE DATES.

(a) Due Dates for Returns of Partnerships, S Corporations,
and C Corporations.--
(1) Partnerships and s corporations.--
(A) In general.--So much of subsection (b) of 6072 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as precedes the second sentence
thereof is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Returns of Partnerships and S Corporations.--Returns
of partnerships under section 6031 and returns of S
corporations under sections 6012 and 6037 made on the basis
of the calendar year shall be filed on or before the 15th day
of March following the close of the calendar year, and such
returns made on the basis of a fiscal year shall be filed on
or before the 15th day of the third month following the close
of the fiscal year.''.
(B) Conforming amendment.--Section 6072(a) of such Code is
amended by striking ``6017, or 6031'' and inserting ``or
6017''.
(2) Conforming amendments relating to c corporation due
date of 15th day of fourth month following taxable year.--
(A) Section 170(a)(2)(B) of such Code is amended by
striking ``third month'' and inserting ``fourth month''.
(B) Section 563 of such Code is amended by striking ``third
month'' each place it appears and inserting ``fourth month''.
(C) Section 1354(d)(1)(B)(i) of such Code is amended by
striking ``3d month'' and inserting ``4th month''.
(D) Subsections (a) and (c) of section 6167 of such Code
are each amended by striking ``third month'' and inserting
``fourth month''.
(E) Section 6425(a)(1) of such Code is amended by striking
``third month'' and inserting ``fourth month''.
(F) Subsections (b)(2)(A), (g)(3), and (h)(1) of section
6655 of such Code are each amended by striking ``3rd month''
and inserting ``4th month''.
(G) Section 6655(g)(4) of such Code is amended by
redesignating subparagraph (E) as subparagraph (F) and by
inserting after subparagraph (D) the following new
subparagraph:
``(E) Subsection (b)(2)(A) shall be applied by substituting
`3rd month' for `4th month'.''.
(3) Effective dates.--
(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
the amendments made by this subsection shall apply to returns
for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2015.
(B) Special rule for c corporations with fiscal years
ending on june 30.--In the case of any C corporation with a
taxable year ending on June 30, the amendments made by this
subsection shall apply to returns for taxable years beginning
after December 31, 2025.
(b) Modification of Due Dates by Regulation.--In the case
of returns for taxable years beginning after December 31,
2015, the Secretary of the Treasury, or the Secretary's
designee, shall modify appropriate regulations to provide as
follows:
(1) The maximum extension for the returns of partnerships
filing Form 1065 shall be a 6-month period ending on
September 15 for calendar year taxpayers.
(2) The maximum extension for the returns of trusts filing
Form 1041 shall be a 5\1/2\-month period ending on September
30 for calendar year taxpayers.
(3) The maximum extension for the returns of employee
benefit plans filing Form 5500 shall be an automatic 3\1/2\-
month period ending on November 15 for calendar year plans.
(4) The maximum extension for the returns of organizations
exempt from income tax filing Form 990 (series) shall be an
automatic 6-month period ending on November 15 for calendar
year filers.
(5) The maximum extension for the returns of organizations
exempt from income tax that are required to file Form 4720
returns of excise taxes shall be an automatic 6-month period
beginning on the due date for filing the return (without
regard to any extensions).
(6) The maximum extension for the returns of trusts
required to file Form 5227 shall be an automatic 6-month
period beginning on the due date for filing the return
(without regard to any extensions).
(7) The maximum extension for filing Form 6069, Return of
Excise Tax on Excess Contributions to Black Lung Benefit
Trust Under Section 4953 and Computation of Section 192
Deduction, shall be an automatic 6-month period beginning on
the due date for filing the return (without regard to any
extensions).
(8) The maximum extension for a taxpayer required to file
Form 8870 shall be an automatic 6-month period beginning on
the due date for filing the return (without regard to any
extensions).
(9) The due date of Form 3520-A, Annual Information Return
of a Foreign Trust with a United States Owner, shall be the
15th day of the 3d month after the close of the trust's
taxable year, and the maximum extension shall be a 6-month
period beginning on such day.
(10) The due date of Form 3520, Annual Return to Report
Transactions with Foreign Trusts and Receipt of Certain
Foreign Gifts, for calendar year filers shall be April 15
with a maximum extension for a 6-month period ending on
October 15.
(11) The due date of FinCEN Report 114 (relating to Report
of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts) shall be April 15
with a maximum extension for a 6-month period ending on
October 15 and with provision for an extension under rules
similar to the rules in Treas. Reg. section 1.6081-5. For any
taxpayer required to file such Form for the first time, any
penalty for failure to timely request for, or file, an
extension, may be waived by the Secretary.
(c) Corporations Permitted Statutory Automatic 6-month
Extension of Income Tax Returns.--
(1) In general.--Section 6081(b) of such Code is amended--
(A) by striking ``3 months'' and inserting ``6 months'',
and
(B) by adding at the end the following: ``In the case of
any return for a taxable year of a C corporation which ends
on December 31 and begins before January 1, 2026, the first
sentence of this subsection shall be applied by substituting
`5 months' for `6 months'. In the case of any return for a
taxable year of a C corporation which ends on June 30 and
begins before January 1, 2026, the first sentence of this
subsection shall be applied by substituting `7 months' for `6
months'.''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection
shall apply to returns for taxable years beginning after
December 31, 2015.

SEC. 2007. TRANSFERS OF EXCESS PENSION ASSETS TO RETIREE
HEALTH ACCOUNTS.

(a) In General.--Section 420(b)(4) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``December 31, 2021'' and
inserting ``December 31, 2025''.
(b) Conforming ERISA Amendments.--
(1) Sections 101(e)(3), 403(c)(1), and 408(b)(13) of the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C.
1021(e)(3), 1103(c)(1), 1108(b)(13)) are each amended by
striking ``MAP-21' '' and inserting ``Highway and
Transportation Funding Act of 2015, Part II''.
(2) Section 408(b)(13) of such Act (29 U.S.C. 1108(b)(13))
is amended by striking ``January 1, 2022'' and inserting
``January 1, 2026''.

SEC. 2008. EQUALIZATION OF HIGHWAY TRUST FUND EXCISE TAXES ON
LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS, LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GAS,
AND COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS.

(a) Liquefied Petroleum Gas.--
(1) In general.--Section 4041(a)(2)(B) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``and'' at the
end of clause (i), by redesignating clause (ii) as clause
(iii), and by inserting after clause (i) the following new
clause:
``(ii) in the case of liquefied petroleum gas, 18.3 cents
per energy equivalent of a gallon of gasoline, and''.
(2) Energy equivalent of a gallon of gasoline.--Section
4041(a)(2) of such Code is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(C) Energy equivalent of a gallon of gasoline.--For
purposes of this paragraph, the term `energy equivalent of a
gallon of gasoline' means, with respect to a liquefied
petroleum gas fuel, the amount of such fuel having a Btu
content of 115,400 (lower heating value). For purposes of the
preceding sentence, a Btu content of 115,400 (lower heating
value) is equal to 5.75 pounds of liquefied petroleum gas.''.
(b) Liquefied Natural Gas.--
(1) In general.--Section 4041(a)(2)(B) of such Code, as
amended by subsection (a)(1), is amended by striking ``and''
at the end of clause (ii), by striking the period at the end
of clause (iii) and inserting ``, and'' and by inserting
after clause (iii) the following new clause:
``(iv) in the case of liquefied natural gas, 24.3 cents per
energy equivalent of a gallon of diesel.''.

[[Page H5203]]

(2) Energy equivalent of a gallon of diesel.--Section
4041(a)(2) of such Code, as amended by subsection (a)(2), is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(D) Energy equivalent of a gallon of diesel.--For
purposes of this paragraph, the term `energy equivalent of a
gallon of diesel' means, with respect to a liquefied natural
gas fuel, the amount of such fuel having a Btu content of
128,700 (lower heating value). For purposes of the preceding
sentence, a Btu content of 128,700 (lower heating value) is
equal to 6.06 pounds of liquefied natural gas.''.
(3) Conforming amendments.--Section 4041(a)(2)(B)(iii) of
such Code, as redesignated by subsection (a)(1), is amended--
(A) by striking ``liquefied natural gas,'', and
(B) by striking ``peat), and'' and inserting ``peat) and''.
(c) Energy Equivalent of a Gallon of Gasoline to Compressed
Natural Gas.--Section 4041(a)(3) of such Code is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(D) Energy equivalent of a gallon of gasoline.--For
purposes of this paragraph, the term `energy equivalent of a
gallon of gasoline' means 5.66 pounds of compressed natural
gas.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to any sale or use of fuel after December 31,
2015.

TITLE III--ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS

SEC. 3001. SERVICE FEES.

Paragraph (4) of section 44940(i) of title 49, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following
new subparagraphs:
``(K) $1,560,000,000 for fiscal year 2024.
``(L) $1,600,000,000 for fiscal year 2025.''.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill shall be debatable for 1 hour,
equally divided among and controlled by the chair and ranking minority
member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the
chair of ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan), and the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), each will control 15 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster).

General Leave

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to
include extraneous materials on the bill, H.R. 3038.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3038, the Highway and
Transportation Funding Act of 2015, Part II.
This bill extends the Federal surface transportation programs through
December 18, 2015. H.R. 3038 is a clean extension and funds the
programs at authorized levels for fiscal year 2014.
The bill also ensures the solvency of the highway trust fund. We have
an immediate, critical need to address the solvency of the trust fund
and extend the current surface transportation law.
If Congress fails to act, the States will not be able to be
reimbursed for past expenses, transportation projects, and jobs across
the country will be at risk; and over 4,000 U.S. Department of
Transportation employees will be furloughed.
I appreciate Chairman Ryan's attention to this pressing issue, as
well as his commitment to addressing the solvency of the trust fund.
A long-term surface transportation reauthorization bill remains a top
priority for this committee, and it should be for this Congress.
I am committed to continuing to work with Chairman Ryan, Ranking
Member DeFazio, and others on achieving a long-term reauthorization
bill. I believe this extension gives us our best shot.
I strongly urge all Members to support H.R. 3038, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Ironically, it was exactly 1 year ago today that the chairman of the
Ways and Means Committee said they needed time to come together for
funding a 6-year surface transportation bill investing in our
transportation system, 1 year ago today.
There was an extension until the end of the year, then there was an
extension until May, and then there was an extension from May until
now--temporary extensions, I think 34 temporary extensions we have seen
now.
Now, we are talking about another temporary extension with the hope
that maybe they can find some money under the couch cushions or pass
tax reform and cut taxes on rich people and use dynamic scoring and say
it raises money and then put it in the trust fund. I don't know what
their solution is.
We have had a user fee funded transportation system in this country
since Dwight David Eisenhower was President, followed by Ronald Reagan
who doubled the tax; and Ronald Reagan also put transit into the
highway trust fund, saying we should not ignore our population centers
and actually our centers of economic growth.
Then in 1993--granted, Democratic President and Democratic Congress,
but we didn't quite have the votes to increase the gas tax--and Bud
Shuster, Republican chair of the Transportation Committee back then,
actual relation to current chairman, he brought us quite a number of
Republicans to vote with the Democrats to go to 18.3 cents a gallon;
and there it stood since 1993.
We are hearing now you can't increase the gas tax, so I have offered
alternatives. Let's eliminate the gas tax and put a tax on a barrel of
oil, the fraction that goes into taxable transportation uses, which
economists say means Wall Street might eat part of that because they
are speculating so much, ExxonMobil might eat part of that, OPEC--hey,
we might get Saudi Arabia to pay for a little bit of our
infrastructure; but I am told, no, they can't do that.
I proposed just indexing the existing gas tax and bonding, pay it
back over time with that increment. Now, if we double index the gas
tax, it might go up 1.7 cents next year. There is apparently a fear in
this place that if gas went up 1.7 cents a gallon--unlike ExxonMobil
jacking it up 25 cents while you are driving by in May because Memorial
Day is coming--but of the Federal Government to invest in filling in
the potholes, fixing the bridges and the transit systems and raised it
1.7 cents, oh, my God, people lose their elections.
Well, we have seen six Republican States raise their gas tax this
year, all red, deep red States; and those same States have said to us
in testimony: It is not enough that we are raising the gas tax; we need
more Federal investment.
The system is falling apart--140,000 bridges, 140,000 need repair or
replacement. Forty percent of the surface national highway system needs
to be not just resurfaced; it needs to be dug up and rebuilt--and that
our transit systems, $84 billion backlog to bring them up to a state of
good repair.
It is so bad in Washington, D.C., that they are killing people; they
are killing people on the transit system because it is so outmoded.
Now, if we made those investments and we made them in a more robust
level than we are doing now, we could put hundreds of thousands of
Americans to work. It is not just construction workers; you are talking
manufacturing; you are talking small business; you are talking minority
business enterprises; you are talking engineering; you are talking
technical.

The Buy America requirements are the strongest in the whole
government. It would have an incredible stimulative effect on the
economy. In addition, it would put 300,000 people back to work, and we
could begin to climb back toward where we were.
Dwight David Eisenhower gave us a system that was the envy of the
world. We were number one in infrastructure. We are now 16. We are
dropping like a rock. Pretty soon, we will be down there with Third
World countries in terms of state of our infrastructure in this
country. It is embarrassing. It is pathetic. It is not necessary.
Today, we should be considering a long-term bill. We have introduced
a viable long-term bill. We propose today a way to pay for the first 2
years of it by just saying Benedict Arnold corporations can't buy a
drugstore overseas for a major pharmaceutical company and then say: Oh,
that is our home headquarters, although we are still here enjoying all
the protections of American citizenship law and our military, but we
don't want to pay for it and our infrastructure.
There are ways forward. There seems to be an incredible reluctance on
their side, so here we are again saying let's

[[Page H5204]]

do a patch until December 18. Meanwhile, the Senate over there has been
in who knows what kind of circles. They are proposing to get most of
the money by reducing retirement for Federal employees. Now, that is a
tremendous relationship to infrastructure and user fees. Let's not get
too far away from the idea of user pays.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Graves).
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I want to make note, the
highway program funding mechanism expires at the end of this month. It
expires; that means it runs out of funding. Voting against this bill
causes the program to shut down, causes a decline, a dropoff on
investment in our Nation's infrastructure.
Right now, we are seeing growth; we are seeing increasing demand. As
the gentleman from Oregon just noted, we are seeing underinvestment in
our infrastructure system. We have got to increase the investment. We
have got to work hard to address the outdated funding mechanism that
funds our current highway system. As was noted, we have lost value in
the current funding mechanism.
Having a user fee is absolutely critical, but a user fee that ensures
the level of investment that we truly need. This extension gives us
time to recreate that. We have been using the same user fee for
decades, a user fee with static figures since 1993, as was just
mentioned, and a user fee that has conflicting Federal policies that
reduces the value of the income of this trust fund as a result of the
corporate average fuel economy or CAFE standards that require greater
fuel efficiency out of vehicles.
We have got to take a fresh look at this. We have got to take this
time and use it wisely to ensure that we can ensure the level of
funding that we need to invest in our Nation's infrastructure. We need
a fundamentally different approach, and we need to do it without
raising taxes.
Mr. Speaker, back in my home State of Louisiana, we have some of the
worst traffic in the Nation for a region of its size. We have an area
that the interstate system, the only place in the Nation where it
literally drops down to one lane, the interstate, an incredible
bottleneck, in this same area where we are having a manufacturing
renaissance, where we are seeing tens of billions of dollars in new
economic development opportunities; yet the infrastructure is
struggling. The infrastructure is strangling that growth and strangling
that investment.
I urge all Members to support this. I urge all Members to work
together to ensure we develop a new funding stream that meets the
demand of our crumbling infrastructure in this Nation.
I want to thank Chairman Shuster, and I want to thank Chairman Ryan
and Ranking Member DeFazio, to ensure that this legislation moves
forward.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton), the ranking member of the
Highways and Transit Subcommittee.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend, the ranking member,
for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, the majority has turned virtually its only congressional
policy, tax savings, on its head with useless short-term transportation
bills and extensions. Their short-term policy on the Nation's highways,
bridges, and transit has simply transferred the transportation tax
burden to the State taxes of their constituents.
Twenty-one States and the District of Columbia have raised their gas
user fees--six since July 1--Iowa, Wyoming, Maryland, Massachusetts,
New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, Vermont, District
of Columbia, South Dakota, Idaho, Georgia, Nebraska, and Vermont.

{time} 1445

States going in that direction are Michigan, North Carolina, Utah,
and Washington State.
States also considering user fee increases are Kentucky, Missouri,
New Jersey, and South Carolina. That makes almost half the States that
Congress has driven to State taxpayers alone, States that have nothing
in common except the desire to keep their transportation
infrastructure, the key to a growth economy, from completely
disintegrating.
Meanwhile, the Representatives in Washington have continually failed
to pay their part, on the average, about 50 percent of the costs of
State infrastructure with Federal dollars, yet the Federal dollars are
only a pass-through that goes right back to the States.
For 22 years, we have allowed the Federal user fee to remain fixed at
1993 levels, although fuel efficiency long ago made that obsolete.
Although American taxpayers have stepped up, they can't do their
projects without a Federal long-term bill. In the Nation's capital, for
example, the iconic Memorial Bridge, gateway to Arlington Cemetery in
the south and, on the north, to the National Mall, is partially closed,
leaving thousands of workers unable to take Metro buses to get to work.
Even bridges like the H Street bridge here, which needs only repair,
is standing in the way of billions of dollars of nontransportation
development here and nationwide.
So whatever the Congress does in the next authorization bill, two
things must be done: We must put in pilots that instruct us, guide us,
for a new way to fund transportation infrastructure in light of fuel
efficiencies, such as cars like my hybrid Ford C-Max.
And, most of all, to be useful at all, we must have a 6-year
transportation bill.
Mr. SHUSTER. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Mica), the former chairman of the committee.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, here we are. It is the last minute to avoid an
infrastructure disaster across the country.
How did we get here? Well, when we knew that we needed a substantial
amount of money, the other side of the aisle found out that there was a
little bit of money left.
We had asked several months ago to consider going to the end of the
year when we are doing tax reform, and we could find sufficient money
to fund a 4- to 6-year bill. They said ``no.''
They had to spend the last dime in the cookie jar, take it out of the
cookie jar, and that is what put us in this situation. What that has
done is at least seven States have almost closed down their
infrastructure projects.
My State isn't affected, but some of the northern States are affected
because they have a very short work period. So they are missing that
work period.
States don't operate like the Federal Government. They have to pay
their bills. They can't be spending, producing, and printing paper
money without backing. So we have let them down.
So here we are, asking to go where we wanted to go to before
December. So I urge the Members to pass this legislation.
It is kind of interesting. Sometimes I think that there is a lot of
amnesia around here. Mr. Speaker, I don't know if we could go down to
the health clinic downstairs and get a supply of ginkgo, but it would
be good to give some of the Members on the other side of the aisle some
ginkgo to help their memory.
Three years ago they controlled the House, the Senate, and the White
House. They could have passed this legislation they are talking about,
funded it, and we would have a bill that would be in place now.
The President came in. I was there. Ray LaHood came in, cut the knees
out of Mr. Oberstar when he was chairman and said they weren't going to
move forward, they weren't going to raise taxes. Now they call for
raising taxes.
Well, 21 States have raised it. They have done the responsible thing,
and they have to do it. It is better for them to do it because the
overhead and the carrying charge is so great in Washington. So they
have to do it.
Going to the well instead of raising gas taxes, now, didn't we
recommend that to the other side and they ignored it? I think we need a
double dose of ginkgo.
So I think now we step up to the plate and we help Mr. Shuster and
Mr. Ryan. They will get us to December. The leadership of the House is
committed to a long-term bill, and we will get that done, everybody
working together. And maybe a few people having another little dose of
ginkgo might help around here.

[[Page H5205]]

Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I must say it is one of the most bizarre
and fanciful things I have ever heard. There never was a viable plan to
go to year-end. The Republicans never proposed the revenues.
They just recently found revenues under couch cushions to get us
through to December 18th. And they have not meaningfully addressed any
long-term funding, despite having been in charge 4\1/2\ years, and he
wants to blame us.
They just held the first hearing ever in Ways and Means on revenues
just a couple of weeks ago, and the chairman started by saying, ``No
user fees.''
Well, you have now ruled out the traditional way of paying for
infrastructure. So they are going to have to come up with something
else. But that was totally bizarre.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. Edwards).
Ms. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, for months Republicans have actually
squandered an opportunity to develop and pass a long-term authorization
for highway spending, and it is pretty regrettable, since May 19
Republicans simply brought up and passed another 2-month extension.
We have already heard--sometimes we lose count. Is it 33? Is it 34?--
extensions. Unfortunately, here we are 2 months later and we are
careening yet again to another Republican-made crisis, more gridlock
for the highway trust fund, right in the middle of the critical
construction season.
Hundreds of thousands of jobs, as has been said, and vital
construction projects across the country are really hanging in the
balance, and here we just have a few days left. What do we know? We
know that Republicans don't have a plan and they don't have any ideas.
Well, we have some ideas, and those ideas are contained in the Grow
America Act. I am one of the original cosponsors. It is a 6-year, $478
billion bill that would be a framework for our discussions. We could
put that on the floor here today, vote on it, and make sure that we get
underway.
But, oh, no, we are stuck yet again with another extension. Frankly,
I am not really sure whether, when we get to December, we won't be
stuck with yet another extension. This just goes on and on and on. The
American people have had enough.
We know that, if we invest in our infrastructure, we create jobs, and
we know that our infrastructure is falling apart. So this seems like a
no-brainer to most Americans and to working people. And I don't
understand what the complication here is, Mr. Speaker, but enough is
enough.
It is time for Republicans to be the adults at the table to bring a
plan and a program to the floor for a long-term authorization and put
America back to work not 6 months at a time, not 2 months at a time,
but for a long time.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I again would like to remind my colleagues
that the Senate was controlled up until January by their party. The
White House has been controlled for 6\1/2\ years by their party.
I know the ranking member at the time when the stimulus came out--as
I recall, I believe he voted against the stimulus because they were
going to squander $800 billion.
If they would have listened to the ranking member at the time, they
would have put much more or a lot more money into the investment of
infrastructure. Instead of that $800 billion bill, about $68 billion
went to transportation.
So everybody can point fingers at everybody, but the reality is here
we are. We need to extend this so that the Ways and Means Committee and
the Finance Committee in the Senate can figure out the dollars in a
responsible way, not to continue to raise the debt and the deficit, but
find a responsible funding level to get us to a 6-year bill, which I am
committed to and I know Chairman Ryan has said many, many times in
public he is committed to, and our leadership in the House is committed
to a long-term bill.
Instead of pointing fingers at each other, let's figure out a way to
move forward together, and I believe we will.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, could I inquire as to the time left before
we proceed?
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Westmoreland). The gentleman has 4
minutes remaining.
Mr. DeFAZIO. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota
(Mr. Nolan).
Mr. NOLAN. Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, the simple truth is, as
has been articulated so well here today by my colleague, that this
Nation desperately needs a long-term transportation funding bill to
repair our Nation's crumbling infrastructure, not another kick-the-can-
down-the-road, short-term, temporary, convoluted fix.
Last week Congress appropriately honored the late chairman of the
Transportation Committee, Jim Oberstar, with the naming of his hometown
post office in Chisholm, Minnesota. What a wonderful tribute it was to
Chairman Oberstar.
But here we are once again kicking the can down the road on the issue
that Jim Oberstar cared most about. As chairman, Jim worked hard to
ensure the committee drafted good, strong, bipartisan legislation, and
that is what we need here today.
If the Transportation Committee were allowed to do that, I have every
confidence that we would indeed write a long-term transportation
funding bill.
Mr. Speaker, the fact is that the trains are running off the tracks,
the bridges are falling down, the wastewater treatment facilities are
overflowing.
So let's do right by our good friend, former Congressman Jim
Oberstar, and let's create a long-term fix to our national
transportation infrastructure.
Mr. Speaker, I include an article for the Record.

[From The Washington Post, July 14, 2015]

House Honors the Late Rep. Jim Oberstar as Congress Fumbles His
Greatest Passion

(By Colby Itkowitz)

It was curious timing for House members to honor the late
Democratic congressman Jim Oberstar.
On Monday evening, they voted to rename a post office after
Oberstar in his hometown of Chisholm, Minn. Several members
spoke on the floor about his deep institutional memory,
passion for everything transportation and all-around
collegiality.
``I'd like to ask that we honor him by rededicating
ourselves to that spirit of bipartisanship, that spirit of
working together, that spirit of getting things done . . .
that was the spirit that epitomized Jim Oberstar and that's
how so he was successful in getting things done,'' Rep. Rick
Nolan (D-Minn.), who represents Oberstar's former district,
said in floor remarks.
But as Oberstar was being memorialized by his former
colleagues, a Republican plan was being hatched to place
another Band-Aid over the gaping, oozing wound that is
federal highway program funding. Whatever short-term fix is
agreed to, it will be just another patch to temporarily
staunch the bleeding, when what's really needed is invasive
surgery.
Oberstar knew this. He had a plan. And when he finally
earned the gavel of the Transportation committee in 2007
(he'd begun his career as a young staffer on the then-Public
Works panel and then, as a new congressman in 1975, climbed
his way up from the lowest rung on the committee dais to the
chairman's perch), he thought the Democratic majorities in
both chambers and two years later the White House would lead
to real investment in transportation.
But there was no political will then, or now, for the
easiest immediate solution to ramp up revenue for the starved
highway programs--raising the federal gas tax for the first
time since 1993. Instead, Congress is poised to find a short-
term fix to bailout the Highway Trust Fund for the seventh
time since President George W. Bush first shifted money from
the general treasury in 2008 to keep the trust fund solvent.
This time, with the highway program set to expire at the
end of this month, House Budget Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-
Wis.) wants to find savings through complicated tax
compliance rules to patch the highway program as lawmakers
continue to fight over how to pay for a multi-year
reauthorization, which has evaded Congress for years.
In 2009, when Oberstar released his six-year, $450 billion
plan for surface transportation, he warned that the short-
term extensions don't allow state departments of
transportation the certainty to plan for bigger, more
ambitious projects. It's a sentiment that's been echoed by
governors, mayors, big business and labor.
Oberstar, who lost his reelection in 2010, believed that if
Democrats had passed his bill they would not have lost the
House in those mid-term elections because the infrastructure
jobs would have been such a boon to the economy.
It's of course impossible to know if that would have been
true. But Oberstar, who died in May 2014, would probably feel
quite conflicted this week--deeply honored by the post office
naming and deeply disheartened that Congress still hasn't
made transportation spending a priority.

[[Page H5206]]

Mr. SHUSTER. May I inquire as to how much time is remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Pennsylvania has 7
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Oregon has 3\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Graves), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Surface
Transportation.
Mr. GRAVES of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I want to associate myself with
the words of my colleagues, who just spoke obviously on the need to do
this and the need for a long-term transportation bill.
I remember Chairman Oberstar working diligently to try to do that in
the six, seven extensions, I think, that we had at this time and never
did come up with a transportation bill. That is why we are working so
hard to make sure we have a good bipartisan bill.
I do rise in support of H.R. 3038. It is going to extend the current
transportation law until December 18, 2015, until we can get that long-
term bill in place.
As chairman of the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, I believe it
is critical for Congress to come together on this bipartisan, long-
term, surface transportation reauthorization bill.
In my home State of Missouri, we have nearly 35,000 highway miles and
over 10,000 bridges that are begging for our attention.
Last month, I had a hearing focusing on the transportation needs of
rural America. Our roads and bridges demonstrate why we need a strong
Federal highway program. A network of efficient, interconnected roads
is critical to moving people and goods and to the overall health of
this economy.
That is why I am committed to working with Chairman Shuster, Chairman
Ryan, and others to get a reauthorization bill done.
Federal surface transportation programs are set to expire at the end
of this month, and Congress has to act to ensure that these programs
continue and that the solvency of the highway trust fund is addressed.
State and local governments need to be able to plan for projects with
confidence. They need certainty not just for the next 5 or 6 months,
but for the next 5 or 6 years.
This bill enables us to continue our bipartisan efforts on a
reauthorization bill, which we hope to accomplish by the end of the
year.
We have a tremendous opportunity to secure that bill that is going to
improve, rebuild, and modernize our Nation's transportation system, and
it is time that we come together to do that.
I want to thank both of the chairmen on their work on H.R. 3038.

{time} 1500

Mr. DeFAZIO. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr.
Blumenauer).
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in yielding me
time.
Mr. Speaker, I could not agree with the chairman of the committee
more. I personally think that it is time to stop pointing fingers.
There is enough bipartisan blame to go around. We didn't quite do the
job when the economy was in free fall. We would have, a number of us--I
know the ranking member would have--written the Recovery Act
differently, but the point is we are here now with the challenge to
fund it.
Six States, six Republican States have increased the gas tax already
this year. I have got a proposal that is ready to go that could be
passed in 2 weeks, and the committee could have the resources to
actually fund the bill, but there could be other options. I know the
ranking member has a barrel tax, a proposal to index the gas tax and
bond against it. I don't care what it is that we do. I do care that we
don't continue to stall.
It was exactly a year ago today we were standing here on this moment
saying: Don't spill this to the end of the year; we need to get on with
it because we will be right back here a year from now. And we are. It
is time to act.
Mr. SHUSTER. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Brendan F. Boyle).
Mr. BRENDAN F. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. I want to thank my colleague
for yielding me the time.
Mr. Speaker, this is just embarrassing. It is embarrassing that we
are here talking about the umpteenth patch for the umpteenth time.
Other countries around the world right now are looking at us and
wondering whether or not the United States is still interested in
leading. Let's forget the short-term patches. Let's finally deal with
the problem.
The previous speaker, Mr. Blumenauer, is exactly right. Before coming
here, as a State legislator in Pennsylvania, we had Democrats and
Republicans band together and cast a very politically tough vote. It
was the right thing to do. Both Democrats and Republicans did it, and
now we are finally building bridges and repairing roads that we
neglected for 20 years in our State.
It is time for the U.S. Federal Government to do exactly the same,
right thing. Bite the bullet, and let's show that in America we can
solve big problems and we can lead again.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close.
Investing in infrastructure in America has always been
extraordinarily bipartisan over the entire time I have been here.
Recently, we have kind of gone off the tracks. It means we both have to
cooperate on policy and on funding. For the life of me, why has the
Republican Party drawn a line in the sand, saying we cannot have user
fee-based investment in transportation which benefits people who drive
cars, pickup trucks, buses, everybody who moves goods in America, we
can't do that anymore, we have got to come up with some fanciful tax
reform which may or may not happen? It is very sad.
I proposed doing away with the retail gas tax, imposing a barrel tax,
where some of the costs would be paid by ExxonMobil, Wall Street
speculators, OPEC, Saudi Arabia, and, yes, they would probably pass a
lot of it through at the pump, but that would be a fair way to move
forward to make the massive investment we need to put hundreds of
thousands of people back to work and get America moving again.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Oregon makes a good
point. We are not spending the kind of dollars--at least, we are not
spending wisely the kind of dollars, I would also add to that--to fix
our infrastructure problem.
But we do face more difficult times today than we did when we set up
the fund in the 1950s or even in the 1980s, as the economy grew. In the
1990s, the economy grew. Today we have an $18 trillion debt.
Republicans want to make sure this is fiscally responsible. We want to
make sure we are just not layering something else on top of the
American people.
More importantly, I hope my colleagues join with me to continue to
reduce the regulatory burden that we have put out there to people who
build the roads, who operate on the roads, the States that have to come
up with a plan to building them.
So again, there is a lot of work to be done. I feel confident that
Chairman Ryan and his committee will be able to come up with a funding
level that we can continue to work to get a 6-year bill, which I think
is essential to this Nation to give the certainty we need to help boost
the economy.
A vote against this bill is a vote in favor of shutting down these
vital programs, putting transportation projects and jobs across the
country at risk, and furloughing Federal employees.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support this bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I rise to speak in favor of this. Here is basically what we are
trying to do:
We want to get to a long-term highway solution. We believe that, for
the sake of jobs, the economy, certainty, planning big projects in our
States, we want to do a multiyear highway bill, and typically a
multiyear highway bill means a 6-year bill. That is our aspiration and
our goal.
We know we are not going to write that bill in the next 2 weeks. We
know we need at least 2 or 3 months to write that bill. Unfortunately,
the highway trust fund has a fiscal shortfall in 2 weeks, so we are
here to extend the highway trust fund through December

[[Page H5207]]

18 to give us the time we need to put together a multiyear solution.
That costs $8 billion just to do that. What we use are revenue
compliance measures to make it easier for people to file their taxes,
effectively, and some spending savings to get the $8 billion. Not a
single fee increase, not a single tax increase is in this bill to
finance the extension of the highway trust fund solvency to December
18.
For example, TSA fees, TSA fees are not being increased. They are
staying exactly the same as they are, so nobody getting on an airplane
will see anything different. The difference is we keep those fees going
to mandatory spending. We keep those fees going to where they are
instead of going into discretionary spending where they can be spent in
addition to other spending. So by walling off that money so Congress
can't go spend it somewhere else, we save money by doing that.
Things like this are what we do. Savings for the taxpayer, tax
compliance, easier to comply with your taxes, making sure that fees
don't get spent in other areas are some important fiscal savings that
we have to make sure that we can extend the solvency of the highway
trust fund.
Now, the other point I would simply make is we believe that we have a
chance of writing a big multiyear bill. That is why we are seeking this
extension. If we didn't think that we had the chance and the
opportunity on a bicameral, bipartisan basis to do a 6-year highway
funding bill, then we would just do a 2-year bill like the other body
is attempting to do. We think we can do a multiyear bill. We think
there are ways of doing it, such as incorporating it with international
tax reform, things that are important for the economy, things that are
important for our businesses. We think that is an opportunity, and that
is something that we are exploring on a bipartisan basis.
So for that reason and many others, I urge adoption of this. I think
it makes sense. Where I come from in Wisconsin, the way we say it is:
We have two seasons--road construction season and winter. The last
thing we want to do is see road construction stop at the beginning of
August. We need to give our construction, our highways, our people who
are filling these construction projects a little certainty, at least
get into the winter so they can finish the building season while we
work out a long-term highway solution.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEVIN. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
As was said, here we go again. A bill from the majority. They have
been in power over 4 years, and the result is another patch. We need to
do better. We know the state of highways and the infrastructure in this
country, our national infrastructure, receives a D-plus grade, getting
worse every day. So it has been said we need multiyear, and that is so
true.
It is also being said that there needs to be a bipartisan, bicameral
bill. I want to just talk to the chairman, to talk to this entire
House, to talk to the Congress, having also met with the
administration. There is no way to have a multiyear bill, 5, 6 years,
unless it is truly bipartisan, involving Democrats as well as
Republicans in both Houses.
We have come up with some ideas. We are suggesting today, for
example, passage of the Stop Corporate Inversions Act that many others
and I introduced some time ago. So we need to consider everything.
I want to close this way: We will not have a multiyear bill if lines
are drawn not in sand, but in concrete. If the majority takes the
position that some ideas cannot be considered, it is likely to lead
infrastructure to another dead end. We need to do much better:
multiyear, bipartisan, both Houses, with the administration. If we
don't do that, the rest is talk.
This delay has cost millions of jobs. Everybody, including the
majority, now talks about middle income and stagnation. Part of it is
because we have been stagnant in terms of an infrastructure bill on a
long-term basis. That has to stop. We need to put a big red sign that
says ``Stop'' in front of the majority in this House and the entire
House and the Congress and get busy on a bipartisan basis on a highway
long-term bill, all infrastructure.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman from
Michigan has more speakers than I do, so if it is all right with him,
why don't a few of the speakers on his side of the aisle go first.
Mr. LEVIN. We will be glad to do that. We are so full of vigor on
this, we have lots of speakers.
I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Becerra), a member of our committee, who is also chair of our Caucus.
Mr. BECERRA. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, in the greatest, most capacitated nation on Earth, there
is no excuse for so many crumbling roads and bridges and for the ever-
growing traffic gridlock and congestion that we see every day that we
try to get to work. There is no reason why hundreds of thousands of men
and women in the construction industry today should remain unemployed
because this Congress won't do its job of replenishing the highway
trust fund. It is crazy.
We know that when we repair a road or a bridge, we put an American to
work, and we make it easier for all of us to get to work so we can be
more efficient. But here we are for the 34th time doing a patch to the
highway trust fund, which doesn't help any city or county in America
because you don't build a road or build a bridge or retrofit a bridge
with 2 months of funding or 5 months of funding. You need 6 years to
know how much money you can rely on because that contractor doesn't buy
cement or lumber for 2 months or 6 months. They buy for 4 or 5 years
because, for them, time is money.
We are costing the American people a ton of money by doing these
constant patches. Why? Because we are not willing to do what we were
elected to do: our job. Instead of just spectating, we should be coming
up with the funds to have those roads built and repaired, those bridges
built and repaired, to replace those aging buses and trains that stop
us from being efficient.
Mr. Speaker, it is time to do it the right way, the long way, a long-
term fix, not this short-term patch.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Reichert), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Select
Revenue Measures.

{time} 1515

Mr. REICHERT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of today's legislation that will
ensure that our country's infrastructure needs are met.
The bottom line is we are all here. We have agreement on a lot of the
discussion we are having today. We all want a multiyear highway bill.
We all recognize that that is what our communities need. That is
exactly why we need to pass this bill today, so that we can have that
opportunity to discuss these issues over the next few months to come up
with a multiyear bill.
It continues funding for construction projects through the end of the
year, while giving us the time to come together on a solution that
funds a multiyear transportation bill.
This is not just about the economy--it is about the economy, but not
just about the economy. It is about jobs and jobs connected with
construction and jobs connected with moving our goods across the
country and in our communities. It is also about the quality of life
that our constituents are having to deal with back home, stuck in
traffic for an hour or 2 hours, trying to get home and not having time
with their families.
There is a lot involved here with our discussion today and the
benefits of a multiyear plan. Of course, when I go back home--just like
any other Member--we drive on the highways. We see the need. We
experience the congestion.
I want to go back and tell my constituents that we have listened to
them, that we realize and recognize that there is a problem; but most
of all, I want to go back and say: We have a plan. As Democrats and
Republicans, we are going to work together on a multiyear plan that we
can agree on to move this country forward, a plan that includes a
multiyear highway bill that offers communities greater certainty to
plan for the future, improves our roads and bridges, reduces
congestion, and eases the movement of goods.

[[Page H5208]]

To get there, we must find a way--of course, this is where the rub
comes in--to pay for it. By the end of the year, I want to be able to
say to my constituents that we have met this challenge and that we have
found a solution.
We can start by evaluating whether we can accomplish our goals
through a solution that modernizes our international tax system,
supports the competitiveness of our American companies, and secures
funding for a multiyear transportation bill--and finally defining a
permanent funding solution for our infrastructure needs.
Mr. Speaker, I want to ask pardon for a pun I am about to use in my
next sentence. The bill today can help drive us there and give us time
to have these discussions.
Today, let's pass this bill; send it to the Senate, and let's get to
work together, Mr. Speaker. People want us to work together on a
multiyear solution to our transportation and infrastructure needs.
Mr. LEVIN. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
Neal), an active member of our committee.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, in reference to the point that my friend,
Sheriff Reichert, just made, I would note the irony of his advocacy on
behalf of a plan. I guess, after 35 short-term extensions, we haven't
been able to find the time to develop a plan. You need years out to
develop a plan.
Just weeks ago, in this very Chamber, our friends on the other side
made a full-throttled argument about America remaining competitive in
the world, and that is why we needed the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Let me think about this for a moment. We want America to be
competitive in the world, and we simultaneously allow America's
infrastructure to crumble as we speak. Do you know what is going to get
Congress to move, sadly enough? That catastrophe that awaits us
somewhere across this country.
The European Union has a highway system that, in many instances, is
the envy of the world; the Chinese are developing high-speed rail that
is the envy of the world, and we are doing the 35th short-term
extension on a highway bill.
Let me relate to our friends on the other side, as you travel across
the Federal highway system, there is this great sign everywhere. It
says the Dwight D. Eisenhower Federal highway system because a
Republican President had the foresight and vision in the aftermath of
World War II to develop a first-class Federal highway system.
You know what else he had? He had two great allies in the Congress:
Lyndon Johnson, the majority leader in the Senate; and Sam Rayburn, who
was the Speaker of this House--who helped sponsor legislation that gave
us a system that was the envy of the world.
Mr. Speaker, 35 times we are not going to talk about extending the
highway bill because we don't have time to develop a plan.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEVIN. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr.
Blumenauer), another valued member of our committee.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, America is still falling apart and
falling behind. We are looking now to slide again past the deadline
towards the end of the year. The problem is we are still pretending we
can pay for 2015 infrastructure with 1993 dollars. It isn't that hard.
It doesn't take 6 months to come up with a funding stream.
I have legislation that is in the committee that could be acted on.
We could follow the example of 20 States that have raised their user
fees for transportation. We could get courage from the 6 Republican
States that have raised their gas tax already this year.
Just a few days ago, in the State of Washington, the Republican-
controlled State Senate approved a 15-cent gas tax increase. We could
follow the example of Ronald Reagan in 1982, when he urged this
Congress to bite the bullet and raise the gas tax. He proposed and
Congress followed through on a 125 percent increase in the gas tax.
Somehow, my Republican friends are afraid to use the mechanism that
is fast, that is accepted, that the people in the States--Republicans
in the States--have the courage to undertake.
Why is it that this year is going to be any different than last year?
Why will my speech be any different? Is it going to be cheaper? Is it
going to become less complex? Are we going to have a little more
backbone?
It is time for us to step up. I would hope that our Ways and Means
Committee could take the next 2 weeks, follow regular order, and
provide funding so that we could give the Transportation Committee the
2 months they need to fund it, and the job would be done.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEVIN. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Pascrell), another valued member of our committee.
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, what are we writing here, a new Magna
Carta? They have had 4 years, for crying out loud; and we still don't
have legislation in front of us.
It has been 2 months since we were last here. We had a lot of talks 2
months ago about how bad extensions are for transportation planning and
policy, how the last extension was going to be the last extension.
Nothing has changed.
You keep on talking about the anxiety over tax reform and tax change.
What about the anxiety that the American people and the contractors and
workers have of getting our roads and highways and airports up to
snuff? The bill before us today has the Congress paying for our
highways and transit systems with more gimmicks.
Tax compliance--these are the same provisions the House rejected last
year. Transportation security administrative fees--Nick Calio at the
airlines trade association rightfully criticizes: ``This plan proposes
to use tomorrow's dollars to pay for today's problems.''
The international tax can be part of a solution to bridge the gap,
but corporate America is counting on those revenues to lower their
rates and not pay for highway spending. Using an international tax
scheme now will make it that much more difficult to get back to a user
fee system. The people who use the system should pay for the system.
That is what we should be agreeing on.
The Ways and Means Committee did hold two hearings on renewing the
trust fund--and we come to this?
This is the new Magna Carta. I am waiting to see the final results 6
months from now. It has been 10 years since this Congress passed a
transportation bill. Neither party has the courage to deal with it.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
distinguished gentlewoman from Kansas (Ms. Jenkins), a member of the
Ways and Means Committee.
Ms. JENKINS of Kansas. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I
thank him for his leadership on this very important issue.
I rise today in support of H.R. 3038. With the prospect of the
highway trust fund dollars and spending authority expiring in just over
2 weeks, this bill is a critical step to give our States the certainty
that they need to continue work on important infrastructure projects
back home. This bill gives the House and the Senate time to work
together toward a long-term highway package by the end of the year.
It is also important to note that this bill includes provisions I
have pushed for to help many small businesses by establishing a
chronological set of due dates for them to pay their taxes. The current
law fails to do this, which causes small business and their owners
unnecessary grief, time, and money.
I have worked during the past two Congresses on legislation to fix
this problem, and I am pleased that the House is acting today to take
another burden off the shoulders of small-business people.
I urge support of H.R. 3038.
Mr. LEVIN. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Danny K. Davis), another valued member of our committee.
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, we all know that on July
31, the highway trust fund will expire, but we didn't just learn it. It
is not that we just found out last week or last month. We have always
known it. Now, we come to where we are backed up against the wall.
We know we need a long-term fix, but I am going to vote for a short-
term fix. I am going to vote for it because I want the contractors in
my State to keep

[[Page H5209]]

working. I want the construction workers to keep laying concrete. I
want the bridgebuilders to keep repairing bridges.
We can't afford to have a short season. In Illinois, if you don't do
construction now, you may not get a chance to do much.
On the basis of the logic of keeping the construction industry
moving, I vote ``yes'' for the highway bill that we are considering
today.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute to
respond to the gentleman from Chicago.
As a person who represents the State line and drives to O'Hare every
week, back and forth, I want to add to the comment. They are in the
middle of road construction right now on I-90 going to Chicago. If we
don't pass this bill, construction projects like that will stop.
By the way, we need more construction in the Chicagoland area, just
like we do around the rest of America. That is why we have to pass
this.
I think the gentleman from Illinois hit it right, which is, yes, we
knew this was coming; but it takes a while to figure out how to do
things like rewrite international tax laws, something we haven't done
for decades. It takes a while to figure out how to come up with long-
term financing of something like a highway trust fund.
We know that we cannot come up with that answer within the next 2
weeks. We don't want to see these construction projects like the really
important one on I-90 and I-94 going to O'Hare--and everywhere else in
America--stop in 2 weeks.
That is why this is necessary. We don't like patches anymore than
anybody else does, but this patch is necessary to make sure that those
projects don't stop.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1530

Mr. LEVIN. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Lewis), a truly valued member of our committee and this Congress.
Mr. LEWIS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my strong concern with yet another
stopgap measure. Nearly 60 years ago, a Republican President, Dwight
Eisenhower, led the charge to create the Interstate Highway System. He
realized that good roads were not just about commerce and economic
development, they are a national security priority to keep America
safe.
I have said it before and I will remind you again: there is no such
thing as a Republican road or a Democratic bridge. Today, American
roads and bridges, American transit, and American highways are
crumbling. This is a national embarrassment.
We have already rolled the ball down the road more than 30 times, and
here we are doing it again. The time for talk is past. In the words of
Dr. King: We have been bogged down in the paralysis of analysis for too
long.
Delay for another day is not an option. American jobs are on the
line. In a few short weeks, transportation projects across our country
will grind to a stop. We must act, and we must act now.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
As I think back, we have been doing this so often, and our chairman
said it takes a while. It has been a decade.
I just want to emphasize, if we are no longer going to take a while
but do it right, it is going to have to be done on a truly bipartisan
basis.
There is a tendency, I think, to go off on a wild goose chase, and
that won't build highways. And it won't build if one party doesn't work
with another, if the Senate doesn't work with the House. Now we have
the Senate seeming to go a different way on a short-term thinking they
can do a long-term. Chaos doesn't build highways. So I really hope,
however we vote on this bill, that there will be a new dedication to
doing what is so long overdue.
All the talk about middle class incomes essentially goes up in smoke
when we fail to do what is so clearly in the interest of middle class
jobs, and that is to build highways, to repair bridges, to take care of
airports, to take care of our infrastructure.
Coming from Michigan, I am ashamed of the state of highways in
Michigan compared to when I was a kid and later on. Disrepair has
essentially been the hallmark of highway and infrastructure in this
country because there has been a failure to step up to the plate.
I just want to finish by saying: Don't put anything aside. Don't say
anything can't be considered because that is a ticket, really, to
another bridge to nowhere.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I will spare the cliches and just simply say I think
this is important that we get this done. Both parties have patched this
trust fund for, as the gentleman said, 10 years.
Part of the problem we have right now, Mr. Speaker, is the revenue
source for highways is a revenue source that is no longer relevant,
that doesn't work anymore. Gas taxes don't work well.
Why?
There is a good reason why. We get much better gas mileage. Our
engine technology is better. Some cars don't even use gas. They are
electric, and therefore, as a result, we don't pay as much for the
highways we use, and that is the problem.
So we are trying to figure out what is a way we can bridge finance
the highway trust fund so that we can come up with a new revenue source
for the long term. That means we have to have a medium term, a 6-year
highway bill to make sure that the construction that we need to get
done gets done, and that is going to take us some time to figure this
out.
That is why we need to have this patch to give us that time, because
if we fail to pass this extension right now, then I can, sure as day,
tell you what will come over from the other body will be a medium,
about an 18-month extension, and that will come through here, and we
will not get the bridge we need. We will not get the ability to give
multiyear projects the ability to plan and get off the ground, and we
will not have done our jobs.
So in order to give us a chance to do our jobs, to get the long-term
solution in place, to work on these big issues, we need to get
ourselves a few more months' time. That is why I think, on a bipartisan
basis, Members understand and appreciate this situation and therefore
will, hopefully, support this.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I will vote for H.R. 3038, the Highway and
Transportation Funding Act of 2015, because our nation cannot afford a
surface transportation shutdown. There are still upwards of 15 million
Americans either unemployed or underemployed, and a lapse in highway
funding--however brief--would jeopardize thousands of Americans'
livelihoods. My hope is that Republicans will stop careening toward
crisis and finally pass a long-term measure to fix our aging
infrastructure and put Americans to work. I am proud to support such a
solution: today's Democratic Motion to Recommit aimed to allow a vote
to re-authorize a long-term Transportation Bill to provide 6 years of
funding for states and localities to repair crumbling roads and
bridges. The time has come to stop governing by crisis and start making
long-term investments to build a full employment society.
Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, roads, bridges, and
railroads are crumbling all across America. In North Carolina, which
used to be known as the ``good roads'' state, over 5,500 bridges are
structurally unsound, and poor roads cost drivers $1.5 billion a year.
That's why I am so frustrated that instead of seizing the opportunity
to build a viable transportation system with a long-term highway-
transit bill, Republican leaders have instead elected to once again
kick the can down the proverbial road and forgo critical repairs and
safety improvements, to say nothing of new construction.
Despite these grave reservations, I will vote for today's 5-month
extension because I believe it will allow congressional leaders to
negotiate the comprehensive transportation overhaul we so desperately
need. However, like President Obama, I will not support future efforts
to shirk the responsibility of rebuilding our nation's infrastructure.
Short-term, stop-gap, extension-to-extension governance has become
the norm over the past few years, and I'm frankly fed up with it. House
Democrats are ready to get serious about making the investments we need
to make to thrive as a country--I strongly encourage Republicans to
answer the call.

[[Page H5210]]

Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise in support of a
long-term surface transportation bill.
It's disappointing that Congress once again has failed to propose a
long-term solution to invest in our nation's roads, bridges, and rails.
The bill being brought to the floor is nothing more than a Band Aid:
however, without this temporary fix, the Department of Transportation
would be unable to fund new obligations to repair America's crumbling
roads and fix our Nation's vast infrastructure problems. The reality is
our nation's investment in infrastructure is woefully inadequate. These
shortfalls hurt our constituents and damage our entire economy.
In Alabama, twenty percent of our major city streets are in poor
condition. Driving on deteriorating roads costs motorists approximately
$1.4 billion a year.
Across our country, an estimated one in three fatal traffic accidents
is caused by roads that are in poor or mediocre condition. Moreover,
The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates that one out of every
nine bridges in the U.S. is structurally deficient.
By building the infrastructure of tomorrow, we would create thousands
of good-paying construction jobs that help more hard-working Americans
earn a living.
Investing in our infrastructure would also enhance our economic
competitiveness by reducing transit costs and travel delays.
We can't continue to kick the can down the road--we must do better by
our constituents. There's no reason why Congress cannot pass a long-
term plan that would fix our aging infrastructure and boost our
nation's economic development.
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in
support of H.R. 3064, the GROW AMERICA Act, a bill that underscores the
urgent need for a long-term investment in our Country's transportation
infrastructure.
With only eighteen days left before the Highway Trust Fund expires on
July 31st, we should be urgently seeking out a long term solution.
Instead, we are considering H.R. 3038, another short term extension
of the Highway Trust Fund that only provides five months of additional
funding. This five month quick-fix fails to provide America with the
stability of a more permanent solution. Passing this bill only
continues the repeated pattern of kicking the can down the road,
further putting off the sensible solution that we owe to our
constituents.
In my home state of Texas, 38 percent of roads are in mediocre or
poor condition, forcing drivers to spend approximately $5.3 billion
annually on otherwise unnecessary automotive repairs. With 19% of our
state's bridges being structurally deficient, it is clear that a
sweeping bipartisan effort is needed to invest in the future of
America's infrastructure.
Without a long term extension, many states are unable to plan future
construction projects, providing much needed repair to deteriorating
roads. This is particularly crippling for Texas, which has a longer
construction season because of its climate.
In the Dallas area specifically, we currently have nine major
construction projects costing in excess of $275 million that would be
put on hold, in the event that the highway trust fund runs out of
money. This is simply unfair. It is harmful to the growth that this
region is experiencing, and places an unnecessary burden on Dallas
residents and their ability to commute safely.
Just a few months ago, I spoke out against the House's refusal to
take up long term action on the Highway Trust Fund; and yet, we are
again attempting to put a band-aid on a deep cut to America's
transportation needs
By contrast, H.R. 3064, the GROW AMERICA Act seeks to address the
harmful impacts of continuous stop-gap funding. This bill infuses our
economy with transportation infrastructure investment, providing $478
billion over six years for highways, bridges, public transportation,
highway safety, and rail programs.
Enacting a six-year GROW AMERICA Act adds nearly two million jobs,
compared to another extension of surface transportation programs, and
is desperately needed to improve transportation quality across the
nation.
I urge my colleagues to call their transportation departments, if
they have not already, and find out how short funding patches in
Federal highway funds would affect their states. Bridge replacements,
traffic decongestion projects, and road widening efforts, all impact
safety, time, money and jobs; all of which stand to be harmed by short-
term funding.
Mr. Speaker, with only eighteen days until the Highway Trust Fund
runs out of money, I urge my colleagues to support the GROW AMERICA
Act, a multi-year solution that provides states with the funding
necessary to adequately invest in their infrastructure.
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I support workers and the important
transportation and infrastructure jobs they do. They deserve the
certainty and support that a long-term, well-funded highway funding
bill would provide. H.R. 3038 is not that bill.
Our infrastructure is rated a D+ by the American Society of Civil
Engineers. A transportation system that was once the envy of the world
has fallen into disrepair. We've passed dozens of short-term extensions
over the past decade, and they haven't done the trick.
We know where this bill will leave us: infrastructure projects won't
be planned beyond December, long-overdue projects will hang in limbo,
and workers will be left wondering if they'll spend the holidays
unemployed.
Every business owner, worker, and state and local official I have
spoken with has asked for the same thing: a long-term, well-funded
bill. In order to do that, we need to make a commitment to filling the
funding gap from the gas tax--which has not been increased in more than
two decades.
I support gradually raising the gas tax to pay for our infrastructure
priorities. I also joined 184 of my Democratic colleagues in supporting
a motion that would have paid for a long-term, well-funded highway bill
by preventing corporate tax inversions--the process of moving corporate
headquarters overseas. Just one Republican supported that proposal.
Doing either of those things would sustain the vital infrastructure
investments we need.
Those who suggest we can't afford a good highway bill are wrong. We
are the richest country in the world at the richest time in our
history. Funding our roads and bridges is a priority. We can afford it,
and the American people demand that we do.
What we cannot do is continue the path of unpredictability and short-
term planning that results from these stopgap measures for our
highways, bridges, and other infrastructure projects. That is why I
voted against H.R. 3038.
This is the greatest country in the world, and there is nothing we
cannot do. It's time to act accordingly by advancing a long-term, well-
funded transportation bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 362, the previous question is ordered on
the bill.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.

Motion to Recommit

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I am opposed, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Van Hollen moves to recommit the bill H.R. 3038 to the
Committee on Ways and Means with instructions to report the
same back to the House forthwith with the following
amendment:
At the end of the bill, add the following:

TITLE IV--STOP CORPORATE EXPATRIATION AND INVEST IN AMERICA'S
INFRASTRUCTURE ACT

SEC. 4001. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Stop Corporate
Expatriation and Invest in America's Infrastructure Act of
2015''.

SEC. 4002. MODIFICATIONS TO RULES RELATING TO INVERTED
CORPORATIONS.

(a) In General.--Subsection (b) of section 7874 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Inverted Corporations Treated as Domestic
Corporations.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding section 7701(a)(4), a
foreign corporation shall be treated for purposes of this
title as a domestic corporation if--
``(A) such corporation would be a surrogate foreign
corporation if subsection (a)(2) were applied by substituting
`80 percent' for `60 percent', or
``(B) such corporation is an inverted domestic corporation.
``(2) Inverted domestic corporation.--For purposes of this
subsection, a foreign corporation shall be treated as an
inverted domestic corporation if, pursuant to a plan (or a
series of related transactions)--
``(A) the entity completes after May 8, 2014, the direct or
indirect acquisition of--
``(i) substantially all of the properties held directly or
indirectly by a domestic corporation, or
``(ii) substantially all of the assets of, or substantially
all of the properties constituting a trade or business of, a
domestic partnership, and
``(B) after the acquisition, either--
``(i) more than 50 percent of the stock (by vote or value)
of the entity is held--

``(I) in the case of an acquisition with respect to a
domestic corporation, by former shareholders of the domestic
corporation by reason of holding stock in the domestic
corporation, or
``(II) in the case of an acquisition with respect to a
domestic partnership, by former

[[Page H5211]]

partners of the domestic partnership by reason of holding a
capital or profits interest in the domestic partnership, or

``(ii) the management and control of the expanded
affiliated group which includes the entity occurs, directly
or indirectly, primarily within the United States, and such
expanded affiliated group has significant domestic business
activities.
``(3) Exception for corporations with substantial business
activities in foreign country of organization.--A foreign
corporation described in paragraph (2) shall not be treated
as an inverted domestic corporation if after the acquisition
the expanded affiliated group which includes the entity has
substantial business activities in the foreign country in
which or under the law of which the entity is created or
organized when compared to the total business activities of
such expanded affiliated group. For purposes of subsection
(a)(2)(B)(iii) and the preceding sentence, the term
`substantial business activities' shall have the meaning
given such term under regulations in effect on May 8, 2014,
except that the Secretary may issue regulations increasing
the threshold percent in any of the tests under such
regulations for determining if business activities constitute
substantial business activities for purposes of this
paragraph.
``(4) Management and control.--For purposes of paragraph
(2)(B)(ii)--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall prescribe
regulations for purposes of determining cases in which the
management and control of an expanded affiliated group is to
be treated as occurring, directly or indirectly, primarily
within the United States. The regulations prescribed under
the preceding sentence shall apply to periods after May 8,
2014.
``(B) Executive officers and senior management.--Such
regulations shall provide that the management and control of
an expanded affiliated group shall be treated as occurring,
directly or indirectly, primarily within the United States if
substantially all of the executive officers and senior
management of the expanded affiliated group who exercise day-
to-day responsibility for making decisions involving
strategic, financial, and operational policies of the
expanded affiliated group are based or primarily located
within the United States. Individuals who in fact exercise
such day-to-day responsibilities shall be treated as
executive officers and senior management regardless of their
title.
``(5) Significant domestic business activities.--For
purposes of paragraph (2)(B)(ii), an expanded affiliated
group has significant domestic business activities if at
least 25 percent of--
``(A) the employees of the group are based in the United
States,
``(B) the employee compensation incurred by the group is
incurred with respect to employees based in the United
States,
``(C) the assets of the group are located in the United
States, or
``(D) the income of the group is derived in the United
States,

determined in the same manner as such determinations are made
for purposes of determining substantial business activities
under regulations referred to in paragraph (3) as in effect
on May 8, 2014, but applied by treating all references in
such regulations to `foreign country' and `relevant foreign
country' as references to `the United States'. The Secretary
may issue regulations decreasing the threshold percent in any
of the tests under such regulations for determining if
business activities constitute significant domestic business
activities for purposes of this paragraph.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Clause (i) of section 7874(a)(2)(B) of such Code is
amended by striking ``after March 4, 2003,'' and inserting
``after March 4, 2003, and before May 9, 2014,''.
(2) Subsection (c) of section 7874 of such Code is
amended--
(A) in paragraph (2)--
(i) by striking ``subsection (a)(2)(B)(ii)'' and inserting
``subsections (a)(2)(B)(ii) and (b)(2)(B)(i)'', and
(ii) by inserting ``or (b)(2)(A)'' after ``(a)(2)(B)(i)''
in subparagraph (B),
(B) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``or (b)(2)(B)(i), as
the case may be,'' after ``(a)(2)(B)(ii)'',
(C) in paragraph (5), by striking ``subsection
(a)(2)(B)(ii)'' and inserting ``subsections (a)(2)(B)(ii) and
(b)(2)(B)(i)'', and
(D) in paragraph (6), by inserting ``or inverted domestic
corporation, as the case may be,'' after ``surrogate foreign
corporation''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years ending after May 8, 2014.

Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the reading be dispensed with.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Wisconsin?
There was no objection.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. A point of order is reserved.
Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Maryland is recognized for 5
minutes in support of his motion.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, we have a very sad state of affairs
here. We know we have an urgent problem with respect to infrastructure
around America. Our roads, our bridges, our transitways are in
disrepair at a time when we should actually be investing more to
modernize our American infrastructure so we can compete and put people
back to work.
And yet what do we have from our Republican colleagues? More of the
same. Five more months of inadequate funding, no certainty for people
who need to plan for projects. People are going to face layoffs again.
So we have an urgent problem, and the response we get from our
Republican colleagues is 5 months of inadequate funding.
We have put forward a 6-year plan, the first 2 years fully funded of
a more robust plan. How do we fund it? We fund it by saying ``no more''
to the companies, the American companies that are cheating the American
taxpayers by inversion.
So what are they doing? They are simply changing their addresses to
an overseas address so they don't have to pay any more into helping our
infrastructure and helping our country.
Let me give you an example of what these companies are doing. They
are not moving their employees. They are not moving their management.
They are not moving their factories or anything else. They are just
changing their mailing address by acquiring a small foreign company
and, in doing so, saying: We are not going to pay any more of our
taxes.
So to the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, I think most
Americans would disagree with you that we need more time. We don't need
5 more months to figure out that these corporations are cheating, as
taxpayers, by using these special provisions. We can close this tax
loophole right now. In fact, about 30 of these companies have inverted
in the last 5 years.
So we want to wait another 5 months and allow 5, 10 more to use this
tax device to escape their responsibilities to the American taxpayer?
Why should we do that?
Let's do the right thing, and let's do it right now. We have that
within our power. That is what the legislation that we have put forward
is all about. Let's invest in our national infrastructure, and let's
use it by getting the savings from these companies that are engaging in
these inversion tax practices.
I am pleased to yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Israel).
Mr. ISRAEL. I thank my colleague.
Mr. Speaker, Republicans and Democrats until this Congress have
always agreed that the way you build an economy is by building
highways, bridges, tunnels, and transit.
With this Congress, Mr. Speaker, under this Republican Congress, we
are not building; we are patching. As a result, the American people are
sitting in more traffic, longer rush hours, with higher repair bills.
Well, this is a choice, Mr. Speaker. Under the Republican plan, we
can kick the can down the crumbling highway. We can patch through
December, telling construction workers we don't know if they are going
to work after that. We can fund the status quo.
Or, under this plan, we can be big, bold, and fair. We have 6 years
of work, a 6-year extension of the highway trust fund, $40 billion in
jobs and construction. It is funded not by asking Americans to dig
deeper into their pockets or take something from their paychecks. It is
funded by telling America's corporations they cannot establish an
address for themselves in the Caribbean in order to avoid paying their
fair share of taxes right here at home.
Mr. Speaker, the American people are fed up. They are sitting in
traffic. They can feel their tires hitting the potholes. They are told
we can't afford to fix those potholes because we don't have the money.
They sit in longer rush hours. Meanwhile, corporations rush to the
Caribbean to avoid paying their fair share of taxes to fix the
potholes.
This is the choice: Will we protect tax gimmicks for America's
biggest corporations, or will we protect the American taxpayer and
America's workers?
Our proposal, Mr. Speaker, grows jobs, creates sustainable growth and
paychecks. It fixes potholes. It fixes our highways and transit. It
gets Americans to their jobs on time. It rebuilds our economy by
rebuilding jobs. And it is a choice we are making today.

[[Page H5212]]

The choice is this, Mr. Speaker: Will we protect tax gimmicks for tax
dodgers, or will we protect jobs for the American people?
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw the reservation of the
point of order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The reservation of the point of order is
withdrawn.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I have a few points.
Number one, I am looking through the bill, the motion to recommit
here. There is no 6-year plan in here. There is no 6-year highway
project plan in here. They may have proposed one, but it is not being
offered here today. All this bill does is the stop corporate
expatriation and invest in America's infrastructure, but there is no
invest in America's infrastructure here, just the tax increase.
Let's speak to that.
We have heard speaker after speaker after speaker here from the other
side of the aisle say: You are getting away from gas taxes to fund
highways, to fund infrastructure.
What does this do? This isn't a gas tax increase. So you are moving
away from the user fee principle yourself in your own rhetoric.
Let's speak to the substance of this particular proposal. This
proposal will do a couple of things.
Number one, it will encourage foreign companies to buy U.S.
companies. You might as well say this is the Buy American Company Act
of 2015.
Number two, it will encourage U.S. corporate headquarters to move
overseas. Don't take my word for it. That is the characterization of
this bill by the Senate Democratic Policy chair, the senior Senator
from New York, who has said this policy will encourage U.S.
headquarters to be moved overseas.

{time} 1545

Inversions are bad. We want to stop inversions. But to quote the
Treasury Secretary of the other side's party, the way to stop
inversions is tax reform.
Why are we here doing this patch? So that we can give ourselves the
time to do tax reform, to do international tax reform, so that we can
prevent inversions. That is the whole purpose of this episode that we
are having here.
So not only is this really bad policy, it doesn't work. It won't
affect what they are trying to do.
If you want to stop inversions, you have got to do tax reforms.
Adding more obstacles to U.S. companies doesn't stop U.S. companies
from moving. It simply says that they are more ripe for takeovers by
foreign companies.
There is a very dangerous trend, Mr. Speaker, of foreign companies
buying U.S. companies. It is happening at an alarming pace. If this
were to pass, it would accelerate that pace.
And the way that this is written, it would say: If you have your
headquarters in America, as an American company, you had better move
them overseas. Why would we want to do that?
The real solution is tax reform, make America more competitive and
make America the place you want to have your corporate headquarters.
Let's have American companies buy foreign companies instead of the
other way around. That is what we should be doing.
Let's just have a little truth in advertising here. This doesn't stop
inversions. This accelerates American companies being bought by foreign
companies. It accelerates American headquarters going overseas, and it
doesn't fund anything for the next 6 years.
So with that and many other reasons, I urge a ``no'' vote on this
motion to recommit.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule
XX, this 15-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by
5-minute votes on passage, if ordered; the motion to suspend the rules
on H.R. 2722; and approval of the Journal, if ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 185,
nays 244, not voting 4, as follows:

[Roll No. 440]

YEAS--185

Adams
Aguilar
Ashford
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Graham
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lee
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Moulton
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Norcross
O'Rourke
Pallone
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

NAYS--244

Abraham
Aderholt
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Babin
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Bost
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Cook
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donovan
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jordan
Joyce
Katko
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Knight
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
LoBiondo
Long
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
MacArthur
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Pascrell
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Russell
Ryan (WI)

[[Page H5213]]

Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Trott
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke

NOT VOTING--4

Beyer
Bishop (UT)
Engel
Schrader

{time} 1613

Messrs. WENSTRUP, DUNCAN of Tennessee, BROOKS of Alabama, MacARTHUR,
HULTGREN, PITTENGER, and HARDY changed their vote from ``yea'' to
``nay.''
Ms. CASTOR of Florida, Messrs. PETERS and LARSON of Connecticut
changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.

Recorded Vote

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 312,
noes 119, not voting 2, as follows:

[Roll No. 441]

AYES--312

Abraham
Adams
Aderholt
Allen
Ashford
Babin
Barr
Barton
Bass
Beatty
Benishek
Bera
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Bonamici
Bost
Boustany
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brooks (IN)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Capps
Capuano
Carson (IN)
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Castro (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clarke (NY)
Clyburn
Coffman
Cohen
Cole
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Connolly
Conyers
Cook
Costa
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
Delaney
DelBene
Denham
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Dold
Donovan
Duckworth
Duncan (TN)
Ellison
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Frelinghuysen
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Gibbs
Gibson
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Graham
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Guinta
Guthrie
Hahn
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinojosa
Holding
Honda
Hoyer
Hudson
Huffman
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Joyce
Katko
Keating
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kilmer
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Knight
Kuster
LaMalfa
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Lawrence
Lee
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Long
Love
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
MacArthur
Maloney, Carolyn
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy
McCaul
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Newhouse
Noem
Nolan
Norcross
Nugent
Nunes
O'Rourke
Olson
Pallone
Paulsen
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson
Pingree
Pittenger
Pitts
Pocan
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Price (NC)
Price, Tom
Quigley
Reed
Reichert
Richmond
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rouzer
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Russell
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schiff
Scott, David
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Titus
Torres
Trott
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke

NOES--119

Aguilar
Amash
Amodei
Barletta
Becerra
Blackburn
Blum
Blumenauer
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brown (FL)
Buck
Byrne
Cardenas
Carney
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Clark (MA)
Clawson (FL)
Clay
Cleaver
Collins (GA)
Cooper
Courtney
Cummings
DeGette
DeLauro
DeSantis
DeSaulnier
DesJarlais
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Edwards
Farenthold
Fleming
Flores
Franks (AZ)
Fudge
Garrett
Gohmert
Gosar
Graves (GA)
Griffith
Grijalva
Grothman
Gutierrez
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hice, Jody B.
Huelskamp
Jolly
Jones
Jordan
Kaptur
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kind
Labrador
Lamborn
Larson (CT)
Latta
Loudermilk
Lummis
Maloney, Sean
Massie
Matsui
McClintock
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
Moore
Moulton
Mulvaney
Neal
Neugebauer
Palazzo
Palmer
Pascrell
Pearce
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Rangel
Ratcliffe
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (NY)
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Rothfus
Salmon
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanford
Schakowsky
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Speier
Thompson (MS)
Tipton
Tonko
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Visclosky
Walker
Weber (TX)
Welch
Westmoreland
Yoder
Yoho

NOT VOTING--2

Beyer
Engel

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining.

{time} 1620

Ms. BROWN of Florida and Mr. GOHMERT changed their vote from ``aye''
to ``no.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________