PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2553, AIRPORT AND AIRWAY EXTENSION ACT OF 2011, PART IV
(House of Representatives - July 20, 2011)

Text of this article available as:

Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.

        


[Pages H5251-H5257]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2553, AIRPORT AND AIRWAY EXTENSION 
                          ACT OF 2011, PART IV

  Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 357 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 357

       Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it 
     shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 
     2553) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 
     the funding and expenditure authority of the Airport and 
     Airway Trust Fund, to amend title 49, United States Code, to 
     extend the airport improvement program, and for other 
     purposes. All points of order against consideration of the 
     bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as read. All 
     points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. 
     The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
     bill to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) 
     one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the 
     chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure; and (2) one motion to 
     recommit.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The gentleman from Florida is 
recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.


                             General Leave

  Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their 
remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support this rule and the 
underlying bill. House Resolution 357 provides for a closed rule for 
consideration

[[Page H5252]]

of H.R. 2553, the Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2011, Part IV.
  So far in the 112th Congress, three short-term extensions have been 
signed into law to allow for the continued aviation trust fund revenue 
collections and aviation program authority necessary to operate 
America's airports. The latest short-term extension expires this 
Friday, July 22.
  H.R. 2553 would extend the program for a little less than 2 months, 
until September 16. The bill maintains current funding levels for FAA, 
its employees, and airports around the country. The bill includes two 
simple Essential Air Service (EAS) reform provisions, one of which has 
already passed the Senate by unanimous consent.
  Both the House and Senate have passed separate versions of multiyear 
reauthorization bills, so this short-term extension will hopefully give 
the House and Senate the time needed to work out the differences 
between the two bills so we can stop kicking the can down the road.
  To say that, that is exactly what we are doing. For starters, this is 
the 21st extension of the FAA program since the last reauthorization. 
We have been at this exact juncture 20 other times. The last 
reauthorization, shepherded by Chairman Mica, was over 7\1/2\ years 
ago. That is a long time. Since September 30, 2007, the FAA has been 
operating on a series of short-term, stopgap extensions.
  Quite simply, it is time to stop doing this. It is too much. The 
safety of our airline passengers is something we ought to take into 
consideration and pass a necessary, meaningful and long-term FAA 
reauthorization.
  Once again, Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and the 
underlying legislation. The Transportation and Infrastructure Committee 
has worked to provide us yet another short-term extension which will 
ensure the continued safety of airline passengers, with the hope that 
the Senate and the House can finally come to the table and realize a 
long-term reauthorization.
  I encourage my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule and ``yes'' on 
the underlying bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend from 
Florida for yielding me the time, and I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2011, Part IV, 
extends aviation trust fund revenue collections and aviation program 
authority at current funding levels through September 16 of this year 
while also imposing new restrictions on the Essential Air Service 
program.
  Frankly, it is no substitute for a long-term Federal Aviation 
Administration authorization, and casts further doubt on airport 
construction and safety improvements instead of ensuring air passenger 
safety, creating jobs, or investing in air traffic control 
modernization.

                              {time}  1230

  As I'm sure most Americans would agree, the word ``uncertain'' does 
not belong in a conversation about our Nation's aviation system and it 
certainly does not belong in the same sentence as air passenger safety. 
I note a friend in the House who is a pilot agrees with that statement. 
Over the course of almost 4 years, however, great uncertainty 
surrounding long-term funding for the FAA has threatened and continues 
to threaten both. Without steady funding, the FAA is unable to best 
manage the long-term programs and projects that are vital to the future 
of our aviation system, including lifesaving airport safety 
improvements and the transition to the very important Next Generation 
Air Transportation System that we know as NextGen.
  Make no mistake, the United States has the safest, most efficient 
aviation system in the world. We can all thank our highly skilled, 
dedicated aviation professionals for that. But in order to ensure that 
it remains that way, we must stop kicking the FAA reauthorization can 
further down the road. I know these cans around here get tired of being 
kicked down the road.
  The measure before us is the 21st short-term FAA extension to be 
considered since the last FAA authorization bill. Vision 100 expired at 
the end of September 2007. I repeat: This is the 21st short-term FAA 
extension we have considered in less than 4 years. It is also the sixth 
extension of operation authority for fiscal year 2011. Meanwhile, there 
has been no progress for weeks on a long-term authorization.
  While short-term extensions have their place in the legislative 
process, they should be the exception, not the rule, especially when 
authorizing the important safety and modernization activities of the 
FAA. The extension not only fails to address the long-term aviation 
needs of our Nation, but also denies many of our small and rural 
communities the air service and economic opportunity made possible by 
the Essential Air Service program.
  By including these policy riders, House Republicans risk a shutdown 
of our aviation system. Senator Rockefeller, after our Rules Committee 
meeting last night, made that very clear in a letter from him to 
Chairman Mica.
  Instead of appointing conferees, as the Senate did 100 days ago, 
House Republicans seem to be pointing fingers and effectively forcing a 
vote on the future of the EAS program ahead of conference legislation. 
While House Republicans continue to play the blame game with the 
Senate, American businesses and workers are losing out on much needed 
economic opportunities.
  Aviation, as we all know, is an economic engine for the United 
States, contributing $1.3 trillion to our economy, accounting for more 
than 11.5 million jobs and $396 billion in earnings, and contributing 
5.6 percent to our Nation's gross domestic product.
  Without full-year funding for the FAA, local officials are unable to 
move forward with project proposals. Because of this, the FAA is an 
estimated $800 million to $1 billion behind in obligating funding, 
which translates to tens of thousands of jobs. Furthermore, if the FAA 
is unable to utilize these funds before the end of the fiscal year, 
they risk being reprogrammed or rescinded. This, in my view, is 
irresponsible, dangerous, and unacceptable. The FAA will have to do 
more with less, which reduces its ability to help airports finance 
safety improvements such as special runway overshoot areas, runway 
resurfacing, proper signage and lighting, and equipment to prevent snow 
and ice buildup on runways.
  These measures not only save lives but increase efficiency at a time 
when air traffic is projected to continue growing significantly. 
According to the FAA, the number of passengers on U.S. airlines is 
forecasted to increase by about 75 percent within the next 20 years and 
to reach 1 billion passengers annually within the next decade. We must 
invest more in our aviation system, not less. Long-term FAA 
authorization should be an immediate priority.
  In the 110th and 111th Congresses, the House, under Democratic 
leadership, passed FAA reauthorization bills that would have created 
jobs, improved aviation safety, and provided the FAA with the tools 
necessary to modernize airport and air traffic control infrastructure.
  My friends on the other side should do the responsible thing and 
appoint conferees so that the House and Senate can work out their 
differences and finalize a long-term FAA reauthorization bill. 
Unfortunately, my friends on the other side of the aisle are clearly 
preoccupied with further isolating small and rural communities than 
moving this debate forward. In fact, the House Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee has held no hearings specifically on the EAS 
program this year, nor did they hold a markup on the measure before us.
  The Senate is not going to pass this. The letter from Senator 
Rockefeller makes it very clear, as the chair of the relevant committee 
in the Senate, that this is not going to pass in its form with the 
policy riders attached. Yet, without the ability to offer amendments on 
the floor, as I requested in the Rules Committee last night, to 
consider a clean extension, one free of the policy riders that will 
hurt our small and rural communities, we face a shutdown. I believe my 
good friend from Florida (Mr. Webster) said on Friday this short-term 
extension would expire and then our aviation system stands to shut 
down. That would be most unfortunate.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Petri).

[[Page H5253]]

  Mr. PETRI. I thank my colleague for yielding, and I'd like to thank 
my colleagues on the Rules Committee for so expeditiously bringing up 
this rule for consideration this afternoon of I think it's the 21st 
temporary extension of the reauthorization of the FAA legislation.
  This reauthorization has been held hostage for several years, and it 
is not cost-free. It's interfering with the efficiency of operations, 
the ability to plan and to expend funds on needed airport improvements 
all across the country. So we're paying a price for this sort of thing, 
and I really don't think we should be allowing people to assert that 
they have the right unilaterally to hold up the whole process, that 
it's their way or the highway, especially when what we're doing in this 
particular mild change to reform a needed part of this legislation, 
Essential Air Service, which is badly in need of reform, is basically 
acceding to language that's already in the Senate bill. By agreeing to 
the bill that in this respect has passed the other House, this is 
nonnegotiable that we can be so bold as to simply say, Fine, we'll 
agree to the language that you have which basically provides that if an 
airport is within 90 miles of a major airport, it's not eligible for 
Essential Air Service.

                              {time}  1240

  The other provides that the cap on subsidy from the Federal 
Government would be $1,000 per passenger.
  Now, what are we talking about? You can rent a car for a lot less 
than $1,000; and most people, frankly, prefer not to go through a 
couple of changes, to a feeder airline to a hub to another destination, 
if you're able to avoid it. An hour 45 minutes, hour and a half air 
travel is certainly perfectly reasonable, especially when you consider 
in addition that if it really is essential, the Secretary of 
Transportation has the ability to waive this legislation. So people are 
just unilaterally assuming that somehow some terrible thing will happen 
when the authority already exists in the executive branch to prevent 
that from happening.
  So to further hold the whole system hostage over a small effort to 
reform what really has been, I think, over a period of years an 
accumulation of earmarks--people had the ability to provide for a 
subsidy for an airport in their district in this area or that area 
because they were in leadership on the committee or in the Congress, 
and we've seen this pile up and pile up, and it's really about time it 
gets addressed.
  And asking people to find a way to get to an airport, if it's less 
than 90 miles that they have to find alternative transportation, rather 
than having the Federal Government subsidize it in a few airports 
around the country seems to me to be something that is badly in need of 
doing. It saves money for the taxpayer. Not a whole lot, but I think 
estimates are between $8 million and $9 million a year. I guess around 
here that doesn't amount to a whole lot, but in most communities and 
families and other areas, that's a lot of money.
  Of course, we have to remember the Federal Government isn't the only 
government concerned. If people really do want a subsidized service 
because of some local need, the community or the State or the county 
involved is certainly perfectly free to do that.
  So why we should be picking a couple dozen communities around the 
entire United States and subsidizing to the extent of over $1,000 per 
passenger to provide this sort of almost air limousine service for a 
few individuals in these communities is beyond me.
  Yet if this is nonnegotiable and we can't concede to the language 
already in the Senate bill and we're going to have to shut down the 
whole system, except for essential air service, because of trying to do 
this modest reform after 23 extensions or 24 extensions, we've really 
come to a pretty kind of arbitrary and unreasonable place here in this 
House.
  So I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying 
legislation.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 3 
minutes to my good friend, the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas 
(Ms. Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentleman. And I want to 
associate myself with his very detailed and well-stated opening 
statement on this legislation.
  I think the premise should be that all of us agree on the importance 
of the FAA. I have served as the chairwoman of the Transportation 
Security Subcommittee of the Homeland Security Committee and now serve 
as its ranking member. Through that timeframe, I have seen the 
overlapping need to view particularly FAA's work and particularly air 
traffic controller work as part of both the safety and security of this 
Nation.
  I remind my colleagues of the activist role that air traffic 
controllers in particular took during 9/11. During the massiveness of 
confusion and the loss of the destination or the placing of three of 
our major airlines and planes that were flying in, airplanes, the air 
traffic controller was really a team that was on the first response, if 
you will. So their work is enormously important.
  And my colleague mentioned some numbers that I think are extremely 
important: $1.3 trillion is what we find as the revenue in the airline 
industry, 11\1/2\ million jobs, a 75 percent increase in employees 
within 20 years and 1 billion in the next decade. I want to say that 
this means that we have a great obligation to protect the American 
traveling public.
  I also want to associate myself with the idea of not protecting our 
small airports and disadvantaging those airports by this legislation. 
And again I assume Chairman Rockefeller's comments play to that as 
well.
  But I had offered an amendment that was sent to the Senate to 
establish a mandate that at the top 20 United States airports there 
should be no fewer than three air traffic controllers on duty during 
periods of airfield operations. I firmly believe this provision will 
ensure that air traffic control towers at high-volume airports in this 
country will be appropriately staffed at all times.
  Mr. Speaker, we engaged with the conference committee very 
diligently. We have all heard the recent stories of air traffic 
controllers falling asleep or being locked out of the control tower or, 
for whatever reason, not being able to be on the job, on duty at 
critical times.
  Now, I know that air traffic controllers reflect the diversity of 
America and the various ills and concerns. We also know they have long 
concentrated hours and it's a difficult job. Just recently there was a 
question of whether or not an air traffic controller was inebriated on 
the job, whether he drank on the job or he came to the job, he or she, 
with this condition. But if that was the case and there was one air 
traffic controller there, there's zero. If that was the case and there 
were two, then there was one.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I yield the gentlelady an additional minute.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentleman.
  I submit that by simply having a codified policy that at the busiest 
and most critical airports we mandate there be personnel redundancy in 
control towers, we can make the aviation system much safer and much 
more secure.
  The American passenger has value. Those dear souls who lost their 
lives on 9/11 who were not exposed to this concept of terrorism had 
value. The American passenger is entitled to safety and security. Think 
about the people on planes flying across our country. They are our 
grandmothers, husbands, wives, babies, family members, businesspersons, 
associates, colleagues. They're American passengers and their lives 
have value. To ensure their safety and security, I believe we need more 
than what is presently moving in this bill that has not come to the 
floor, and I believe we should move on with the conferees to be 
appointed because, as I said, I sent my language to the initial 
negotiation. We need to move on so there's an opportunity for us to 
work this idea.
  But this is more than a study. We don't need another study. We have 
already seen the mishaps. On 9/11 we discovered the value and 
importance of these particular workers, and we now have discovered the 
problem.
  I ask my colleagues to raise the question and to question this rule 
and this bill, or this extension, because we are putting our American 
passengers in jeopardy.

[[Page H5254]]

  Mr. Speaker, as we consider yet another extension for FAA programs, I 
rise today to discuss a key issue that I urge the conferees on the FAA 
Reauthorization bill to consider.
  Prior to H.R. 658 being sent to the Senate, I offered an amendment to 
establish a mandate that at the top 20 U.S. airports, there shall be no 
fewer than three air traffic controllers on duty during periods of 
airfield operations. I firmly believe this provision will ensure that 
air traffic control towers at high volume airports in this country will 
be appropriately staffed at all times. This is a matter of national 
security.
  We have all heard the recent stories of air traffic controllers 
falling asleep, or being locked out of the control tower, or for 
whatever reason, not being able to be on the job, on duty at critical 
times.
  I submit that by simply having a codified policy that at the busiest 
and most critical airports we mandate there be personnel redundancy in 
control towers, we can make the aviation system much safer.
  The American Passenger has value. The American Passenger is entitled 
to Safety and Security.
  Think about the people on planes flying across our country. They are 
our grandmothers, husbands, wives and babies. They are American 
Passengers and their lives have value. To ensure their safety and 
security we must insist that Air Traffic Controllers are vigilant. To 
ensure their vigilance we must set reasonable minimum standards.
  After 9-11, we discovered the vital importance of protecting our 
domestic airspace. Air Traffic Controllers are part of the front line 
of defense to protect the ensure the safety of our air space. If they 
lose contact with a plane, they can alert authorities. If an Air 
Traffic Controller at a major domestic and international airport is 
asleep at the wheel who will make that call?
  It is unfair to put the lives of American passengers at high volume 
airports at ANY time in the hands of one individual, who may at some 
point be incapacitated. Even pilots have co-pilots. What if the 
Controller fell ill? What then? What would you tell those passengers on 
the plane? Hope for the best? We need to provide the support that Air 
Traffic Controllers need in addition to the responsibility.
  This language I support creates a mandate, that at all times there 
must be a minimum of three air traffic controllers in the tower during 
hours of airfield operation. I commend Secretary LaHood for ordering a 
second air traffic controller to be on duty overnight at National 
Airport. However, the Secretary's action simply evidences that there is 
no current mandate for multiple air traffic controllers. According to 
the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, most airports operate 
24 hours a day with two controllers in the tower for the midnight-to-6 
a.m. shift. The operative word is ``most'', we must act to create a 
uniform nationwide standard, verifiable and enforceable by the FAA. 
Again, safety and security are mutually needed to protect the public. 
This mandate of 2 air traffic controllers on duty at the top 20 
airports is vital to America's National Security.
  I urge the conferees to adopt this important provision.
  Mr. WEBSTER. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes 
to my very good friend from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
  (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ANDREWS. I thank my friend for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, as we meet this afternoon to consider this very 
necessary legislation, too many Americans are looking at yet another 
Friday without a paycheck. Too many Americans are leery when they hear 
the phone ring for fear it's another dunning phone call from a creditor 
they can't pay. Too many Americans are stuck for yet another week in a 
part-time job that doesn't come anywhere close to paying their 
families' bills.
  The country has a jobs crisis. We have the same number of private 
sector jobs in America today that we had in 2001, and we have 14 
percent more people looking for work. We have a jobs crisis.
  This is the 196th day of the majority that now runs the House of 
Representatives, and on not one of those days has the majority taken 
advantage of the opportunity to come to the floor, work together on 
legislation that would address this jobs crisis here in our country.

                              {time}  1250

  I believe that resolving this crisis requires us to work together in 
three areas:
  First, we have to get our fiscal house in order as a government. We 
can no longer borrow 40 cents of every dollar we spend, and we 
certainly cannot let this country fail to meet its obligation to pay 
its bills--a deadline that is on August 2. Failure to do that would 
mean more than simply failing our country's national obligations. It 
would mean higher mortgage rates; it would mean higher car loan rates, 
higher small business rates; and if we miss the deadline, it would mean 
not enough money to pay Social Security checks or our troops or our 
creditors. We cannot let that happen.
  Just across this Capitol, there are signs of hope, where Members of 
the other body from both political parties have begun to have a serious 
proposal put on the table that would significantly address our budget 
problem by reducing entitlement spending, which we must do; by reducing 
spending on regular government programs, which we must do; by reducing 
spending on defense in areas that would not weaken our country, which 
we must do; and yes, by requiring the wealthiest and most successful of 
Americans to pay a bit more towards solving this problem. That is a 
fair and balanced way to approach this problem. I am heartened by the 
fact that, across the Capitol, both Republicans and Democrats are 
beginning to make that effort. We should make the same effort here, 
something we could agree to.
  Second, we've got to stimulate the demand for businesses in this 
country. I think the main reason so many employers are not hiring is 
they legitimately fear there won't be enough customers to buy their 
appliances or their antibiotics or their software, that there isn't 
enough demand in our economy.
  One of the reasons we don't have that demand is we send $1 billion a 
day to Middle Eastern countries which sell us oil. Why don't we keep 
that $1 billion here in the United States of America and put it to work 
by putting Americans to work, whether it's in building windmill farms 
off the coast or solar farms throughout our rural areas or in exploring 
regular, conventional sources of energy in a safe and environmentally 
conscious way. Let's do that.
  Why aren't we investing to give ourselves a continued lead in the 
biotechnology industry? As scientists are figuring out ways to grow new 
tissue that heals hearts and livers and kidneys, why aren't we working 
to retain our leadership position in the world in order to create jobs 
here in our country?
  So these are ways that we could and should work together.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I yield the gentleman an additional 1 
minute.
  Mr. ANDREWS. Why aren't we doing far more than we're doing this 
afternoon on this airport bill?
  Airport investment puts Americans to work, and good air travel makes 
growth possible, but look at what we're doing: a temporary, scanty 
extension of our investment in our air traffic system because we can't 
get our fiscal house in order to agree to the kind of extension that we 
need.
  We have 196 days of missed opportunity. Let's not make tomorrow the 
197th day of missed opportunity. Let's come together; work together as 
Republicans and Democrats, and create an environment where 
entrepreneurs can begin to create the jobs that we so desperately need 
here in our country. Yes, we have a deficit in America--it is a very 
serious deficit--but the most serious deficit we have is a jobs 
deficit, and until we can find a way to put 15 million unemployed 
Americans back to work, our deficits will continue.
  Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, I want to remind the people who might be 
watching this that we're talking about House Resolution 357, which is a 
rule that would allow us to reauthorize an extension of the Airport and 
Airway Extension Act, which is called H.R. 2553. That's our discussion. 
That's what we're talking about.
  I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I would ask my good friend from Florida 
whether he has any other requests for time. I am prepared to close.
  Mr. WEBSTER. No. I am ready to close.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. In so doing, Mr. Speaker, having now fully

[[Page H5255]]

read Senator Rockefeller's letter, I do ask that it be made part of the 
Record. I will read only four sentences from it. He says to Chairman 
Mica:
  ``I strongly urge you to reconsider your position and send over a 
clean FAA extension and appoint conferees for the FAA reauthorization 
bill, as the Senate did on April 7, 2011, to move this important 
legislation forward. Further efforts to add policy components to FAA 
extensions that have not been negotiated with the Senate will likely 
shut the FAA down.''
  As Transportation Secretary LaHood and FAA Administrator Babbitt have 
said, the United States faces a pivotal time in aviation history. In 
order to ensure the safety of the flying public and bring our air 
transportation system into the 21st century, the FAA needs a long-term 
reauthorization bill. While H.R. 2553 buys us a little more time, we 
cannot afford to continue ignoring the underlying problem.
  Mr. Speaker, I try very much not to be as parochial as I can be in 
many instances, but in West Palm Beach, we are building a new airport 
tower, and we need the NextGen facilities. At the Fort Lauderdale 
Airport--that is my hometown airport--we are expanding the runway. It 
becomes increasingly difficult to complete the projects when money for 
doing so comes in increments rather than in a block that will allow 
that they go forward in a meaningful way.
  Toward that end, the failure to enact a multiyear FAA reauthorization 
is just going to result in delays to much needed infrastructure 
improvements, including, as I have mentioned, the ground-based and 
NextGen technologies; and it will ultimately cost our Nation more in 
the long run with regard to passenger safety, jobs and the environment.
  Enough is enough. We need a clean extension now in order to pass a 
long-term authorization as soon as possible. I urge my colleagues to 
vote ``no'' on the rule and on the underlying bill.

         United States Senate, Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
           Transportation,
                                     Washington DC, July 19, 2011.
     Hon. John Mica,
     Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
     House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       John, As you are well aware, Congress has passed 20 routine 
     Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) extensions since 2007. 
     I was genuinely hopeful that we would have had a 
     comprehensive bill after four months of negotiations, but 
     appreciated that a handful of difficult issues remained to be 
     resolved before agreement on a final bill could be reached. I 
     was under the impression that we were still operating on a 
     shared desire to complete this important legislation.
       It is for this reason that I am deeply puzzled by your 
     decision to introduce an FAA extension with language that 
     adversely affects the Essential Air Service (EAS) program. 
     This surprise maneuver is a complete reversal from the 
     discussions we have been having for several months, and 
     strongly suggests you have not been negotiating in good 
     faith.
       As troubling and problematic as the extension you 
     introduced is, I am even more taken aback by the blistering 
     press release you issued in conjunction with it. Its 
     hostility was unexpected. The tone and tenor of the release 
     was so different than any of our previous interactions, I 
     almost did not believe you wrote it.
       As your press release inferred, you inserted the EAS 
     language into the FAA extension in retaliation for the 
     Senate's refusal to accept your language on the National 
     Mediation Board (NMB). At no point during our discussions, 
     have we ever linked reforms to the EAS program to language on 
     NMB. I made it clear from the beginning of our negotiations 
     that the NMB language included in your bill--or any other 
     language adversely impacting workers rights--could not pass 
     the Senate. As you know, the Senate voted on this issue last 
     year and our Leadership considers this matter settled. Your 
     attempt to punish the Senate by hurting small community air 
     service has backfired--this language only guarantees that the 
     Senate will reject the FAA extension.
       As I told you on numerous occasions, EAS is critical to 
     West Virginia. Specifically, I discussed how Morgantown and 
     Clarksburg depend on the EAS program. Air service has been a 
     critical factor in the economies of these communities, and 
     drives economic growth across my state. Our every 
     conversation had me convinced that you appreciated the 
     reasons I am so dedicated to supporting this program. I 
     believed you when you indicated you wanted to work with me on 
     reaching language acceptable to both chambers. The language 
     in the FAA extension you introduced with Congressmen Camp and 
     Petri makes it harder to find a path forward on this issue.
       Over the last twenty-four hours, it is my understanding 
     that you have asserted to others that you had no role in 
     developing this extension, claiming that it was a leadership 
     decision. If this is true, I am unclear as to why you 
     sponsored it, and issued such a searing press release along 
     with it. If you truly have no authority to make final 
     decisions on the FAA bill, I urge the House to formally 
     appoint conferees and allow me to negotiate directly with 
     your colleagues who can make decisions.
       I strongly urge you to reconsider your position and send 
     over a clean FAA extension and appoint conferees for the FAA 
     reauthorization bill, as the Senate did on April 7, 2011, to 
     move this important legislation forward. Further efforts to 
     add policy components to FAA extensions that have not been 
     negotiated with the Senate will likely shut the FAA down. You 
     need to think about this very, very carefully. Any 
     consequences resulting from such an action will fall squarely 
     on your shoulders. Right now you are in control of the 
     agency's immediate future.
           Sincerely,
                                           John D. Rockefeller IV.

  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WEBSTER. In closing, I would like to address one thing about the 
change that's in this particular reauthorization, that of essential air 
service, which has basically become the government-funded corporate jet 
program. We've tried to reduce that. If you're a businessman and you 
live in a rural community, instead of being willing to drive an hour 
and a half to get on a plane at a medium- or small-sized hub, you're 
willing to have the government fund your airplane for you. It's 
basically a corporate member, somebody who has a business there. He 
gets on a jet, and to the tune of up to $3,720, we subsidize that. The 
taxpayers of this country subsidize that, so it's like a subsidized 
corporate jet.
  It's a sad thing. We want to reduce that. We'd like to do away with 
it, and a lot of us would like to do away with it altogether; but it 
would reduce that down to $1,000 instead of having to drive, maybe, an 
hour and a half to an airport. It's a sad thing.
  However, another sad thing is that we're here. I am sad about the 
fact that we're standing here on the floor once again to vote for 
another extension. I wish it had worked out. I wish we could get 
together, and I hope that happens in the next few weeks if we approve 
this. This extension is necessary to ensure continued safety for all 
who fly, be it for business or pleasure or for any other reason, in the 
American skies.
  I ask my colleagues to join me today and vote in favor of this rule 
and of passage of the underlying bill.
  I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question 
on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. WEBSTER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair 
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on 
the question of adoption.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 239, 
nays 183, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 608]

                               YEAS--239

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa

[[Page H5256]]


     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NAYS--183

     Ackerman
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Bachmann
     Blumenauer
     Capuano
     Castor (FL)
     Ellison
     Giffords
     Hinchey
     McDermott
     Runyan
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1330

  Messrs. CONYERS, CLYBURN and Ms. BROWN of Florida changed their vote 
from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Messrs. LEWIS of California, CAMP, McKINLEY, and CRENSHAW changed 
their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, due to official House business, I was 
unable to vote on the following measure:
  Motion on Ordering the Previous Question on the Rule for H.R. 2553--
Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2011, Part IV (H. Res. 357).
  Had I been able to vote, I would have voted ``nay.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. 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 242, 
noes 178, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 609]

                               AYES--242

     Ackerman
     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Amash
     Austria
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carney
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Costa
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Dreier
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Landry
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (AR)
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walsh (IL)
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NOES--178

     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (FL)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson (IN)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell

[[Page H5257]]


     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Bachmann
     Blumenauer
     Capuano
     Castor (FL)
     Ellison
     Giffords
     Gutierrez
     Hinchey
     McDermott
     Runyan
     Scott (VA)
     Young (AK)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Two minutes remain in this 
vote.

                              {time}  1337

  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated against:
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, due to official House business, I was 
unable to vote on the following measure:
  H. Res. 357--Closed Rule providing for consideration of H.R. 2553--
Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2011, Part IV.
  Had I been able to vote, I would have voted ``nay.''

                          ____________________