June 3, 2015: Congressional Record publishes “TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2016”

Volume 161, No. 88 covering the 1st Session of the 114th Congress (2015 - 2016) was published by the Congressional Record.

The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.

“TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2016” mentioning the Environmental Protection Agency was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H3817-H3877 on June 3, 2015.

The publication is reproduced in full below:

TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES

APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2016

General Leave

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill, H.R. 3577, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Florida?

There was no objection.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 287 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 2577.

The Chair appoints the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) to preside over the Committee of the Whole.

{time} 1908

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill

(H.R. 2577) making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, and for other purposes, with Mr. Bishop of Utah in the chair.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the first time.

The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart) and the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price) each will control 30 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to present to the House today for consideration H.R. 2577, the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2016.

The committee has put forth a bill that conforms to our 302(b) allocation of $55.3 billion in budget authority and is in line with the budget cap of 1.016, ``ten sixteen.''

Under such an allocation, we prioritized programs and spending to achieve, really, three very important basic goals: first, we continue the ob lim funding levels of MAP-21 contingent upon reauthorization; we keep the commercial airspace running smoothly; and also we preserve the housing option for all current HUD-assisted families.

Mr. Chairman, I think this is a balanced bill with the allocation that has been given to us by the chairman. The Department of Transportation is funded at $17.2 billion in budget authority and $70.6 billion in total budgetary resources to ensure, Mr. Chairman, the safe and effective transportation of goods and people in America.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development is funded at $42 billion to provide housing opportunities and assistance to the most vulnerable in both cities and rural areas across our great Nation.

Mr. Chairman, as you know, we are a diverse body and this is a very diverse bill, and I know some Members will speak for increased funding. I would like to remind my colleagues that if you are going to be voting against this bill, you are voting against the commercial airspace system and our air traffic controllers and control system; against housing programs for the most vulnerable, including the elderly and families; and frankly, you would also be voting against community development block grants that are vital to the cities and counties that we all represent.

Some, however, Mr. Chairman, will speak for lower spending. Here it is also important to remember that the House passed a budget resolution, which this bill adheres to, Mr. Chairman, and the Congress and the President are currently bound by the Budget Control Act, which does include sequester. So this bill takes the responsible steps of setting funding priorities for the next fiscal year, many of which are shared, frankly, between both parties, and again, very important, without doing it with across-the-board cuts or across-the-board sequester.

The whole House of Representatives now has the opportunity for full consideration of this legislation. It is imperative that we move this bill to final passage reflecting the amendments obviously adopted by the House, and we move this bill to conference in time for the new fiscal year.

I really need to first thank my friend, the gentleman from North Carolina and the ranking member of this subcommittee, Mr. Price, for his ideas and his support in drafting this piece of legislation. The gentleman, as anyone who has dealt with him knows, gives a lot of thought and careful consideration to the many programs under our jurisdiction, and I appreciate his willingness to collaborate on this bill that is now before us.

I would also like to thank, in particular, Chairman Rogers and also Ranking Member Lowey plus the members of the committee, and yes, I must say, especially the members of the subcommittee for the hours and hours spent in hearings, markups, and meetings, working together in a cooperative effort to bring this bill to the floor and eventually signed into law. Finally, as we can never do enough, I want to thank the staff on both sides of the aisle for their incredible hard work.

I urge the expeditious adoption of this bill, Mr. Chairman, and at this time, I reserve the balance of my time.

TH03JN15.001

TH03JN15.002

TH03JN15.003

TH03JN15.004

TH03JN15.005

TH03JN15.006

TH03JN15.007

TH03JN15.008

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, as we begin consideration of H.R. 2577, the fiscal year 2016 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill, I want to start by thanking our chairman, Chairman Diaz-Balart, for the hard work he has put in on this bill. He has been open and accessible throughout this year's process, and he has been receptive to my concerns and the concerns that other subcommittee members and other colleagues have raised. It has been a pleasure working with him, and I look forward to continuing to do that throughout this process.

I also want to echo the thanks he just expressed to our hardworking staff, to Dena Baron and her colleagues in the majority, to Kate Hallahan and Joe Carlile on our side of the aisle, as well as Laura Thrift and Kate Roetzer from my personal staff.

Now, unfortunately, I have to add that there is going to be a lot of further work to do. It is necessary, and it is going to be difficult. That is not the chairman's fault. He was dealt an impossible hand in the Republican budget and an allocation that is simply unworkable.

At first glance, it might appear that this bill is a relative winner when compared to other appropriations bills, as Chairman Rogers did increase the subcommittee's allocation by $1.5 million. However, the reality is that once you factor in declining Federal Housing Administration receipts, increased Section 8 renewal costs, and other inflationary adjustments, this bill is actually $1.5 billion below last year's funding level, resulting in fewer services and less capital investment than last year.

Mr. Chairman, the programs under the jurisdiction of this subcommittee are critical to our Nation's economic and social well-

being: providing necessary funding to improve housing and transportation options, creating infrastructure jobs for hardworking American families, and ensuring safe and adequate transportation networks for goods, commuters, and travelers. But our Nation's transportation and housing systems face daunting challenges, and on almost every count, this bill falls short.

{time} 1915

The President requested a robust increase for this bill for fiscal 2016, calling on Congress to provide the critical investments necessary to accelerate and sustain economic growth. Unfortunately, the bill before us would not even begin to address our infrastructure needs.

In transportation, the bill levies deep cuts to capital programs. As we learned from the Amtrak derailment last month in Philadelphia, these cuts can have clear, direct consequences for the safety of our transportation system. The bill before us cuts Amtrak by 18 percent--18 percent--below last year. There is no funding for the expansion of safety mechanisms, including Positive Train Control, which regulates the excessive speeds that caused the Philadelphia derailment.

Now, no one can say whether Positive Train Control would have prevented the tragedy in Philadelphia, but cutting funding certainly isn't making our transportation system any safer. How many train derailments, how many bridge collapses is it going to take before the majority agrees that we must invest in our crumbling transportation infrastructure?

The bill before us would also reduce funding for the New Starts program in the Federal Transit Administration by 8 percent below this year, 40 percent below the President's request. It would cut DOT's enormously popular TIGER program by 80 percent. It cuts the Federal Aviation Administration's capital program by $355 million below the President's request, $100 million below last year. That will hamper FAA's ability to maintain and improve aging facilities and will slow down progress on the critical NextGen program.

The bill doesn't just provide insufficient funding for critical investments; it also contains toxic provisions completely unrelated to the appropriations process. For instance, riders on truck length and weight have no place in this bill. They should be left to the authorizing committees. The bill also continues to delay full implementation of the Department of Transportation's hours-of-service rule for driver safety by including additional, unmanageable study requirements. These riders, I regret to say, value the bottom line of the trucking industry over driver safety. They will actually make our roads more dangerous.

The bill also attempts to undermine President Obama's new policy related to the United States' relationship with Cuba. Some of the riders aim to prevent scheduled air services and cruise ship travel to Cuban ports of entry.

On the housing side, the bill fails to adequately address the capital needs of public housing. For example, the bill provides only the token amount of $20 million for the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Choice Neighborhoods Initiative. At such a low funding level, the program won't be able to fulfill its mission--transforming clusters of poverty into functioning, sustainable mixed-income neighborhoods and allowing the children who live there to have the opportunities that all Americans deserve.

The bill contains $1.68 billion for the Public Housing Capital Fund, which is a $194 million cut from last year. If enacted, this level would be about the same as the funding level in 1989. That is 26 years ago! Given that new maintenance needs accrue at $3.4 billion per year, this level of funding would cover less than half the need while doing nothing to address a backlog that now amounts to $25 billion.

The majority's bill transforms--or, more accurately, devolves--the Housing for the Elderly and Housing for the Disabled programs into purely rental renewal programs. Without capital funding, the supply of safe, decent, and affordable housing for the elderly and for the disabled will not keep up with the demand.

Mr. Chairman, for centuries, our country's economic competitiveness has been built upon a world-class infrastructure that enabled innovation and ingenuity to flourish. This bill and the budgetary levels it reflects undermine the continued viability of our Nation's infrastructure and our economic vitality. We simply cannot write a credible bill until we have a new budget agreement.

This bill clearly illustrates the folly of dogmatically insisting on domestic appropriations cuts as the sole focus of deficit reduction--

that is the majority's strategy--while leaving the main drivers of the deficit unaddressed. Under sequestration funding levels, any advancement of appropriations bills is simply delaying the day of reckoning. So let's stop this charade now. Let's not wait for Presidential vetoes or for governmental shutdowns. Let's confront it now! Let's begin serious, broad budget negotiations.

I know we can responsibly chart a course to fiscal balance; we have done it before, as recently as the 1990s. We achieved budget surpluses as the result of a concerted, bipartisan effort to balance the budget through a comprehensive approach. And I mean comprehensive. Revenues, entitlements, military and domestic appropriations, everything was on the table. We balanced the budget 4 years in a row. We paid off more than $400 billion of this Nation's debt. Why is that lesson so hard to recollect?

By contrast, the current Republican budget gives us the worst of both worlds. It fails as fiscal policy, and it decimates the investments a great country must make.

In its current form, Mr. Chairman, I cannot support the fiscal 2016 T-HUD Appropriations bill. I do remain hopeful, however, that this bill could be improved as it goes through the appropriations process. I will continue working with the chairman as we move forward. I am confident that a new agreement on funding levels can give this bill and America's transportation and housing infrastructure the resources that our national interest requires.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield as much time as he may use to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), a friend, a leader, a teacher, and the chairman of the full Appropriations Committee.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I thank the chairman for yielding me this time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this bill, obviously, the fiscal 2016 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Appropriations bill.

Mr. Chairman, I am proud that we have this piece of legislation. It is our fifth appropriations bill of this year on the floor today. It is the next step in our ongoing effort to fully fund the government before the end of the fiscal year, as is our congressional duty.

This bill, as the chairman has said, funds a wide range of Federal programs that affect every citizen of every district of every State. From the transportation infrastructure that moves goods, people, and businesses around the country to the housing options that help most those in need, the benefits of the programs in this bill are felt far and wide.

In total, the bill provides $55.3 billion in discretionary spending due to reduced offsets, including lower FHA receipts. The bill represents a $25 million increase above the current year.

This is a tight budget, Mr. Chairman. Yet the bill targets funds to provide adequate investments in critical infrastructure and much-

relied-upon housing programs.

Of the total, $17.2 billion goes toward discretionary funding for DOT, prioritizing projects that have great benefits to our Nation as a whole and that will help make this Nation's transportation systems safer and more efficient.

This includes $15.9 billion for the Federal Aviation Administration. A portion of that money will go to what is called the NextGen program to improve efficiency in our airways and reduce congestion and delays.

The Federal highway program gets $40.2 billion from the highway trust fund, an amount equal to last year, but that is subject to continued authorization. This funding will ensure our roadways, bridges, and tunnels can safely and smoothly facilitate the flow of American commerce.

The Federal Railroad Administration is funded at $1.4 billion. That includes $289 million for Amtrak operations, the same as last year, and

$850 million for capital grants, as well as $187 million for critical safety and research programs. Total FRA funding is reduced by $262 million, but rail safety, which is so important, is held harmless from any reductions.

In fact, safety was a priority throughout the bill, and that is evident in the funding levels. For instance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration received $6.5 million more than last year, and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration receives a $6.9 million bump up to help address safety concerns regarding the transport of energy products.

Beyond these important infrastructure investments, the bill also includes a total of $42 billion for the Department of Housing and Urban Development. This level will guarantee that all individuals and families currently receiving housing assistance will continue to be served by this program, and it ensures that the 77,000 VASH vouchers which support our veterans remain in circulation.

Important housing programs for some of our most vulnerable citizens, the elderly and persons with disabilities, also receive targeted increases. To help bolster economic growth in local communities, the bill provides $6.4 billion in grant funding for economic development. Investing in our communities through programs like Community Development Block Grants will allow funds to be targeted to local areas to meet their unique needs.

Now, as with all appropriations bills, particularly in these tight budget times, we had to take a close look at what was mission critical and what was lower on the priority list. Some tough choices had to be made and some programs had to be reduced. Overall, I believe this bill puts everything in its proper place and does the very best within its allotted resources.

I want to thank the chairman of the subcommittee, Congressman Diaz-

Balart. This is his maiden voyage as a cardinal, a chairman of a subcommittee, his first voyage at sea. We hope it is a safe and smooth one. And I am proud to say to him, ``Job well done so far.'' So we wish for you the very best.

Thanks to David Price and the members of the committee, subcommittee, all the staff; my counterpart Mrs. Lowey. I thank all of you for working hard on this bill.

I am proud to support this bill, and I ask my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), our distinguished ranking member of the full committee.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I, too, would like to congratulate Chairman Diaz-Balart and Ranking Member Price in their new roles on the subcommittee. You have worked so hard, you have worked together, and I really do want to express my appreciation. And to Chairman Rogers, thank you for your work. I would particularly like to thank the chairman for his support of my grade crossing safety requests.

However, the Republican bill to fund transportation and housing priorities drastically shortchanges job-creating investments critical to hard-working American families, like roads, bridges, rail systems, and access to safe and affordable housing. At the same time, it includes special interest giveaways for the trucking industry and other policy riders that make our roads less safe and our rail system less competitive and meddles foolishly in foreign policy.

Despite the fact that our infrastructure needs are increasing, the bill before us takes a giant step backward. We cannot meet tomorrow's challenges by slashing investments in TIGER, transit, and air traffic modernization.

Even though the bill was considered in full committee the morning after last month's tragic Amtrak crash in Philadelphia, the majority voted down amendments to increase funds for Amtrak capital investments and positive train control, which the NTSB has said would have prevented the derailment. Yet it does not receive any funding in the bill.

{time} 1930

While we do not yet have all of the answers to the horrific accident in Philadelphia, we do know that starving Amtrak of funding will inhibit safety upgrades, track, and capital improvements. Our continued failure to invest in road and rail infrastructure is not just unwise; it is plainly a public safety hazard.

Before I turn to housing, it is important to mention the plentiful legislative riders. Christmas came early for the trucking industry: longer, heavier trucks; the stalled enforcement of hours-of-service rules; and inadequate insurance requirements.

Controversial riders have no place in an already difficult appropriations process. At a time when roads and bridges are crumbling and when there is a national crisis of affordable housing, it makes no sense to use this critical bill to meddle in foreign policy by including riders on Cuba.

With regard to housing, adequate funding to renew existing vouchers is provided, but it isn't sufficient to meet our country's actual housing needs.

Significantly cutting Lead Hazard Control will slow the progress on eliminating household toxins despite the fact that the successful program has resulted in lower lead poisoning and in better educational and behavioral outcomes.

Slashing Choice Neighborhoods by $230 million, or 92 percent below the President's request, guts resources to transform clusters of poverty into functioning, sustainable mixed-income neighborhoods; and it prevents the children who live there from having the opportunities that all Americans deserve.

Employing gimmicks to fund HOME through the housing trust fund perpetuates another gap in the spectrum of affordable housing.

Democrats are more than willing to support bills that make investments to grow our economy and create opportunity for hard-working Americans. Unfortunately, this bill falls far short of that goal.

Again, in conclusion, I want to thank the chairman, the ranking member, and all of the hard-working staff. Although I urge my colleagues to vote ``no,'' I do hope we can move forward and get to real bills so we can work together and complete this process on especially this very important piece of legislation.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Yoder), an indispensable member of the subcommittee.

Mr. YODER. I appreciate the chairman for yielding time in this debate.

I want to thank Chairman Diaz-Balart, Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Price, and Ranking Member Lowey for their work in putting together what is, I think, one of the best bills to come through Congress as we debate how to balance our challenges with our budget and how to make sure we enhance safety and improve our economy all at the same time.

Mr. Chairman, this is one of the earliest opportunities we have had to debate this piece of legislation in the appropriations process since 1974, which is a commendable achievement. I want to thank Chairman Diaz-Balart for his leadership, and I ask for the body to support this good piece of legislation.

There are really three great reasons to support this bill.

First of all, it is great for the economy as we invest in our Nation's critical transportation projects and programs and invest in housing projects to help America's poverty families all across our districts.

It helps to promote safety enhancement on our infrastructure by ensuring that our roads, rails, and airways are safe for all Americans. It increases funding for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration; it increases funding for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, and it increases funding for the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration--all to help protect the safety of Americans.

It works to enhance the responsible efforts to spend money in this capital. Most Americans know Washington is spending too much money, and our budget is not in balance. It is a tough job, and I commend the committee for doing the hard work to ensure that we are good stewards of taxpayer dollars, so as to keep to the balanced budget agreement that the House and Senate passed for the first time since 2001.

The bill also works towards needed policy achievements that would help farmers in my State of Kansas or that would help keep the cost of goods down for hard-working Americans because the prices at the grocery stores are too high.

In Kansas, for example, the bill helps to ensure that Kansas laws are in parity with States like Nebraska and Oklahoma when it comes to the length of a trailer that custom harvesters can use. This is a provision that is supported by the Kansas Highway Patrol, the Kansas Department of Transportation, the Kansas Department of Agriculture.

I would ask my colleagues from across the aisle to listen to the leaders in Kansas. The leaders of public safety in Kansas and those within the highway patrol support this provision. Let's not subject the will of Washington over the will of people in Kansas when it comes to helping farmers with truck length for custom harvesters.

It works to eliminate the number of trucks that are on the road. This bill's actually extending the trailer length will eliminate 6.6 million truck trips; it will save 1.3 billion miles driven; it will reduce carbon emissions by 4.4 billion pounds annually, and it will eliminate the need for every ninth truck in our economy. Truck tonnage is projected to grow by 23 percent over the next 12 years, so it makes sense to move freight in fewer trucks.

The bill also works to enhance a program we started last year for short line rail safety, which would help short line rail companies across this country have the ability to have a stronger and sustainable safety culture as they move more and more of our goods.

Mr. Chairman, this is a good bill. It promotes safety; it promotes our economy, and it creates jobs.

I urge the bipartisan support of this legislation to help the American economy.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), our colleague who is the ranking member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Mr. DeFAZIO. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Chairman, we have all heard about America and American exceptionalism, and tonight, we see here a great new example for the 21st century the Republican majority version of American exceptionalism. A country that used to be the envy of the world with its infrastructure has now become a laughingstock of the industrial world because it is falling apart.

There are 150,000 bridges on the National Highway System that need repair or replacement, and with this bill, next year, it will be 160,000 that will need repair or replacement. There is 40 percent of the road surface on the National Highway System that needs not just resurfacing; it is so bad that it has to be dug up. Next year, there will be more miles that are deficient.

And our transit? There is an $80 billion backlog just to bring our existing transit systems up to a state of good repair. It is so bad that we are killing people unnecessarily here in the Nation's Capital on the mass transit system; and what does the Republican budget do? It cuts the allocation to the Metro system here in D.C. In the greatest country on Earth, it will be dangerous to ride on the Metro system because we can't afford to fix it.

They failed to distinguish between investment--investment in moving our people and our goods more efficiently--and spending. They rail about spending, but they cut indiscriminately, and they add money in places we don't need it.

Let's go down the list.

In aviation, we want to build a 21st century air traffic control system, but they cut that budget $100 million.

The Coast Guard is spread so thin it can't meet its own criteria for search and rescue, but they are $17 million below what the President proposed, and there is no money in here for a new Coast Guard icebreaker. We are a great maritime nation. We are down to one 50-year-

old, decrepit icebreaker. That is not going to serve our country too well.

The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. DeFAZIO. Then Amtrak, they cut Amtrak by $251 million in its capital accounts. On the day that we had the Amtrak crash, they cut the capital acquisition account for Amtrak by $251 million, despite the fact that Amtrak has a $20 billion backlog.

There are 140-year-old tunnels that are near collapse, which will paralyze the East Coast. There are bridges that are 100, 110, 120 years old--and, yes, we do not yet have the positive train control system on all of Amtrak's routes.

That has been something that has only been recommended for 25 years by the National Transportation Safety Board. This is pretty pathetic.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Rouzer).

Mr. ROUZER. I thank the chairman.

I am proud to lend my full support to the chairman's bill to fund our transportation systems that are so vital to moving this country forward.

Mr. Chairman, important needs of our industries and countless businesses in North Carolina are addressed by this legislation.

First, a marginal increase in the length of twin trailers carrying freight over North Carolina's roads will allow more freight to be carried per trip, thus decreasing the number of trucks on the road. This modest change to 33 feet in length has a large impact on productivity. Slightly longer trailers improve stability because you have a longer wheelbase.

More productivity means a slower growth rate of truck trips on our roads. With this change, there would be 6.6 million fewer truck trips per year; and, according to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's data, it would prevent at least 912 highway accidents every year.

Mr. Chairman, I think it is important to note that the North Carolina Troopers Association is focused on supporting policies that promote safety and improve law enforcement in the State of North Carolina and across this country. They support modernizing freight transportation regulations to allow for 33 feet in length.

Mr. Chairman, I submit for the Record their letter in support of this change.

May 6, 2015.Secretary Anthony Foxx,Department of Transportation,Washington, DC.

Dear Secretary Foxx: The North Carolina Troopers Association, founded in 1977, is focused on supporting policies that promote safety and improve law enforcement in the state of North Carolina and the United States of America. We are grateful for your leadership on policies at the intersection of safety, law enforcement and transportation. From the Charlotte City Council and Mayor's Office to the Department of Transportation and the President's Cabinet, the central questions remain the same. Which policy choices will do the most to keep people safe?

We often work alongside the North Carolina Trucking Association on matters concerning the transportation of freight on the national highway system as well as the extensive network of North Carolina highways and roads. From Murphy to Manteo, we partner with professional drivers to keep everyone safe on the roads.

We support truck safety advances such as lane departure technologies and adaptive speed controls and encourage the continued adoption of modern technology and training techniques.

The less than truckload (LTL) market has a significant footprint in North Carolina not least in the areas around Greensboro and Charlotte. We understand the American Trucking Associations along with other leading LTL companies, the United States Chamber of Commerce, and the National Association of Manufacturers, back a proposal to increase the length of twin trailers in the LTL freight market by five feet with no change to federal weight limits. We support the proposal for several reasons.

First, a marginal increase to the length of twin trailers carrying freight on North Carolina's roads will result in an increase in cubic capacity allowing more freight to be carried per trip, thus decreasing the number of trucks on the road. A modest change in length has a large impact on productivity. More productivity makes it easier to slow the growth rate of truck trips on our road system.

Modernizing freight transportation regulations to allow for 33-ft. doubles means 6.6 million fewer truck trips per year and according to Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration data it would prevent at least 912 highway accidents every year.

Second, studies from the experts at the University of Michigan and the federal Department of Transportation show that an increase to the length of the wheel base without an increase to weight limitations creates a more stable truck for both straight line driving and cornering. Indeed, the proposal for five more feet on twin trailers came from a 2002 analysis from the Transportation Research Board (Special Report 267, 2002).

In addition, fewer trucks on the road will inevitably lead to much needed relief for North Carolina's infrastructure. In 2013, some 9.7 billion tons of freight was carried by truck. The proposal for twin 33s would shift a portion of that freight--the LTL market--into trailers with a slightly longer wheelbase providing benefit for North Carolina bridges.

We are encouraged by your advocacy for better, smarter, safer transportation policies. When the proposal for a five foot extension--with no change in weight limits for twin trailers--comes before Congress we ask you to provide the full support of your office.

Sincerely,

Daniel S. Jenkins, Jr.,

President, North Carolina Troopers Association.

Mr. ROUZER. I am also pleased to support the committee's language that would continue to prohibit the use of funds to enforce the restart provisions of hours-of-service rules for our truck drivers. The trucking industry does not need more regulations imposed upon them in the name of safety.

Safety is an absolute priority for their industry. Trucking companies know that, without good safety records, they will not be the carriers of choice for businesses that need to move freight.

Mr. Chairman, each of these provisions will help spur economic growth throughout our Nation and enable us to better compete and thrive globally. My constituents in the manufacturing and agricultural industries are interested in making Federal transportation policies more conducive to the productive and efficient movement of the goods, and these provisions will help facilitate that.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much time both sides have remaining?

The CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina has 14 minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Florida has 15 minutes remaining.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

As for the ideas that are being thrown back and forth here tonight about highway safety and driver safety, the advocates for highway and auto safety who are looking at this bill and evaluating this bill include the Teamsters and the Short Line Railroad Association.

My own highway patrol in North Carolina came to see me; they came on their own volition, and they had pictures, Mr. Chairman, of carnage on our highways. It left no doubt that they were not interested in seeing heavier and longer trucks and relaxed rules on our highways.

I suggest that Members might want to check in with safety advocates and with law enforcement in their own States and see what kind of assessments they get of this highly irregular effort that is going on here tonight of writing into appropriations bills provisions that haven't had hearings, that haven't had thorough evaluations.

In some cases, they overturn evaluations that are already in the process--evaluations that this body has ordered up--prejudging the consequences and the conclusions of those studies and are moving ahead with ill-advised relaxations in truck and auto safety.

I suggest that Members will want to take a critical look at that.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1945

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), one of those additional speakers, a member of the Committee on Appropriations.

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding but also for his very thoughtful leadership on the subcommittee as our ranking member.

I rise to express my grave concerns regarding the funding levels for our transportation and housing programs provided in this bill. Once again, the majority has brought a bill to the floor that includes drastic and misguided sequester cuts to programs that are critical to the American economy and to the lives of the most vulnerable and to creating jobs.

Under the transportation title, the bill funds TIGER grants $1.15 billion below the President's request. Similarly, Small Starts and New Starts are underfunded from the President's request by over $1 billion. These are programs that create jobs and create economic growth. It is completely nonsensical to starve our communities of the proven Federal investments in transportation that we so desperately need.

The bill before us drastically underfunds our critical housing programs, including $25 million less than the President's request for elderly and disabled housing. Yes, that is elderly and disabled housing. It zeroes out the housing trust fund, which helps the lowest income Americans, and it is $320 million less than the request for Choice Neighborhoods. These cuts keep people living on the margins and push more people into poverty and homelessness.

Before I conclude, let me just say how inappropriate it is in this bill, like all these bills that we are seeing, they contain language that would turn, now, this bill, the Treasury-HUD bill, into an ideological and wrongheaded foreign policy document by restricting travel to Cuba. I introduced an amendment to strike this language and will be introducing a bipartisan amendment with my friend Representative Mark Sanford to do the same on this bill. We need a 21st century approach to our relations with the nation that is 90 miles from our shores, not to cling to cold war era policies.

The CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I yield an additional 1 minute to my colleague.

Ms. LEE. Americans deserve the right to travel to wherever they would so desire. They travel to China and Vietnam; Americans have that right. Why shouldn't they have the right to travel to a country 90 miles off of our shores? Cold war era policies are just that, 50-year-old policies that have failed. They are wrong, first of all. They are very ridiculous at this point, and they don't make any sense. So to keep trying to put these amendments into nongermane bills where it makes no sense is mind-boggling to me. I hope that we can get that amendment out.

I just want to thank the ranking member for his efforts, given the tremendous constraints allotted by Republican austerity budgeting.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cuellar), a distinguished member of our Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies.

Mr. CUELLAR. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I want to thank the ranking member, Mr. Price, for the leadership that he has provided in this committee, and also, thank you to his staff.

I also want to thank my friend Chairman Mario Diaz-Balart for his leadership in working on this bill in a bipartisan way. There are a couple things I just want to point out that are important to the State of Texas. First of all, one of the issues that we worked on together was to make sure that we direct the Federal highway authority to continue to develop a freight network that connects to our high-volume land ports of entry.

Some of the maps that I have seen show that they don't connect to the land ports; but just to give you an idea, in my hometown of Laredo, the largest inland port, if you look at the trucks that come in, those are 12,000 trailers every single day. This is why this particular language got added: to make sure that the freight is connected to land ports of entry and will make sure that American communities are able to get products that are coming into the United States.

The other thing I do want to emphasize that was put in in this particular bill has to do with encouraging the standardization of passenger rail standards between the U.S. and Mexico, which means basically from the San Antonio area to the Laredo area to the Monterrey area, and this is something that will be one of the first. I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for putting in that language.

Finally, the last thing I want to bring up is the language that helps HUD pay a little bit more attention to colonias. As you know, colonias are third-world communities that have no water and no sewage. Putting in this type of language will help thousands of people that live in third-world conditions. After speaking to Secretary Castro and speaking to the chairman and the ranking member, Mr. Price, this will put a focus on that.

I want to thank the ranking member for his good work. I also thank my friend, the chairman, so much for working with me on this language.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I have no further speakers, so I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I also yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this bill for many reasons, but one short-sited cut stands out. This bill cuts HUD's Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes by $35 million. Let me explain in the simplest terms I can what a $35 million cut would mean: thousands of children in the United States will be poisoned.

Thousands of housing units identified as containing lead paint hazards will not be made safe for the children who live there. Thousands of children will be needlessly subjected to decreased IQ and cognitive function across their entire lifespan, developmental delays, behavior problems, learning disabilities, seizures, coma, and even death. Lead poisoning impacts the decision making center of the brain. Children with lead poisoning are 7 times more likely to drop out of school, more likely to engage in risk-taking behaviors, and more likely to engage in criminal activity.

Lead poisoning is entirely preventable--but to save a few dollars, this Majority will let them suffer. And it doesn't even save a few dollars. The total annual costs of lead poisoning to society are over

$50 billion. Every dollar spent on lead hazard control activities has a benefit of $17 to $220 in medical, educational, and criminal justice costs. A $35 million cut will create a minimum of $600 million, and possibly nearly $8 billion in additional costs to society.

In my district in Rochester, NY, 200 children were confirmed with lead poisoning in 2014. Two hundred children. That's ten kindergarten classrooms full of kids. That is simply not acceptable. This $35 million cut would let another 119 children be poisoned in my district alone. When lead poisoning is entirely preventable, I do not know how we can stand to have the lifelong negative impacts on those children's lives on our conscience.

The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.

Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the 5-minute rule.

During consideration of the bill for amendment each amendment shall be debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent and shall not be subject to amendment. No pro forma amendment shall be in order except that the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective designees may offer up to 10 pro forma amendments each at any point for the purpose of debate. The chair of the Committee of the Whole may accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the Member offering an amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion of the Congressional Record designated for that purpose. Amendments so printed shall be considered read.

The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

H.R. 2577

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, and for other purposes, namely:

TITLE I

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

salaries and expenses

For necessary expenses of the Office of the Secretary,

$105,000,000, of which not to exceed $2,734,000 shall be available for the immediate Office of the Secretary; not to exceed $1,025,000 shall be available for the immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary; not to exceed $20,066,000 shall be available for the Office of the General Counsel; not to exceed $9,310,000 shall be available for the Office of the Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy; not to exceed

$12,808,000 shall be available for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs; not to exceed

$2,500,000 shall be available for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs; not to exceed $26,029,000 shall be available for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration; not to exceed $2,029,000 shall be available for the Office of Public Affairs; not to exceed

$1,769,000 shall be available for the Office of the Executive Secretariat; not to exceed $10,793,000 shall be available for the Office of Intelligence, Security, and Emergency Response; and not to exceed $15,937,000 shall be available for the Office of the Chief Information Officer: Provided, That the Secretary of Transportation is authorized to transfer funds appropriated for any office of the Office of the Secretary to any other office of the Office of the Secretary: Provided further, That no appropriation for any office shall be increased or decreased by more than 5 percent by all such transfers: Provided further, That notice of any change in funding greater than 5 percent shall be submitted for approval to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations: Provided further, That not to exceed $60,000 shall be for allocation within the Department for official reception and representation expenses as the Secretary may determine: Provided further, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, excluding fees authorized in Public Law 107-71, there may be credited to this appropriation up to

$2,500,000 in funds received in user fees: Provided further, That none of the funds provided in this Act shall be available for the position of Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Dent

Mr. DENT. I have an amendment at the desk I would like to offer.

The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 2, line 13, after the first dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.

Page 2, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by $2,000,000)''.

Page 2, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by $1,000,000)''.

Page 47, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $9,000,000)''.

Page 50, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.

Page 56, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.

Mr. DENT (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading of the amendment.

The CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania?

There was no objection.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer this amendment to increase Amtrak's capital account by $9 million, which is the amount that we are told it will cost to equip all of Amtrak trains with inward-facing cameras in their engine cars.

It has been over 3 weeks since Amtrak Northeast Regional number 188 derailed just north of Philadelphia, killing at least eight people and injuring over 200. We still do not know exactly what caused this tragic accident, but had the train been equipped with an inward-facing camera, we very well might.

This is a simple and relatively inexpensive reform that the National Transportation Safety Board has been advocating for years, and it is past time that we act. Like the infamous black boxes on airplanes, inward-facing cameras on trains would provide inspectors with critical information after an accident.

Northeast Regional 188 was traveling over twice the posted speed limit on the stretch of track where it derailed. I should also let you know, I rode on that same regional train that morning, from Wilmington, Delaware, down to Washington, so I know this particular line, the Northeast corridor. I travel it regularly, so I am very much personally interested, as are so many of my constituents and friends in the northeastern part of the United States.

Had an inward-facing camera been installed on that train, we might now know whether that was due to some mechanical failure, negligence on the engineer's part, or perhaps some medical incident beyond his control. With that information in hand, we would be that much closer to taking the appropriate steps to ensure that this never happens again.

Our thoughts and prayers remain with the victims of this tragedy and their loved ones, and we owe it to them to do everything we can to prevent future incidents like the one we saw in Philadelphia. The installation of inward-facing cameras in all Amtrak trains is an important step in that direction.

I would like to thank Chairman Diaz-Balart and his staff for their support and for working with me to identify an acceptable offset, especially given the extremely tight constraints under which this bill was drafted. I urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment.

I also would like to say, I know that the offsets are of some concern to some of the Members. We are going to do our best to try to work with them on that matter.

At this time, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition so as to raise objections about the offsets proposed in this amendment.

The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, my friend Mr. Dent has proposed an increase in an appropriation for a worthy purpose, to install inward-facing cameras on Amtrak locomotives, but his amendment offers another example of why the overall allocation in this T-HUD bill is completely inadequate.

The offsets may represent relatively small reductions in DOT's administrative accounts, each of these accounts: the DOT Secretary's salaries and expenses, the Federal Transit Administration's administrative expenses account, the Saint Lawrence Seaway. All of these would be cut below last year's level.

At this point, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), my colleague from the full committee.

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment, respectfully, and I implore the majority to take a close look at where they have obtained the money for this important Amtrak investment. Amtrak is important to Ohio, to the Pennsylvania-Ohio corridor, and there would be nothing I would do to hurt Amtrak. I have been one of Amtrak's greatest advocates.

Of the $9 million to fix this problem for Amtrak, you don't take the majority of it, $3 million, from the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Administration, the Great Lakes-Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation. In effect, what they have done is they have taken $3 million of the $9 million they need for Amtrak out of the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, which is, in effect, a 10 percent cut to the smallest entity inside of the Department of Transportation.

Why is the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation important? First of all, the current funding level is the smallest budget within the Department of Transportation. Our amendment inside the full Committee on Appropriations allowed that budget not to be cut any further.

The seaway is the only binational instrumentality between Canada and the United States. It connects an entire region of the country from Duluth to Massena, New York, to global markets. They have threatened problems within the seaway, such as locks collapsing and inadequate areas for our ships to pass through. Sailing on the Great Lakes can be very, very dangerous, as many of our sailors know.

That corridor is the shortest distance between Europe and the United States, and last year, the seaway had an 8 percent increase in its shipping growth. It serves a part of America that has been battered economically. Manufacturing has been fighting its way back. This really isn't the time to tamper with the seaway's budget.

I understand the problems of Amtrak, and I know that it needs funding, but I am just asking the majority to please look at the budget you have offered. Your offsets in the case of the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation are truly unacceptable, and in doing so, the seaway will be harmed. It will harm ports like Erie, Pennsylvania; Massena, New York; Duluth, Minnesota; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Gary, Indiana; Toledo, Ohio; Detroit, Michigan. The list is a very, very long list.

We have an aging infrastructure in the Great Lakes as well. We don't have the power of the Intracoastal. We wish we did. But I have to raise my voice in strong objection to the offset related to the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation.

I respect very much the gentleman from Pennsylvania. I know what you are trying to do for Amtrak. I want to help you in that effort, but not at the expense of the seaway.

{time} 2000

I am hoping that the respective staffs can work together as this bill moves forward to find a more reasonable offset. I have many more ideas about that, but the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation should be allowed to remain functional and not be harmed by a 10 percent cut.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DENT. Mr. Chairman, I certainly appreciate the comments of the gentlewoman from Ohio, and I understand the difficult choices here. I do intend to work with her and any other concerned Members about these offsets and maybe find a way to alter them at some point, but I just didn't have time to do it tonight.

Again, I believe this is a reasonable amendment and it will do what we need to at least help with respect to the inward-facing cameras on Amtrak trains.

At this time I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Lance), my friend, who is a frequent Amtrak rider himself.

Mr. LANCE. Mr. Chairman, 3 weeks ago, the tragic Amtrak accident in north Philadelphia led to deaths, injuries, and destruction. Those who were injured included two of my constituents with whom I had been meeting with earlier in the day here in Washington.

While the circumstances surrounding the incident remain under investigation, we do know that certain measures can be taken to ensure safety and preparedness, and changes can be implemented moving forward for public safety.

Inward-facing cameras are an appropriate step in modernizing train transportation safety. The National Transportation Safety Board has been advocating for this simple and relatively inexpensive reform for years.

I urge support of Mr. Dent's amendment to bring this reform to fruition.

Mr. DENT. Again, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment that would provide $9 million for inward-facing cameras on Amtrak trains. This is absolutely essential, I believe, to helping us hopefully prevent and--certainly, after the fact--determine the causes of these types of tragedies when they occur.

I wish we weren't at this point, but we need to do this. It is important. Amtrak wants to move in this direction. The National Transportation Safety Board has urged this for some time. And it is now time that Congress act.

So, again, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen). The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Dent).

The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mrs. Bustos

Mrs. BUSTOS. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 2, line 13, after the first dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $500,000)''.

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

Page 60, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $500,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Illinois.

Mrs. BUSTOS. Madam Chairman, I would like to thank Chairman Diaz-

Balart and Ranking Member Price for their hard work on this legislation.

I rise today to urge my colleagues to join with me in improving rail and pipeline safety by supporting my amendment to increase funding by

$500,000 to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. This important agency's mission is to protect our communities from the risks of hazardous materials transportation, including moving crude oil by rail and pipeline.

Until just a few years ago, our Nation's railroads transported very little crude oil. Now, in part due to the boom in oil production from the Bakken formation in North Dakota and in other areas, approximately 1.1 billion barrels are transported by rail in the United States every single day.

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration conducted tests on Bakken crude and found it to have a higher degree of volatility than most other U.S. crudes.

Last year, railroads carried almost 650,000 carloads of oil, compared to only 9,500 carloads in 2008. This impact is especially felt in Illinois, my home State, where we have the second-most number of miles of rail track in the entire country. In fact, about 25 percent of all U.S. rail traffic passes through Chicago, Illinois.

Improving rail safety is extremely important to our region, our State, and to our entire country. This issue is especially personal to me and the people I serve in my congressional district. That is because in March, earlier this year, a train carrying crude oil derailed near Galena, Illinois. It is in the northwest corner of my State and is one of the most beautiful regions of not only my congressional district but the entire State of Illinois--and I think in the entire country.

While we were lucky that no one was harmed, several tanker cars exploded and the Bakken crude spilled just a few feet from a slough that flows straight into the Mississippi River, which is the drinking water supply for millions of people.

Because of the bravery and the dedication of first responders and local, State, and Federal cleanup crews, no water was contaminated. We were also lucky that the derailment took place in a largely rural and uninhabited area. Imagine what would have happened if a derailment like this were to occur in Chicago, Los Angeles, or New York, or any more populated area.

In light of several other high-profile train derailments, including those in West Virginia and North Dakota, involving cars carrying crude oil, communities across the country are becoming increasingly concerned about the safe movement of crude oil--and with very good reason.

While I am encouraged that Federal agencies and industry leaders are working together to make transportation of hazardous material safer, Congress must also do its job and step up and provide adequate resources to keep our energy transport system safe and secure.

That is why I ask today for your support for my effort to ensure this appropriations bill includes additional funding for the agency that helps ensure the safe transportation of energy products, including the shipment of crude oil by pipeline and rail.

I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Bustos).

The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Meehan

Mr. MEEHAN. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

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

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

Page 44, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $3,500,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. MEEHAN. Madam Chairman, I want to thank my good friend and colleague from Florida for his indulgence and working with me on this amendment.

We have benefited here across the United States in recent times with a boom in energy and moving towards energy self-sufficiency. Much of this has been due to the ability to take advantage of our natural resources, including crude oil, which is increasingly being developed from the Western parts of our country. In fact, more than 33 million barrels of crude oil are shipped by rail each month in the United States, and that is a fifty-fold increase from more than 5 years ago.

Shipments from the Bakken region have brightened the future of oil workers and refineries in my own Seventh District of Pennsylvania, and indeed the entire Philadelphia area, and in fact they have created energy opportunities throughout our Nation.

But now, despite the fact that nearly all of the shipments reach their destinations safely, accidents, sadly, are on the rise. Recent incidents in Ontario, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania call to mind the need for improved safety measures.

Madam Chairman, my amendment seeks to transfer funding from the Office of the Secretary salaries and expense account and puts $3.5 million into the Federal Railroad Administration to fund additional cars to inspect the more than 14,000 miles of crude oil rail routes nationwide.

This funding would also expedite the use of remote automated track inspection capability, which will increase inspection mileage while reducing costs.

For more than 30 years, the FRA's automated track inspection program, called ATIP, has provided accurate track geometry and performance data to assess compliance with the Federal Track Safety Standards.

Collected data is used by the FRA, railroad inspectors, and railroads to ensure that track safety is being maintained. Immediately following ATIP track surveys, the railroads use the data to help locate and correct problems. Often railroads use the ATIP data as a quality assurance check on their own track inspection and maintenance programs.

Madam Chairman, America's energy boom has brightened communities across the country, and as crude oil by rail grows, I want to help protect those communities. My amendment would enable the FRA to increase its ATIP capability to meet this challenge.

Madam Chairman, I thank the chairman and Ranking Member Price for their willingness to work with me on this issue. I urge the amendment's adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meehan).

The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Burgess

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 2, line 13, after the first dollar amount, insert

``($4,000,000)''.

Page 2, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by $500,000)''.

Page 2, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by $1,000,000)''.

Page 2, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by $250,000)''.

Page 2, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by $2,000,000)''.

Page 3, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by $250,000)''.

Page 40, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $4,000,000)''.

Mr. BURGESS (during the reading). Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent the amendment be considered read.

The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?

There was no objection.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. BURGESS. Madam Chairman, this is an amendment to add an additional $4 million to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's operations and research.

Madam Chair, at the beginning of this Congress, I took the gavel of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade. This was the gavel previously held by our good friend, Chairman Lee Terry.

There was some unfinished business as this Congress started, and one of the biggest issues left over from the previous Congress was the issue of airbag energetic deployments and ruptures, and the subsequent recall of those airbags.

There was a hearing done in December right at the end of the last Congress, and it seemed like there was no activity from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. But just 2 weeks ago, they announced a recall of 34 million vehicles. The recall massively expanded. And the manufacturer of the airbags, Takata, finally admitted that six of their manufacturing designs were indeed defective. Takata has identified 11 auto manufacturers that use the defective air bag inflators.

Again, 34 million vehicles have been subject to this recall. And this may not be the end.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Takata have not identified what is the cause of these energetic disruptions of the air bag inflators.

Yesterday, the Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Subcommittee held a hearing to receive an update on the situation. Among the witnesses was the Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Dr. Mark Rosekind. Dr. Rosekind took over the Administration just weeks after the subcommittee's Takata hearing in December.

During yesterday's hearing, one of the themes we heard repeatedly from Administrator Rosekind was that NHTSA would have been better able to identify and mandate recalls had they had more resources. It is a refrain we are used to hearing here in Congress. His argument was that with more money, the agency could save more lives. I will take him at his word on that.

For fiscal year 2016, Congress is proposing funding the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration operations and research, the account responsible for the policing of the safety of auto manufacturers' products, at $150 million. This indeed is an increase of

$20 million from fiscal year 2015, and for that I am extremely grateful.

In the interest of good faith, however, from the new chairman of the subcommittee to the new Administrator of NHTSA, I want to take one more step and offer an additional $4 million to this account to provide NHTSA with the resources it needs to ensure that more lives are not disrupted by these defects.

{time} 2015

It is my hope that NHTSA can use this additional funding to find a permanent solution to the problem.

The Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Subcommittee is closely watching and awaiting the release of a report by NHTSA's inspector general on their Office of Defects Investigation. We hope it will be released soon.

The offset comes from the Department of Transportation Office of the Secretary for salaries and expenses. This seems like an extremely worthwhile investment, and I urge the subcommittee's adoption of my amendment.

Again, I want to thank the subcommittee for hearing my amendment. I certainly want to congratulate the chairman and ranking member of the subcommittee. I think they have done good work on this. I urge adoption of the amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).

The amendment was agreed to.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

research and technology

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

national infrastructure investments

(including transfer of funds)

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

Amendment Offered by Ms. Maxine Waters of California

Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 4, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $1,150,000,000)''.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I reserve a point of order on the gentlewoman's amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.

Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentlewoman from California and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.

Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Madam Chair, I rise to offer an amendment to invest in transportation infrastructure for the 21st century.

The transportation funding in this bill is woefully insufficient to meet our country's infrastructure needs. The cuts to the TIGER program are particularly egregious.

TIGER, formally known as Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery, is a competitive grant program that creates jobs by funding investments in transportation infrastructure. This bill cuts TIGER from the 2015 level of $500 million down to a mere $100 million in 2016.

America needs new infrastructure for the 21st century. The American Society of Civil Engineers gave the public infrastructure of the United States a grade of D-plus in 2013 and estimated that we will need to invest $3.6 trillion by 2020 in order to improve the conditions of our infrastructure.

Indeed, TIGER needs to be expanded, not cut. The President requested

$1.25 billion for TIGER in the coming fiscal year, as part of an expanded TIGER program that will create jobs, encourage innovation, and modernize transportation infrastructure for the 21st century.

Earlier this year, I sent a letter to the Appropriations Committee urging support for the President's request, and 144 Members of Congress signed my letter.

Our economy is still struggling to recover from the recession. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our Nation's unemployment rate stands at 5.4 percent. Furthermore, unemployment among Hispanics is 6.9 percent. Among African Americans, it is 9.6 percent, and among teenagers, it is 17.1 percent.

An expanded TIGER program will create meaningful employment building safe roads, bridges, and public transit systems in communities throughout the United States.

My amendment increases TIGER funding to $1.25 billion in order to fully fund the President's request for this critical program.

Madam Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price).

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I want to commend my colleague, who does such distinguished work in housing and financial services on her committee, for coming in to this debate today and calling attention to the importance of the TIGER program, and I would just like to ask her to respond.

I am looking at the figures for this year. There is a $500 million appropriation for that program in the current year. Is the gentlewoman aware that the Department of Transportation has already received 950 preapplications, totaling $14.5 billion? That is 29 times the amount available.

What does that suggest about the need for this program?

Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Well, you have accurately and appropriately identified the need for the program, based on those applications. Not only is it a very popular program, it is a program that creates jobs, and our local communities need this very much, and they are strong advocates for it.

I would hope that my colleagues here in the Congress, on both sides of the aisle, who have benefitted from the TIGER program, would see the need and remove all obstacles, support this program, and let us move forward with getting the infrastructure repairs and the building that we need to do.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank my colleague for offering this amendment. It calls attention to the gross underfunding in this bill, not just of TIGER, but of virtually every HUD and transportation program so that it is very hard, of course, to find offsets. There is very little money in this bill.

We should be breaking out of that mold. We should be going after a budget agreement that will let us write a decent bill and meet this country's needs. Her amendment, better than anything we have heard thus far tonight, underscores that need.

I thank the gentlewoman.

Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. I thank the gentleman from North Carolina, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Point of Order

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, the amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill.

The amendment is not in order under section 3(d)3 of House Resolution 5 of the 114th Congress, which states the following:

``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''

The amendment does propose a net increase in budget authority in the bill in violation of such section.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order? If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.

The gentleman from Florida makes a point of order that the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California violates section 3(d)3 of House Resolution 5.

Section 3(d)3 establishes a point of order against an amendment proposing a net increase in budget authority in the pending bill.

As persuasively asserted by the gentleman from Florida, the amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill. Therefore, the point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.

Amendment Offered by Ms. Maxine Waters of California

Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 4, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $400,000,000)''.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I reserve a point of order on the gentlewoman's amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.

Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentlewoman from California and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.

Ms. MAXINE WATERS of California. Madam Chair, I rise to offer an amendment to restore some of the transportation funding that was cut drastically in this bill.

This is my second of two amendments to increase funds for the innovative TIGER transportation grant program. This amendment increases fiscal year 2016 TIGER funding to $500 million, thereby restoring TIGER to the 2015 level.

States, local governments, and transit agencies depend upon the TIGER program to finance projects to repair aging infrastructure and develop new highway and transit systems. A safe, efficient, modern, and accessible transportation system is vital for a growing economy.

Madam Chair, we cannot afford to cut TIGER below the current funding level, and I am here this evening to urge my colleagues to vote for my amendment and invest in infrastructure for the 21st century.

I recognize that a point of order has been raised on this issue, but I also recognize that what I am advocating is vital for this economy and for this country. I would hope that somehow we would be wise enough, creative enough, and caring enough to dispense with the rule, as it has been identified on my first amendment, and move forward in a very creative way to do what is necessary to help our failing infrastructure in this country.

The stories about the failing bridges, the stories about the unsafe highways, the stories about the need for transit system improvements are stories that we hear, day in and day out.

Given the information that has been made available to us about the needs for infrastructure repairs, I would hope that we would not simply treat this in such an ordinary fashion and apply the rule that basically says: Well, if I did not find the money to fund it, then somehow it cannot be in order.

Certainly, this amount of money is not easy to locate; certainly, I do not have an answer to where this money would necessarily come from, but I would hope that my colleagues would take into consideration again the desperate need of our economy and our communities and not rule this out of order.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Point of Order

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, this amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill.

The amendment is not in order under section 3(d)3 of House Resolution 5 of the 114th Congress which states the following:

``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''

The amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill in violation of such section.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order? If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.

The gentleman from Florida makes a point of order that the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California violates section 3(d)3 of House Resolution 5.

For the reasons stated in the previous ruling, and as persuasively asserted by the gentleman from Florida, the amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill. Therefore, the point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Dold

Mr. DOLD. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

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

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. DOLD. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of this amendment to change a provision in the bill relating to TIGER grants.

Put simply, this amendment would put all transportation projects on an even playing field and allow all qualified projects to fairly compete for these grants, regardless of whether they take place in an urban area or a rural area.

{time} 2030

Madam Chair, my district is heavily reliant on all forms of transportation. The Chicagoland area is the hub for the Nation's transportation network. Over 925 million tons of freight move in and out of Chicago each and every year, and each workday, tens of thousands of citizens of the 10th Congressional District use commuter rail.

The Chicago Regional Transportation Authority estimates that it needs to find $13.4 billion over the next decade just to maintain the system in its current condition. That is why it is more important than ever to find the funds to pay to maintain and rebuild our Nation's transportation system.

In the Transportation Appropriations funding bill, there is a provision which discriminates against urban districts, like Illinois' 10th Congressional District. TIGER grants, which are competitive grants to fund capital investments in surface transportation projects, can be awarded to projects across the entire Nation.

However, the bill also provides that projects in urban areas receive a Federal match of 50 percent of the project funding, while projects in rural areas can receive up to 80 percent of the project's funding.

Madam Chair, this is unfair and unjust. The TIGER grants are competitive, discretionary grants that should be awarded to the most deserving projects. The bill's language allows rural areas to leverage local dollars at a 4 to 1 ratio, allowing them to put up just $2 out of every $10 needed for a project. Urban areas may only leverage at a 1 to 1 ratio.

This language harms urban areas and makes it more difficult to secure the funding needed to complete these projects. My amendment is a commonsense and just solution to this problem and would place all projects, no matter where they occur, on an even playing field.

Madam Chair, it is time to bring equity back to transportation funding, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and put all qualified projects on an even playing field.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I respectfully oppose the gentleman's well-intentioned amendment.

TIGER is a national program, and we support cities of all sizes having a chance to get a grant, and we work to ensure there is a balance between urban and rural areas. I am afraid that the well-

intentioned amendment from the gentleman seeks to undo that delicate balance at this time.

Madam Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price).

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I, too, want to reluctantly express my opposition to this amendment.

Madam Chair, I take second place to no one in this body as the champion of the TIGER program, as I hope was evident in my support for the gentlewoman from California's (Ms. Maxine Waters) amendments just now; but we are underscoring in this amendment, while it is worthy in its intent--and I would love to be able to add a lot more money than this to the TIGER program--its offset is very worrisome and one that I think should lead us to oppose this amendment.

It comes out of the Federal Aviation Administration's operations account, $100 million out of that account.

Now, the bill provides a slight increase for FAA operations, but it is still $67 million below the President's request. This is the account that provides the funds needed to ensure aviation safety and security, so cutting this account is ill advised.

Mr. DOLD. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. DOLD. I think the gentleman is talking about a different amendment. My amendment doesn't take anything out of any account. This is talking about simply changing the percentages between urban and rural to allow competitive grants so that it competes at a level playing field.

I just respectfully think you have got a different amendment, which I appreciate, but it is not the one that I think that we are talking about right now.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. The gentleman does have an amendment that fits my description; is that true?

Mr. DOLD. Yes, but we have withdrawn that one, but I do appreciate the gentleman talking about that one.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank the gentleman for that clarification. My remarks will await the proper amendment.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DOLD. Madam Chair, as we talk about transportation and infrastructure, it is so critically important, critically important for our economy, critically important certainly for our urban areas, and if you look at a map of the city of Chicago in the center of our country, we have got six of seven major rail lines that go through there.

It used to be that a third of all the freight in the country would go through Chicago. Now, it is about a quarter, but it is still a tremendous amount, and it really impacts the Nation's economy.

We can get a railcar from Los Angeles to Chicago in 2 days. It takes nearly 2 days to go from one side of Chicago to the other side of Chicago. This does have an impact.

The same rail that we are talking about here also has commuter rails on it, and we are dealing with infrastructure that goes back to the Roosevelt administration. I don't mean FDR; I mean Teddy Roosevelt. We need to make sure that there is some additional funding going here.

This amendment that we are talking about is not talking about moving dollars around. It is talking about trying to provide equity so that urban projects, which I would argue we desperately need, are on the same level as the rural projects.

If we were to lose mass transit or some of these other projects in the city of Chicago, we are talking about a 50 percent increase in congestion on our roadways.

This is an amendment that I hope that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would embrace--at least let's talk about a level playing field, where we are not giving preference to the rural areas versus the urban areas, urban areas which I would argue use the rail a pretty significant amount in terms of how we are moving people around, not to mention our goods and services.

This is an amendment that I think is a commonsense amendment, and I would hope that I would get some support from my good friend from Florida and maybe we could get him to even reconsider, but I hope I am not tilting at windmills on that one, Madam Chair.

I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Dold).

The amendment was rejected.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

financial management capital

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

cyber security initiatives

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

office of civil rights

For necessary expenses of the Office of Civil Rights,

$9,600,000.

transportation planning, research, and development

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

working capital fund

For necessary expenses for operating costs and capital outlays of the Working Capital Fund, not to exceed

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

minority business resource center program

For the cost of guaranteed loans, $336,000, as authorized by 49 U.S.C. 332: Provided, That such costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, That these funds are available to subsidize total loan principal, any part of which is to be guaranteed, not to exceed $18,367,000.

In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the guaranteed loan program, $597,000.

small and disadvantaged business utilization and outreach

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

payments to air carriers

(airport and airway trust fund)

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

Amendment Offered by Mr. McClintock

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 9, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced to $0)''.

Page 156, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $155,000,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Chair, this amendment eliminates the $155 million of discretionary spending that is wasted on one of the least essential programs in the entire United States Government, the so-

called Essential Air Service. That is the program that subsidizes empty and near-empty planes to fly from small airports to regional hubs just a few hours or less away by car.

This was supposed to be a temporary program to allow local communities and airports to readjust to airline deregulation in 1978. Not only is it still going on today, but it has doubled in cost in the last 4 years, from $130 million in 2011 to roughly $260 million in 2015, and $155 million of that is in our control. This amendment zeros it out and puts it toward deficit reduction.

Now, we are often told: Well, don't worry. We have enacted all of these reforms. We have caps on subsidies.

All those caps, $200 per ticket, are only for flights under 210 miles. It continues unlimited subsidies over that distance. Actual subsidies per passenger can be as high as $980 per ticket, paid by hard-working taxpayers. Year after year, we are promised reform; and year after year, the cost goes up and up.

By the way, Essential Air Service flights are flown out of Merced and Visalia airports, serving my district in the Sierra. Trust me, a tiny number of people actually use it. The alternative is hardly catastrophic; it is typically an extra hour's drive to a regional airport. I guarantee you that everybody who hears about this waste of their money is outraged by it.

It is true there are a few tiny communities in Alaska, like Kake's 700 citizens, that have no highway connections to hub airports, but they have plenty of alternatives. In the case of Kake, they enjoy year-

round ferry service to Juneau. In addition, Alaska is well served by a thriving general aviation market and the ubiquitous bush pilot.

Rural life has great advantages. It also has some disadvantages, but it is not the job of hard-working taxpayers who choose to live elsewhere to level out the differences.

Now, apologists for this wasteful spending tell us it is an important economic driver for these small airports and airlines, and I am sure that is so. Whenever you give away money, the folks you are giving it to are always better off, but the folks you are taking it from are always worse off to exactly the same extent. Indeed, it's economic drivers like this that have driven Europe's economy right off a cliff.

Two years ago, one Member rushed to the microphone to suggest that this was essential for emergency medical evacuations. It has nothing to do with that. This program subsidizes regularly scheduled commercial service that practically nobody uses. If it actually had a passenger base, it wouldn't need, in effect, to hand out $100 bills to the few passengers who use it.

An airline so reckless with its funds would quickly bankrupt itself. Well, the same principle holds true of governments.

The Washington Post is not known as a bastion of fiscal conservatism, but I cannot improve upon an editorial a few years ago when it said,

``Ideally, EAS would be zeroed out, and the $200 million we waste on it devoted to a truly national purpose: perhaps deficit reduction, military readiness, or the social safety net.''

The Washington Post goes on to write, ``Alas, if Congress and the White House were capable of making such choices, we probably never would have had sequestration in the first place.''

Madam Chair, there are many tough calls in setting fiscal priorities, but this isn't one of them. If the House of Representatives--where all appropriations begin, where the Republican majority pledged to stop wasting money--can't even agree to cut this useless program off from the trough, how does it expect to be taken seriously on the much tougher choices that lie ahead?

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, this amendment that the gentleman from California has offered is about as indiscriminate as it gets. He apparently has ideas, and those ideas ought to be heard to reform this program, to make it more efficient and more effective and more targeted. The place to do that is in the authorizing committee. We have forums where we can discuss those ideas and act on them.

To come in tonight and offer this indiscriminate amendment which, by the way, not only cuts this overall program by more than half, but also cuts the allocation for this bill, which is already so inadequate, it is not an approach that this body should endorse.

{time} 2045

The program we are talking about, Essential Air Services, was created after deregulation. It has remained essential to keep service going to many, many small communities in this country, including Crescent City, El Centro, Merced, and Visalia in California. It is funded through annual appropriations, and also funded through overflight fees that are collected when foreign air carriers traverse through U.S. airspace. If this amendment were adopted, many small communities would lose air service.

Madam Chair, this isn't the way to reform the program, so I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Chair, this is the kindest cut of all. It is a temporary program that was established 37 years ago and has become a poster child for wasteful Federal spending, and I believe the authorization ran out years ago. Our national debt has doubled in 8 years. American taxpayers pay $230 billion a year just in interest costs on that debt. That means if you are an average family paying average taxes, $2,000 of those taxes did nothing more than rent the money that we have already spent.

Continuing to pay for this obsolete and wasteful program with money we don't have is obscene and makes a mockery of any claim that we have cut spending to the bone, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.

Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California will be postponed.

The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

administrative provisions

Sec. 101. None of the funds made available in this Act to the Department of Transportation may be obligated for the Office of the Secretary of Transportation to approve assessments or reimbursable agreements pertaining to funds appropriated to the modal administrations in this Act, except for activities underway on the date of enactment of this Act, unless such assessments or agreements have completed the normal reprogramming process for Congressional notification.

Sec. 102. The Secretary or his designee may engage in activities with States and State legislators to consider proposals related to the reduction of motorcycle fatalities.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Walberg

Mr. WALBERG. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 11, strike lines 1 through 3.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. WALBERG. I want to begin by thanking Chairman Diaz-Balart and his staff for their hard work on this legislation before us.

Madam Chair, I rise today to offer a commonsense amendment with Mr. Sensenbrenner and Mr. Ribble of Wisconsin which makes it clear that Federal Government agencies should not be in the business--again, I say should not be--in the business of lobbying State and local legislators with Federal taxpayers' money. Federal law already prohibits Federal agencies from lobbying Congress in support of or against legislation.

Thanks in part to the leadership of Mr. Sensenbrenner in 1998, Congress passed similar antilobbying language to prohibit the Department of Transportation from lobbying State and local elected officials.

At that time, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration was sending staff to State capitols at taxpayers' expense to lobby in favor of motorcycle helmet laws. At the cost of tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars, these officials traveled across the country to testify before State legislative committees, participate in conferences, and produce videotapes and other printed materials with the goal of advancing mandatory motorcycle helmet laws.

As the co-chairman of the Congressional Motorcycle Caucus and a rider myself who wears a helmet, I believe the most effective way to reduce motorcycle injuries and fatalities is to prevent these crashes from occurring in the first place. Madam Chair, that means putting between the ears as opposed to simply putting on the head.

I believe the NHTSA has an appropriate role in promoting vehicle and highway safety, whether that is focusing on efforts on crash prevention or rider education. Unfortunately, language pushed by the administration has made it into the recent omnibus legislation to reverse the lobby ban, and that provision is carried over into this bill.

Whether you ride or not, I would hope all my colleagues agree that this is an inappropriate use of taxpayer dollars. It violates the rights of States and local communities we represent to make their own decisions on helmet laws.

Madam Chair, I ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, we have an amendment before us that would strike a provision that has been carried in every transportation appropriations bill since 2009. The section simply grants the Secretary or his representatives the authority to engage in activities with States and State legislators to consider proposals related to the reduction of motorcycle fatalities. This consultation is entirely voluntary.

Madam Chair, in 2013, we had 5,000 motorcycle fatalities in this country. That is the last year for which we have data.

The research and expertise of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration can be extremely helpful--helpful to State highway traffic safety agencies as they consider measures they might want to undertake to improve motorcycle safety. Why wouldn't we want to be in partnership with the States as they address this important safety issue?

Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WALBERG. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

Mr. WALBERG. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan will be postponed.

The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

Sec. 103. Notwithstanding section 3324 of title 31, United States Code, in addition to authority provided by section 327 of title 49, United States Code, the Department's Working Capital Fund is hereby authorized to provide payments in advance to vendors that are necessary to carry out the Federal transit pass transportation fringe benefit program under Executive Order 13150 and section 3049 of Public Law 109-59: Provided, That the Department shall include adequate safeguards in the contract with the vendors to ensure timely and high-quality performance under the contract.

Sec. 104. The Secretary shall post on the Web site of the Department of Transportation a schedule of all meetings of the Credit Council, including the agenda for each meeting, and require the Credit Council to record the decisions and actions of each meeting.

Sec. 105. In addition to authority provided by section 327 of title 49, United States Code, the Department's Working Capital Fund is hereby authorized to provide partial or full payments in advance and accept subsequent reimbursements from all Federal agencies for transit benefit distribution services that are necessary to carry out the Federal transit pass transportation fringe benefit program under Executive Order 13150 and section 3049 of Public Law 109-59: Provided, That the Department shall maintain a reasonable operating reserve in the Working Capital Fund, to be expended in advance to provide uninterrupted transit benefits to Government employees, provided that such reserve will not exceed one month of benefits payable: Provided further, that such reserve may be used only for the purpose of providing for the continuation of transit benefits, provided that the Working Capital Fund will be fully reimbursed by each customer agency for the actual cost of the transit benefit.

Federal Aviation Administration

operations

(airport and airway trust fund)

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

$8,831,250,000 shall be derived from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, of which not to exceed $7,505,293,000 shall be available for air traffic organization activities; not to exceed $1,258,411,000 shall be available for aviation safety activities; not to exceed $16,605,000 shall be available for commercial space transportation activities; not to exceed

$725,000,000 shall be available for finance and management activities; not to exceed $60,089,000 shall be available for NextGen and operations planning activities; and not to exceed

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

Amendment Offered by Mr. LoBiondo

Mr. LoBIONDO. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 12, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.

Page 13, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.

Page 16, line 9, after the first dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $3,000,000)''.

Page 16, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $3,000,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. LoBIONDO. Madam Chair, I would like to start by thanking Chairman Diaz-Balart for cooperating with this amendment.

Madam Chair, the Federal Aviation Administration is dealing with an increasing threat of cyberattacks against the National Airspace System. This critical threat was recently detailed in a GAO report as well as identified in news reports of a reported attempt to hack into the flight control system of a U.S. airliner through the plane's in-flight entertainment system.

The FAA must protect the safety of our citizens and prevent negative impact to the U.S. economy by developing a comprehensive and multilayered approach to mitigating new and emerging cybersecurity threats.

My amendment will transfer $3 million within the FAA to develop an integrated cybersecurity testbed to evaluate and certify all NextGen and National Airspace systems. The FAA currently possesses the capability to establish such a testbed at its existing integrated testing environment at the FAA Tech Center in southern New Jersey. The Tech Center presents a natural host for FAA partnership with industry and academia to leverage the best ideas and technology to continually mitigate evolving cybersecurity threats.

Madam Chair, increasing FAA capability for creating, identifying, defending, and solving cybersecurity-related problems for existing National Airspace System and future NextGen systems is vital to the future safety and proposals of our American airspace.

Once again, Madam Chair, I thank Chairman Mario Diaz-Balart. I thank Ranking Member Price. I urge adoption of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo).

The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Ms. Esty

Ms. ESTY. I have an amendment at the desk, Madam Chair.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 12, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.

Page 13, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.

Page 44, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $3,000,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Connecticut.

Ms. ESTY. Madam Chair, I come to the floor once again to urge this House to invest in rail safety. My amendment adds $3 million to the Federal Railroad Administration for safety and operations to fund vital rail safety education programs, like Operation Lifesaver.

Railroads move the goods that fuel our economy, and thousands of commuters in my district rely on passenger rail lines every day. In fact, over 11\1/2\ million Americans took the trains along the Northeast corridor last year, a record high ridership.

Freight rail traffic is also increasing, reflecting a growing economy and a booming energy sector. However, as we have seen in the news almost monthly, there have been a disturbing number of rail accidents in the last few years, many of them preventable train derailments and collisions. We in this House stood in silence a few weeks ago to mourn the loss of the eight passengers killed in last month's Amtrak derailment near Philadelphia. Those deaths were tragic and completely avoidable. We must do more to promote safe and reliable rail travel.

I have worked hard on the Transportation Committee and advocated in this House to implement positive train control and other innovative technologies that can protect passengers against the most dangerous rail accidents. But technologies like positive train control cannot prevent all train-related accidents.

On February 3, 2015, six people died when a northbound Metro-North Railroad commuter train collided with an SUV that was stopped at a highway rail crossing. Aditya Tomar, a resident of Danbury, Connecticut, and one of my constituents, was one of those passengers killed.

{time} 2100

According to the Federal Railroad Administration, these sorts of highway-rail grade crossing accidents lead to 270 deaths every year.

Just this morning, media outlets were featuring a viral video from an Amtrak Silver Star train colliding with a car and slicing it in half after the driver drove around the lowered gate at a rail crossing in Jacksonville, Florida. Miraculously, every passenger survived with only minor injuries.

This video demonstrates that even when crossings are equipped with gates and warning lights, human error and miscalculation can have devastating consequences.

That is why we need to educate drivers, passengers, and pedestrians on how to avoid accidents along railroad tracks and at highway-rail grade crossings.

Technological safety advances are essential, make no mistake, but they are not enough. We must educate people about the dangers of walking along railroads or ignoring rail crossing warning signals.

The Operation Lifesaver program is an effective public safety campaign that encourages drivers and pedestrians to ``stop, look, and listen'' at highway-rail grade crossings and increases awareness in all 50 States.

Congress authorized Operation Lifesaver in 2008, but has failed to provide adequate funding.

My amendment to increase funding for the Operation Lifesaver rail safety program is also fiscally responsible and does not increase spending. Instead, this investment is offset by a very small reduction in Federal Government staff offices for the Federal Aviation Administration, an account that will still receive $75 million above the administration's request.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, just moments ago we increased the FRA safety and operations by $3.5 million.

This amendment, however, would result in, really, an unsustainable cut to FAA's operations account. Air traffic control facilities would have to close and communities would lose service. Frankly, critical operational support staff would have to be furloughed or even laid off. Safety could be compromised for flights, and flights could be potentially canceled.

Therefore, I cannot support this well-intentioned offset and, therefore, I cannot support this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. ESTY. Madam Chair, I urge passage of this commonsense amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. Esty).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.

Ms. ESTY. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Connecticut will be postponed.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Dold

Mr. DOLD. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 12, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $290,000,000)''.

Page 13, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $81,203,000)''.

Page 13, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by $208,797,000)''.

Page 47, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $290,000,000)''.

Mr. DOLD (during the reading). Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be considered as read.

The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois?

There was no objection.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. DOLD. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of an amendment to increase funding for Amtrak's capital account. The bill as is cuts $290 million from Amtrak's capital account, which is used to upgrade or replace the infrastructure that Amtrak owns, along with the acquisition and maintenance of Amtrak's fleet of locomotives, passenger cars, and other equipment.

Madam Chair, the Chicago area, which I represent, is the hub of our Nation's transportation network. Over 30 million people ride Amtrak every year nationwide, and many of those passengers ride through the city of Chicago. However, in the Chicago area, Amtrak trains are running on infrastructure that has not been updated in decades, including switches that date back to the administration of Teddy Roosevelt.

As we have seen in recent months, safety concerns on Amtrak are at a premium. Now is not the time to reduce the amount of money that we have made available for Amtrak and for our needed infrastructure upgrades. We need to make investments in our tracks, our trains, our stations, and the rest of our transportation system.

My amendment would take a step towards addressing that problem. All it does is restore capital investment grants to the level at which they were appropriated last year. This is a small step but one that will help rebuild our crumbling infrastructure and will help improve the mass transit systems that so many of our citizens use each and every day.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, this amendment would result in a deep and, frankly, unsustainable reduction to FAA's operations account. FAA would have to suspend contracts that run the information technology systems that keep our air traffic control flowing.

Air traffic control facilities would have to be closed and communities, frankly, would lose service. Critical operational support staff would be furloughed or, again, laid off. Safety could be compromised. Flights, again, would be canceled.

Therefore, I cannot support this offset and, respectfully, cannot support the gentleman's amendment.

At this time, I would like to yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I, too, reluctantly oppose this amendment. The discussion we had earlier about this offset certainly pertains here. We really cannot afford to make this kind of cut--safety-related cut, I might say--to the Federal Aviation Administration's funding.

The amendment is worthy in purpose. Again, funding for Amtrak's capital accounts is woefully inadequate in this bill. But this is simply not the way to make it up. In fact, there is no way to make it up within the confines of this bill. We are robbing Peter to pay Paul. This is what is wrong with this bill--an inadequate allocation. That means there is no way to get adequate funding for things we care about without doing equivalent damage somewhere else. It is an impossible dilemma.

What we need to do is do the responsible thing: get a budget agreement, get numbers we can work with, and write a decent bill. In the meantime, this amendment, while well-intentioned, really is not acceptable, and I urge rejection.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DOLD. Madam Chair, as we look at our transportation and infrastructure system, we know that investment is needed.

I urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Dold).

The amendment was rejected.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Lynch

Mr. LYNCH. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 12, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $25,000,000)''.

Page 13, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $25,000,000)''.

Page 44, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $25,000,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Mr. LYNCH. Madam Chair, what I am trying to do in this amendment is to really address a wider problem in my congressional district. My district surrounds the Logan International Airport in Boston.

What this amendment would do is remove $25 million from the FAA budget and transfer it to rail. The reason for that is because the FAA has steadfastly refused to do part of their job in my district. I have tried to get them to come to the town of Milton, Massachusetts, to address the overflights in that area. The new NextGen RNAV system concentrates flight after flight, thousands of flights a month, over the town of Milton, Massachusetts.

I requested the FAA to come out and meet with my neighbors--the people that I represent--just like everybody else represents people in their districts, and the FAA has flatly refused. So since they have refused to do part of the job that we fund them for, I figured I would take $25 million out of their budget because they are not doing their job.

All I am looking for is a meeting with the FAA in my district, and I've got to resort to this. It is shameful. I would say that their attitude towards my constituents--the people I work for--has been utter contempt and disrespectful. So here I am trying to cut their budget to get their attention. It is a sad statement of the way the FAA operates.

But my real issue is getting the FAA to respond to my constituents, not about cutting their budgets. I know the chair and the ranking member have worked wonderfully, and I give you great credit for the work you have done.

What I am wondering is, would the chair and the ranking member help me just get the FAA to respond by having a meeting in my district in the town of Milton? I would withdraw my amendment and leave the money that you have wisely appropriated where it is. I am just looking to get this agency, this bureaucracy, to respond to the people I represent. It is as simple as that, Mr. Chairman.

I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I will tell the gentleman that one of the responsibilities that we have is to make sure that we hold government accountable. I don't think it is acceptable to not get answers. So I look forward to working with the gentleman to make sure that we move to address those concerns of your community. I don't want to speak for the ranking member, but I know that I look forward to working with you to make sure that we get answers that you need to get.

Mr. LYNCH. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. LYNCH. I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I appreciate the chairman's response.

I, too, will work with you. This isn't acceptable. We will do our best to help you get the kind of response you need.

Mr. LYNCH. Madam Chair, I want to thank the chairman, and I want to thank the ranking member for the courtesy, not only to me, but to my constituents as well.

I yield back the balance of my time, and I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?

There was no objection.

The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.

=========================== NOTE ===========================

June 3, 2015, on page H3840, the following appeared: There was no objection. AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. DOLD

The online version should be corrected to read: There was no objection. The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn. AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. DOLD

========================= END NOTE =========================

Amendment Offered by Mr. Dold

Mr. DOLD. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 12, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $200,000,000)''.

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

Page 52, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $200,000,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. DOLD. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of an amendment to increase funding for capital investment grants to help our Nation's mass transit rail systems. The bill as is cuts $200 million from the account, and my amendment would restore that funding.

While I recognize, and as we have heard from the chairman and the ranking member, there is not really a good spot to be able to take some of these additional funds from, I do think it is important though, Madam Chair, that we talk about our infrastructure system, especially our rail system. And as we look specifically in the greater Chicago area, the Chicago Transit Authority's rail system, the El, serves around 725,000 riders each and every day, and the Metra, which serves the suburban areas like the 10th District in Illinois, serves over 300,000 riders each and every day. Over a million people are using these rail systems.

{time} 2115

Again, as we talked about before, Metra estimates that it needs to find roughly $13.4 billion over the next decade just to maintain the system in its current condition. That is why it is more important than ever before to find the funds to pay to maintain and rebuild our Nation's transportation infrastructure system.

Madam Chair, we hear all the time from our constituents that we need good, high-paying jobs. Frankly, a transportation infrastructure system for manufacturers--how do we get raw material and a finished product out? How do we get people around?--is absolutely critical to our economy.

I saw an estimate from UPS that read that every additional 5 minutes of idling time costs them $100 million. We have switches in the Chicago area that delay rail up to 15 minutes one way. That is 30 minutes a day; and, if you are a regular commuter, that is 10\1/2\ hours in a given month, 10\1/2\ hours that you could be more productive or could be spending time with your family or spending time doing homework with your children.

If we as a country want to be more productive, if we want to encourage more good, high-paying jobs, we have to find a way to make sure that we invest in our transportation infrastructure system.

When we use this transportation infrastructure system and if it goes away, we are talking about an increase in congestion--at least I can tell you in the Chicago area--of an additional 50 percent. In talking to the rail, we would need an additional 29 lanes of traffic.

What is the cost of that? We just don't have it. If we don't have this type of funding, the car in front of you could have been somebody who was sitting on the rail, who could have been using mass transit.

Madam Chair, this bill is a step backward for our Nation's mass transit systems, not a step forward. Instead of providing funds to maintain and improve world-class mass transit systems, we are, instead, taking money away and making it harder and harder for the public to find the funds needed to keep their systems operational, much less to improve them. A reliable and consistent stream of capital funding is essential for these systems, but this bill does not meet that need.

My amendment would take a step toward addressing that problem. I recognize it is just a step, but I am anxious to work with the chairman and the ranking member, and I am anxious to work with those on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee to make sure that we are coming up with outside-the-box thinking in how we can improve our mass transit systems.

It is vitally important for our urban areas, and it is certainly important for the Nation's transportation hub, which, I would argue, is in the heartland, in the Chicago area.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, one has to frankly respect and admire Mr. Dold's knowledge and passion in these amendments that he is doing. I am sensitive to that, and I look forward to working with him. I know that he will make sure that we work with him on these issues that he brings up and that he is very passionate about, which I think are very important.

Respectfully, I have to oppose this amendment. This amendment would result in deep reductions to the FAA's operations account and would result in breaches of contract for air traffic control information technology systems. In addition, it would result in staff layoffs, which would again compromise safety.

I look forward to continuing to work with the gentleman. He brings up, obviously, some very important points; but again, respectfully, I must object to this amendment at this time.

Madam Chair, I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), the ranking member of the subcommittee.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Madam Chair, I appreciate the chairman's yielding.

I want to echo his opposition to this amendment, and I want to echo his praise for the reality check that the gentleman from Illinois has provided us tonight. At various times in the course of the evening, we have talked about TIGER grants; we have talked about Amtrak; we have talked about transit investments--all of which are underfunded in this bill.

I am also pleased that the chairman has expressed the willingness to cooperate in going forward. I want to echo that on my part, too, because we do believe a better day will come and, hopefully, not only at the end of the fiscal year but soon, where we get a budget agreement, where we get better numbers, and where we are able to address each of these accounts that the gentleman has highlighted.

He is exactly right about the need in all of these areas. The offset is not acceptable. It is even dangerous.

For that reason, I oppose the amendment, but the larger message is we have got to get a better budget number, and we have got to revisit many of the accounts in this bill.

Mr. DOLD. Madam Chair, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining?

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Illinois has 1\1/2\ minutes remaining.

Mr. DOLD. I certainly want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for their thoughts.

Madam Chair, there is no question as we look at the debt that we have--we have an $18 trillion debt in our country--that it is jeopardizing our children's opportunity for the American Dream. One of the things that I talk about in terms of how we get out of it is by talking about: How do we grow, Madam Chair?

We grow, I think, by creating this opportunity and environment so people want to come and put their businesses here, becoming globally competitive. When entrepreneurs look at where to go to place their businesses, one of the things they are going to look at is our transportation infrastructure system. We need to know how we are going to get our raw materials in and our finished product out if we want to be globally competitive and if we want to manufacture. I would argue that we do.

I recognize where the committee is. I also appreciate the chairman's and the ranking member's willingness to work with us in going forward, but we have to, each and every one of us, come together and put our differences aside and invest in our infrastructure system so that we can grow our economy and have greater dollars coming into the Federal Treasury so that we can have these resources.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Dold).

The amendment was rejected.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Bridenstine

Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 13, line 5, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $250,000)''.

Page 13, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert

``(decreased by $250,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma.

Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Madam Chair, the Bridenstine-Rohrabacher-Posey amendment, which is supported by the Commercial Spaceflight Federation, transfers $250,000 from the FAA's finance and management activities to the Office of Commercial Space Transportation. This is a small amount, but it is extremely important if we are to support the booming commercial spaceflight industry.

The FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation's mission is as follows: ``to ensure protection of the public, property, and the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States during commercial launch or reentry activities and to encourage, facilitate, and promote commercial space transportation.''

To carry out this mission, AST, as the office is known, is tasked with overseeing commercially licensed launches, test launches under experimental permits, licenses and permits for new vehicle designs, supporting NASA and the Commercial Crew contractors, taking the lead role in coordinating space traffic at the White House's request, and many other duties.

Over the past few years, the number of activities AST oversees has grown significantly; yet funding and staffing levels have remained absolutely flat.

Just last month, the House of Representatives passed the SPACE Act on an overwhelmingly bipartisan basis. That bill establishes a statutory and regulatory regime that provides stability and encourages private sector investment in order to facilitate the growth of commercial space activities. If we are passing legislation to encourage growth, we need to provide this office with increased resources to keep up.

We rely on the commercial space sector for many things: reliable, frequent, and inexpensive launches; communications, navigation, and imaging satellites; and services such as the Internet, telephone, television, and radio, which are staples of modern life.

Going forward, there are companies whose goal is to provide space tourism services. There are also ventures planning missions to harvest precious resources from celestial bodies. This is just the tip of the iceberg for this growth industry.

This is an industry that is constantly innovating. It is also an industry we have come to increasingly rely on. If AST does not get the additional resources, it could lead to slips of planned launch dates for some companies as the office is unable to process inspections, permits, and licenses in a timely manner. On top of being a hindrance to this growth industry, it could also reduce the functionality and capabilities we take for granted in our everyday lives.

This funding will give AST additional resources to accomplish its mission. As its workload continues to grow, I encourage the Office of Commercial Space Transportation to continue to work alongside industry in developing and supporting consensus safety standards that can streamline the inspection process.

I appreciate Chairman Diaz-Balart's leadership and his recognition of the importance of this office. I thank him for working with me on this amendment, particularly given the constraints he is under while crafting this appropriations bill.

I understand we are in tough fiscal times; however, we need to ensure we do not strangle the unlimited potential of the commercial spaceflight industry. An important piece of this is ensuring that the Office of Commercial Space Transportation can keep up with the growth of this burgeoning industry.

I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and the underlying legislation.

I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Bridenstine).

The amendment was agreed to.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

facilities and equipment

(airport and airway trust fund)

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

research, engineering, and development

(airport and airway trust fund)

For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, for research, engineering, and development, as authorized under part A of subtitle VII of title 49, United States Code, including construction of experimental facilities and acquisition of necessary sites by lease or grant,

$156,750,000, to be derived from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund and to remain available until September 30, 2018: Provided, That there may be credited to this appropriation as offsetting collections, funds received from States, counties, municipalities, other public authorities, and private sources, which shall be available for expenses incurred for research, engineering, and development.

grants-in-aid for airports

(liquidation of contract authorization)

(limitation on obligations)

(airport and airway trust fund)

For liquidation of obligations incurred for grants-in-aid for airport planning and development, and noise compatibility planning and programs as authorized under subchapter I of chapter 471 and subchapter I of chapter 475 of title 49, United States Code, and under other law authorizing such obligations; for procurement, installation, and commissioning of runway incursion prevention devices and systems at airports of such title; for grants authorized under section 41743 of title 49, United States Code; and for inspection activities and administration of airport safety programs, including those related to airport operating certificates under section 44706 of title 49, United States Code,

$3,600,000,000, to be derived from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund and to remain available until expended: Provided, That none of the funds under this heading shall be available for the planning or execution of programs the obligations for which are in excess of $3,350,000,000 in fiscal year 2016, notwithstanding section 47117(g) of title 49, United States Code: Provided further, That none of the funds under this heading shall be available for the replacement of baggage conveyor systems, reconfiguration of terminal baggage areas, or other airport improvements that are necessary to install bulk explosive detection systems: Provided further, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, of funds limited under this heading, not more than $107,100,000 shall be obligated for administration, not less than $15,000,000 shall be available for the Airport Cooperative Research Program, and not less than $31,000,000 shall be available for Airport Technology Research.

administrative provisions

Sec. 110. None of the funds in this Act may be used to compensate in excess of 600 technical staff-years under the federally funded research and development center contract between the Federal Aviation Administration and the Center for Advanced Aviation Systems Development during fiscal year 2016.

Sec. 111. None of the funds in this Act shall be used to pursue or adopt guidelines or regulations requiring airport sponsors to provide to the Federal Aviation Administration without cost building construction, maintenance, utilities and expenses, or space in airport sponsor-owned buildings for services relating to air traffic control, air navigation, or weather reporting: Provided, That the prohibition of funds in this section does not apply to negotiations between the agency and airport sponsors to achieve agreement on below-market rates for these items or to grant assurances that require airport sponsors to provide land without cost to the FAA for air traffic control facilities.

Sec. 112. The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may reimburse amounts made available to satisfy 49 U.S.C. 41742(a)(1) from fees credited under 49 U.S.C. 45303 and any amount remaining in such account at the close of that fiscal year may be made available to satisfy section 41742(a)(1) for the subsequent fiscal year.

Sec. 113. Amounts collected under section 40113(e) of title 49, United States Code, shall be credited to the appropriation current at the time of collection, to be merged with and available for the same purposes of such appropriation.

Sec. 114. None of the funds in this Act shall be available for paying premium pay under subsection 5546(a) of title 5, United States Code, to any Federal Aviation Administration employee unless such employee actually performed work during the time corresponding to such premium pay.

Sec. 115. None of the funds in this Act may be obligated or expended for an employee of the Federal Aviation Administration to purchase a store gift card or gift certificate through use of a Government-issued credit card.

Sec. 116. None of the funds in this Act may be obligated or expended for retention bonuses for an employee of the Federal Aviation Administration without the prior written approval of the Assistant Secretary for Administration of the Department of Transportation.

Sec. 117. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the funds made available under this Act or any prior Act may be used to implement or to continue to implement any limitation on the ability of any owner or operator of a private aircraft to obtain, upon a request to the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, a blocking of that owner's or operator's aircraft registration number from any display of the Federal Aviation Administration's Aircraft Situational Display to Industry data that is made available to the public, except data made available to a Government agency, for the noncommercial flights of that owner or operator.

Sec. 118. None of the funds in this Act shall be available for salaries and expenses of more than 9 political and Presidential appointees in the Federal Aviation Administration.

Sec. 119. None of the funds made available under this Act may be used to increase fees pursuant to section 44721 of title 49, United States Code, until the FAA provides to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a report that justifies all fees related to aeronautical navigation products and explains how such fees are consistent with Executive Order 13642.

Sec. 119A. None of the funds in this Act may be used to close a regional operations center of the Federal Aviation Administration or reduce its services unless the Administrator notifies the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not less than 90 full business days in advance.

Sec. 119B. None of the funds appropriated or limited by this Act may be used to change weight restrictions or prior permission rules at Teterboro airport in Teterboro, New Jersey.

Federal Highway Administration

limitation on administrative expenses

(highway trust fund)

(including transfer of funds)

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

federal-aid highways

(limitation on obligations)

(highway trust fund)

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

(liquidation of contract authorization)

(highway trust fund)

Contingent upon enactment of authorization legislation, for the payment of obligations incurred in carrying out Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs authorized under title 23, United States Code,

$40,995,000,000 derived from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account), to remain available until expended.

administrative provisions--federal highway administration

Sec. 120. Contingent upon enactment of authorization legislation:

(a) For fiscal year 2016, the Secretary of Transportation shall--

(1) not distribute from the obligation limitation for Federal-aid highways--

(A) amounts authorized for administrative expenses and programs by section 104(a) of title 23, United States Code; and

(B) amounts authorized for the Bureau of Transportation Statistics;

(2) not distribute an amount from the obligation limitation for Federal-aid highways that is equal to the unobligated balance of amounts--

(A) made available from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) for Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs for previous fiscal years the funds for which are allocated by the Secretary (or apportioned by the Secretary under sections 202 or 204 of title 23, United States Code); and

(B) for which obligation limitation was provided in a previous fiscal year;

(3) determine the proportion that--

(A) the obligation limitation for Federal-aid highways, less the aggregate of amounts not distributed under paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection; bears to

(B) the total of the sums authorized to be appropriated for the Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs (other than sums authorized to be appropriated for provisions of law described in paragraphs (1) through (11) of subsection (b) and sums authorized to be appropriated for section 119 of title 23, United States Code, equal to the amount referred to in subsection (b)(12) for such fiscal year), less the aggregate of the amounts not distributed under paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection;

(4) distribute the obligation limitation for Federal-aid highways, less the aggregate amounts not distributed under paragraphs (1) and (2), for each of the programs (other than programs to which paragraph (1) applies) that are allocated by the Secretary under such authorization legislation and title 23, United States Code, or apportioned by the Secretary under sections 202 or 204 of that title, by multiplying--

(A) the proportion determined under paragraph (3); by

(B) the amounts authorized to be appropriated for each such program for such fiscal year; and

(5) distribute the obligation limitation for Federal-aid highways, less the aggregate amounts not distributed under paragraphs (1) and (2) and the amounts distributed under paragraph (4), for Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs that are apportioned by the Secretary under such authorization legislation or title 23, United States Code (other than the amounts apportioned for the National Highway Performance Program in section 119 of title 23, United States Code, that are exempt from the limitation under subsection (b)(12) and the amounts apportioned under sections 202 and 204 of that title) in the proportion that--

(A) amounts authorized to be appropriated for the programs that are apportioned under title 23, United States Code, or such authorization legislation to each State for such fiscal year; bears to

(B) the total of the amounts authorized to be appropriated for the programs that are apportioned under title 23, United States Code, or such authorization legislation to all States for such fiscal year.

(b) Exceptions From Obligation Limitation.--The obligation limitation for Federal-aid highways shall not apply to obligations under or for--

(1) section 125 of title 23, United States Code;

(2) section 147 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978 (23 U.S.C. 144 note; 92 Stat. 2714);

(3) section 9 of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1981 (95 Stat. 1701);

(4) subsections (b) and (j) of section 131 of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (96 Stat. 2119);

(5) subsections (b) and (c) of section 149 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987

(101 Stat. 198);

(6) sections 1103 through 1108 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2027);

(7) section 157 of title 23, United States Code (as in effect on June 8, 1998);

(8) section 105 of title 23, United States Code (as in effect for fiscal years 1998 through 2004, but only in an amount equal to $639,000,000 for each of those fiscal years);

(9) Federal-aid highway programs for which obligation authority was made available under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (112 Stat. 107) or subsequent Acts for multiple years or to remain available until expended, but only to the extent that the obligation authority has not lapsed or been used;

(10) section 105 of title 23, United States Code (as in effect for fiscal years 2005 through 2012, but only in an amount equal to $639,000,000 for each of those fiscal years);

(11) section 1603 of SAFETEA-LU (23 U.S.C. 118 note; 119 Stat. 1248), to the extent that funds obligated in accordance with that section were not subject to a limitation on obligations at the time at which the funds were initially made available for obligation; and

(12) section 119 of title 23, United States Code (but, for each of fiscal years 2013 through 2016, only in an amount equal to $639,000,000).

(c) Redistribution of Unused Obligation Authority.--Notwithstanding subsection (a), the Secretary shall, after August 1 of such fiscal year--

(1) revise a distribution of the obligation limitation made available under subsection (a) if an amount distributed cannot be obligated during that fiscal year; and

(2) redistribute sufficient amounts to those States able to obligate amounts in addition to those previously distributed during that fiscal year, giving priority to those States having large unobligated balances of funds apportioned under sections 144 (as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of Public Law 112-141) and 104 of title 23, United States Code.

(d) Applicability of Obligation Limitations to Transportation Research Programs.--

(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the obligation limitation for Federal-aid highways shall apply to contract authority for transportation research programs carried out under--

(A) chapter 5 of title 23, United States Code; and

(B) the transportation research programs sections of such authorization legislation.

(2) Exception.--Obligation authority made available under paragraph (1) shall--

(A) remain available for a period of 4 fiscal years; and

(B) be in addition to the amount of any limitation imposed on obligations for Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs for future fiscal years.

(e) Redistribution of Certain Authorized Funds.--

(1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the date of distribution of obligation limitation under subsection (a), the Secretary shall distribute to the States any funds

(excluding funds authorized for the program under section 202 of title 23, United States Code) that--

(A) are authorized to be appropriated for such fiscal year for Federal-aid highway programs; and

(B) the Secretary determines will not be allocated to the States (or will not be apportioned to the States under section 204 of title 23, United States Code), and will not be available for obligation, for such fiscal year because of the imposition of any obligation limitation for such fiscal year.

(2) Ratio.--Funds shall be distributed under paragraph (1) in the same proportion as the distribution of obligation authority under subsection (a)(5).

(3) Availability.--Funds distributed to each State under paragraph (1) shall be available for any purpose described in section 133(b) of title 23, United States Code.

Sec. 121. Notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, funds received by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics from the sale of data products, for necessary expenses incurred pursuant to chapter 63 of title 49, United States Code, may be credited to the Federal-aid highways account for the purpose of reimbursing the Bureau for such expenses: Provided, That such funds shall be subject to the obligation limitation for Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs.

Sec. 122. Not less than 15 days prior to waiving, under his or her statutory authority, any Buy America requirement for Federal-aid highways projects, the Secretary of Transportation shall make an informal public notice and comment opportunity on the intent to issue such waiver and the reasons therefor: Provided, That the Secretary shall provide an annual report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations on any waivers granted under the Buy America requirements.

Sec. 123. None of the funds in this Act to the Department of Transportation may be used to provide credit assistance unless not less than 3 days before any application approval to provide credit assistance under sections 603 and 604 of title 23, United States Code, the Secretary of Transportation provides notification in writing to the following committees: the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations; the Committee on Environment and Public Works and the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs of the Senate; and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives: Provided, That such notification shall include, but not be limited to, the name of the project sponsor; a description of the project; whether credit assistance will be provided as a direct loan, loan guarantee, or line of credit; and the amount of credit assistance.

Sec. 124. Section 127 of title 23, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``(m) Longer Combination Vehicles in Idaho.--No limit or other prohibition under this section, except as provided in this subsection, applies to a longer combination vehicle operating on a segment of the Interstate System in the State of Idaho if such vehicle--

``(1) has a gross vehicle weight of 129,000 pounds or less;

``(2) complies with the single axle, tandem axle, and bridge formula limits set forth in subsection (a); and

``(3) is authorized to operate on such segment under Idaho State Law.''.

Sec. 125. Section 31111(b)(1)(A) of title 49, United States Code, is amended by striking ``or of less than 28 feet on a semitrailer or trailer operating in a truck tractor-semitrailer-trailer combination,'' and inserting ``or, notwithstanding section 31112, of less than 33 feet on a semitrailer or trailer operating in a truck tractor-semitrailer-trailer combination,''.

Sec. 126. Exemption.--

(a) In General.--Section 31112(c)(5) of title 49, United States Code, is amended--

(1) by striking ``Nebraska may'' and inserting ``Nebraska and Kansas may''; and

(2) by striking ``the State of Nebraska'' and inserting

``the relevant state''.

(b) Conforming and Technical Amendments.--Section 31112(c) of such title is amended--

(1) by striking the subsection designation and heading and inserting the following:

``(c) Special Rules for Wyoming, Ohio, Alaska, Iowa, Nebraska, and Kansas.--'';

(2) by striking ``; and'' at the end of paragraph (3) and inserting a semicolon; and

(3) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (4) and inserting ``; and''.

Sec. 127. Section 130(e)(1) of title 23, United States Code, is amended by striking ``$220,000,000'' and inserting

``$350,000,000''.

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

motor carrier safety operations and programs

(liquidation of contract authorization)

(limitation on obligations)

(highway trust fund)

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

$9,000,000, to remain available for obligation until September 30, 2018, is for the research and technology program, and of which $34,545,000, to remain available for obligation until September 30, 2018, is for information management: Provided further, That $1,000,000 shall be made available for commercial motor vehicle operator grants to carry out section 4134 of Public Law 109-59, as amended by Public Law 112-141, and as extended by Public Law 113-159.

motor carrier safety grants

(liquidation of contract authorization)

(limitation on obligations)

(highway trust fund)

Contingent upon enactment of authorization legislation, for payment of obligations incurred in carrying out sections 31102, 31104(a), 31106, 31107, 31109, 31309, 31313 of title 49, United States Code, and sections 4126 and 4128 of Public Law 109-59, as amended by Public Law 112-141, as extended by Public Law 113-159, $313,000,000, to be derived from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) and to remain available until expended: Provided, That funds available for the implementation or execution of motor carrier safety programs shall not exceed total obligations of

$313,000,000 in fiscal year 2016 for ``Motor Carrier Safety Grants''; of which $218,000,000 shall be available for the motor carrier safety assistance program, $30,000,000 shall be available for commercial driver's license program improvement grants, $32,000,000 shall be available for border enforcement grants, $5,000,000 shall be available for performance and registration information system management grants,

$25,000,000 shall be available for the commercial vehicle information systems and networks deployment program, and

$3,000,000 shall be available for safety data improvement grants: Provided further, That, of the funds made available herein for the motor carrier safety assistance program,

$32,000,000 shall be available for audits of new entrant motor carriers.

administrative provisions--federal motor carrier safety administration

Sec. 130. Funds appropriated or limited in this Act shall be subject to the terms and conditions stipulated in section 350 of Public Law 107-87 and section 6901 of Public Law 110-28.

Sec. 131. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration shall send notice of 49 CFR section 385.308 violations by certified mail, registered mail, or another manner of delivery, which records the receipt of the notice by the persons responsible for the violations.

Sec. 132. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act or any other Act may be used to implement, administer, or enforce sections 395.3(c) and 395.3(d) of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, and such section shall have no force or effect on submission of the final report issued by the Secretary, as required by section 133 of Division K of Public Law 113-235, unless the Secretary and the Inspector General of the Department of Transportation each review and determine that the final report--

(1) meets the statutory requirements set forth in such section; and

(2) establishes that commercial motor vehicle drivers who operated under the restart provisions in effect between July 1, 2013, and the day before the date of enactment of such Public Law demonstrated statistically significant improvement in all outcomes related to safety, operator fatigue, driver health and longevity, and work schedules, in comparison to commercial motor vehicle drivers who operated under the restart provisions in effect on June 30, 2013.

Sec. 133. None of the funds limited or otherwise made available under the heading ``Motor Carrier Safety Operations and Programs'' may be used to deny an application to renew a Hazardous Materials Safety Program permit for a motor carrier based on that carrier's Hazardous Materials Out-of-Service rate, unless the carrier has the opportunity to submit a written description of corrective actions taken, and other documentation the carrier wishes the Secretary to consider, including submitting a corrective action plan, and the Secretary determines the actions or plan is insufficient to address the safety concerns that resulted in that Hazardous Materials Out-of-Service rate.

Sec. 134. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to develop, issue, or implement any regulation that increases levels of minimum financial responsibility for transporting passengers or property as in effect on January 1, 2014, under regulations issued pursuant to sections 31138 and 31139 of title 49, United States Code.

{time} 2130

Amendment Offered by Mr. Cartwright

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Chair, I rise to offer an amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Strike section 134.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Chair, tonight I urge the adoption of my amendment, which would allow the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to continue its congressionally mandated ongoing work to improve safety and accountability in the trucking and bus industry. I do so out of a concern that we need to exhibit common sense in what we do. We need to be fiscally prudent, we need to promote safe highways in our Nation, and we need to recognize the importance of promoting personal responsibility and accountability.

My amendment would strike a section of this bill that would halt the FMCSA's work toward issuing a rule that would make our highways safer for everyone by creating an incentive for motor carriers to make safety a greater priority. We have to allow the FMCSA to proceed with the development of a rule to increase insurance minimums for motor carriers, which have not been updated in, fully, 35 years in this Nation and, thus, have become outdated to the point of uselessness.

The first point I make is that it is simply common sense that we adjust for inflation. Not adjusting for inflation for 35 years is not prudent, and it makes no sense. It allows carriers to travel on our Nation's highways in a financially irresponsible manner, in a manner that would allow them not to be accountable for whatever harm they might cause.

Adjusting for inflation is common sense. It is also fiscally prudent, because what happens? Right now in this Nation, tractor-trailers are allowed to travel around with $750,000 of liability insurance. The FMCSA is studying that number to see what it should be updated to after 35 years. $750,000 is not enough money.

Just this morning in my district in northeastern Pennsylvania, there was a horrendous truck and bus accident in which three people were killed and a dozen others were seriously injured. When three people are killed, asking their families to share $750,000 is not fiscally responsible. Look who pays the difference.

If somebody is killed or if somebody is rendered, for example, a paraplegic, they are going to incur incredible amounts of medical bills; they are not going to be able to work. Who picks up the difference when that happens? It is the Social Security system, it is the Medicare system, it is John Q. Taxpayer that ends up paying the bill when the trucking company doesn't have enough insurance to pay the damages.

That is why it is fiscally prudent that we allow the FMCSA to continue its important work, and it is important work that was mandated by the MAP-21 bill that required the FMCSA to do this work.

It also promotes safe highways, because if we raise insurance minimums up to modern and responsible levels, that means insurance companies will have to engage in actual real underwriting. They will have to go out from the home office and visit the headquarters of trucking companies to make sure they are acting properly and safely and responsibly. If they do that, if you want to buy insurance at reasonable levels, you have to act safely.

Finally, Madam Chair, this is about personal responsibility. If you don't have enough insurance, you get away without being personally responsible when these horrendous crashes happen.

Madam Chair, I yield to Mr. Price for a colloquy.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I want to commend him for offering this amendment.

Madam Chair, as he has stressed very effectively, this is simply irrational to freeze these claims where they were in the early 1980s, and it also defies our own body's directions to the DOT to look at this and to think about what kind of future changes might be in order. This simply preempts that whole process; is that right?

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. That is correct. For that very reason, I urge everyone to support my amendment to allow the FMCSA to finish its important work of examining and developing a rule that is critical to preventing devastating trucking accidents and keeping our highways safe and secure for everyone.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Iowa. Madam Chair, I claim time in opposition.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. YOUNG of Iowa. I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Chair, I oppose this amendment. As is frequently the case in Washington, D.C., the proposed rules requiring truckers to increase their liability insurance is a solution in search of a problem. The provision currently included in the bill must remain. It must remain because it protects job creators so they can stay in business. When you consider that 99.9 percent of crashes are already covered by existing insurance requirements, you can see that increasing insurance and, thus, costs at the expense of jobs is just not a credible solution.

Safety is important. We all know that. We all want to make sure that our roadways are safe. But the Department of Transportation readily admits that raising the cost does not necessarily improve safety. The DOT's own study expresses a crippling revelation to proponents of a cost increase on our job creators. There may be more effective ways that reduce crashes at a lower cost.

Bottom line, we need to strike a balance. If the proposed regulations went into effect, our smaller trucking companies in Iowa and other rural areas in States around the country would be unable to absorb the increased costs, and it could threaten their ability to stay in business. Too frequently in this town we are working to fix the mistakes that were made by so-called Washington solutions. I strongly encourage the rejection of this amendment tonight.

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. YOUNG of Iowa. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Chair, on the one point about 99.9 percent of crashes settling within existing insurance minimums, there we have the opponents of my amendment speaking really out of both sides of their mouth, because if they say it is so rare that a crash will cost more than the minimum insurance, then what that means is that the expense of insuring against that minimal risk has to be minimal itself, but these are the same people saying that it will be a crippling additional insurance premium. It doesn't make sense.

Mr. YOUNG of Iowa. Reclaiming my time, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry).

Mr. PERRY. Madam Chair, I, too, oppose this amendment. Increasing insurance requirements will not improve highway safety. I mean, what incentive does it create? How does increasing the insurance requirement improve safety? It is not backed by any sound data.

The agency's own data shows that current requirements cover damages in more--more--than 99 percent of all crashes. Think about that, more than 99 percent of all crashes. But to the gentleman's point, my friend from Pennsylvania, the agency is planning on tying these requirements to medical inflation, and that results in increases of 500 percent or more. Think about that, medical inflation, this administration. I mean, isn't that the height of irony? I thought they were driving the cost of medical inflation down. That is another whole story.

The fact is the industry has a remarkable safety record compared to all commercial motor vehicles. As a matter of fact, motor coaches average only 20 fatalities per year and schoolbuses only 5. Now, that is not meant to minimize those losses because every life is precious, but in a highway environment that produces 35,000 fatalities per year, the DOT study did not even consider accident data, claims data, or talk to insurance carriers about the impacts of increasing insurance or whether there is even a need for it.

Indeed, this is a solution that is looking for a problem, a problem that does not exist. I urge the Members to vote ``no'' on this amendment.

Mr. YOUNG of Iowa. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Cartwright).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania will be postponed.

The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

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

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

operations and research

For expenses necessary to discharge the functions of the Secretary, with respect to traffic and highway safety authorized under chapter 301 and part C of subtitle VI of title 49, United States Code, $150,000,000, of which

$20,000,000 shall remain available through September 30, 2017.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Gosar

Mr. GOSAR. I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Collins of Georgia). The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

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

Page 142, line 9, after the dollar amount insert

``(increased by $500,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.

{time} 2145

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment which seeks to bolster funds for the inspector general of the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, or Amtrak.

I am a strong proponent of government oversight, and I believe the revelatory work of the inspector general should be staunchly supported within each agency of the Federal Government.

Today, given the dismal financial record of Amtrak through its history, compounded with recent safety failures, it is clear that the scrupulous, objective oversight of the inspector general is needed for this agency now more than ever.

This amendment redirects $500,000 to the Amtrak Office of the Inspector General salaries and expenses account to bring it up to the budget request level.

Since the Inspector General Act was passed into law, the IG community has saved taxpayers billions of dollars and has uncovered countless examples of wrongdoing in the Federal Government. The inspector general community does good work. Let's give them the resources they need.

The committee has noted the good work of the Amtrak OIG in the committee report, stating: ``The OIG's efforts have resulted in valuable studies and recommendations for this committee and for the Corporation that have yielded cost savings and management improvements. These studies have been in a number of areas, including food and beverage service, capital planning, overtime, and fraud.''

I commend the committee for the work they have done to support efficient and effective government.

This amendment is directly in line with the high value the committee places on the thorough work of the OIG and will ensure additional transparency and accountability within Amtrak.

There is a wide agreement about the need to reform, streamline, and improve Amtrak. A valuable first step in that reform is supporting the objective, rigorous auditing information which the OIG is uniquely qualified to produce.

I ask my colleagues to join me in support of government accountability by giving the Amtrak OIG the resources they need to identify the waste, fraud, and abuse within a government agency that is in desperate need of reform.

I thank the chairman and the ranking member for their leadership on this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).

The amendment was agreed to.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

operations and research

(liquidation of contract authorization)

(limitation on obligations)

(highway trust fund)

Contingent upon enactment of authorization legislation, for payment of obligations incurred in carrying out the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 403, and chapter 303 of title 49, United States Code, $125,000,000, to be derived from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) and to remain available until expended: Provided, That none of the funds in this Act shall be available for the planning or execution of programs the total obligations for which, in fiscal year 2016, are in excess of $125,000,000, of which

$120,000,000 shall be for programs authorized under 23 U.S.C. 403 and $5,000,000 shall be for the National Driver Register authorized under chapter 303 of title 49, United States Code: Provided further, That within the $120,000,000 obligation limitation for operations and research, $20,000,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2017, and shall be in addition to the amount of any limitation imposed on obligations for future years: Provided further, That

$6,500,000 of the total obligation limitation for operations and research in fiscal year 2016 shall be applied toward unobligated balances of contract authority provided in prior Acts for carrying out the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 403, and chapter 303 of title 49, United States Code.

highway traffic safety grants

(liquidation of contract authorization)

(limitation on obligations)

(highway trust fund)

Contingent on the enactment of authorization legislation, for payment of obligations incurred in carrying out provisions of 23 U.S.C. 402 and 405, section 2009 of Public Law 109-59, as amended by Public Law 112-141, and section 31101(a)(6) of Public Law 112-141, to remain available until expended, $561,500,000, to be derived from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account): Provided, That none of the funds in this Act shall be available for the planning or execution of programs the total obligations for which, in fiscal year 2016, are in excess of $561,500,000 for programs authorized under 23 U.S.C. 402 and 405, section 2009 of Public Law 109-59, as amended by Public Law 112-141, and section 31101(a)(6) of Public Law 112-141, of which

$235,000,000 shall be for ``Highway Safety Programs'' under 23 U.S.C. 402; $272,000,000 shall be for ``National Priority Safety Programs'' under 23 U.S.C. 405; $29,000,000 shall be for the ``High Visibility Enforcement Program'' under section 2009 of Public Law 109-59, as amended by Public Law 112-141;

$25,500,000 shall be for ``Administrative Expenses'' under section 31101(a)(6) of Public Law 112-141: Provided further, That none of these funds shall be used for construction, rehabilitation, or remodeling costs, or for office furnishings and fixtures for State, local or private buildings or structures: Provided further, That not to exceed

$500,000 of the funds made available for ``National Priority Safety Programs'' under 23 U.S.C. 405 for ``Impaired Driving Countermeasures'' (as described in subsection (d) of that section) shall be available for technical assistance to the States: Provided further, That with respect to the

``Transfers'' provision under 23 U.S.C. 405(a)(1)(G), any amounts transferred to increase the amounts made available under section 402 shall include the obligation authority for such amounts: Provided further, That the Administrator shall notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations of any exercise of the authority granted under the previous proviso or under 23 U.S.C. 405(a)(1)(G) within 60 days.

administrative provisions--national highway traffic safety administration

Sec. 140. An additional $130,000 shall be made available to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, out of the amount limited for section 402 of title 23, United States Code, to pay for travel and related expenses for State management reviews and to pay for core competency development training and related expenses for highway safety staff.

Sec. 141. The limitations on obligations for the programs of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration set in this Act shall not apply to obligations for which obligation authority was made available in previous public laws but only to the extent that the obligation authority has not lapsed or been used.

Sec. 142. None of the funds in this Act shall be used to implement section 404 of title 23, United States Code.

Sec. 143. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to obligate or award funds for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's National Roadside Survey.

Sec. 144. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to mandate global positioning system (GPS) tracking in private passenger motor vehicles without providing full and appropriate consideration of privacy concerns under 5 U.S.C. chapter 5, subchapter II.

Federal Railroad Administration

safety and operations

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

Amendment Offered by Mr. Garrett

Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 44, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $16,930,000)''.

Page 52, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $83,000,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment that will bolster our Nation's rail safety and operations.

First, I would like to thank the gentleman from Florida for his dedication and important work on this bill.

Mr. Chairman, the number of train derailments and accidents in our local communities is a growing concern among my constituents and Americans all across the country.

In the first 2 months of 2015, there were 18 Amtrak accidents, as well as recent oil train derailments in West Virginia and in North Dakota. Most recently, Mr. Chairman, an Amtrak train crash in Philadelphia killed eight people and injured dozens more.

In New Jersey alone, there are 2,400 miles of freight lines and over 1,000 passenger rail miles, and we must ensure, Mr. Chairman, that these existing lines are operating safely.

So what do we have here? My amendment fully funds the Federal Railroad Administration's safety and operations account without increasing spending in the underlying bill. The FRA's safety and operations account provides funding for the FRA's safety program activities related to passenger and freight railroads.

So how do we do this? By reallocating a mere 4 percent of funding from capital investment grants, we can fund the safe operation of our Nation's trains at the President's requested levels.

Mr. Chairman, we do not build a new section onto our house if our roof is caving in. So we should not be adding on to these systems if they are caving in or failing.

So why are we funding new projects before we ensure that our current rail lines have enough dollars, enough funding for their safety?

My amendment would simply prioritize safety and maintenance of our existing infrastructure over the ribbon-cutting ceremonies associated with system expansion.

In light of the recent upsurge in deadly rail accidents, now is the time to adequately fund the safety and operations of our trains. Additionally, with our rising national debt, it is very important that we remain fiscally responsible and prioritize how we spend our constituents' hard-earned tax dollars.

That is why, in conclusion, my amendment does not increase spending, but only prioritizes a commonsense directive. And so I urge my colleagues to support my amendment to fund train safety, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, while I know and I am absolutely certain that the gentleman from New Jersey's heart is in the right place, unfortunately, I cannot support the offset.

The committee carefully calculated the New Start numbers to be able to accommodate the signed FFGAs and Small Starts Grant Agreements at the beginning of the fiscal year, and I am a firm believer that once you sign a grant, once you make that commitment, we should honor it. This reduction would impact those signed agreements, so I reluctantly oppose this amendment.

With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina

(Mr. Price), the ranking member.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I want to echo his opposition to this amendment, although I do commend Mr. Garrett for his focus on safety and operations. I, too, would like to raise that appropriation to the request level. That is a good objective.

There are a couple of problems here, though. One, is that because of differences in outlay rates, to pick up $17 million on the safety and operations side you have to cut $83 million from the transit New Starts. That has to do with differences in outlay rates. But the fact is, it is a substantial cut. And these New Starts in the bill, I remind colleagues, are already $1.3 billion below the President's request. They are $198 million below what we have this year.

These are badly underfunded items. So we simply, again, are robbing Peter to pay Paul. But because of the disproportionate impact here, and the fact that New Starts are already so underresourced, I reluctantly oppose this amendment.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chairman, two points. The first is, I understand the gentleman's opposition on procedural grounds as far as the differences in outlays and what have you. But when you go back home and talk to your district and say you are trying to do something for safety, as we are in this case, and you say: Well, the reason we can't do this is the procedural aspect of outlays versus the actual amount of money going in and the amount of money being cut, and so on and so forth, and you go through all the rubric and the matrix that we use around here and all the buzz words on the floor to try to explain things, the eyes of the people back home glaze over, rightfully so, because they say: Those are your rules, not ours. Why don't you just get something done.

What they are asking to get done is rail safety. And that is what this amendment does.

I just want to end with one quote. Back in 2010, the head of the FTA--at that time, the administrator was Peter Rogoff--chastised local transit agencies for promoting rail construction for so many new rail lines. He said on one hand, agencies were unable to maintain the rail lines they already had. The FTA had recently at that point estimated that rail transit systems suffered from close to a $60 billion maintenance backlog--and the backlog was growing even then.

And he said this: ``If you can't afford to operate the systems you have,'' he asked the agencies, ``why does it make sense for us to partner with you in new expansions?''

That is a great question. If they can't fix up what is already out there and all the problems on the rail lines out there on important things like safety, then why on Earth are we spending all these tens of millions of dollars on brand new programs that we know that they are not going to be able to maintain as well? Let's do first things first.

As I said in my little example before, if your roof is collapsing on your house, you don't add a new deck, you don't put in a new pool, you don't put in a paved new driveway, you don't do anything else. You repair the roof, first and foremost, and then everything else comes after that.

And that is really all I am asking. Let's maintain the safety, first and foremost, so that everyone riding on the rails can feel confident that they are operating right. Then, after that, let's come back here to the floor and fix up the other funding mechanism for new programs and what have you, and go forward.

Right now, let's make sure that our constituents back home can feel confident every time they ride on a transit system, be it a bus or train or something else, that they know that it is adequately funded and taken care of and maintained.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.

Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey will be postponed.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

railroad research and development

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

railroad rehabilitation and improvement financing program

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

operating grants to the national railroad passenger corporation

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

Amendment Offered by Ms. Titus

Ms. TITUS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 45, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $1,000,000) (increased by $1,000,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Nevada.

{time} 2200

Ms. TITUS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today with this very simple amendment. It is one that is meant to shed light on inadequate investments that are being made in our Nation's passenger rail service.

The bill before us appropriates nearly $16 billion for aviation, over

$40 billion for our roads, over $10 billion for public transit, but just $1.1 billion for our Nation's passenger rail service.

I represent Las Vegas, where we import everything from tourists to lobsters, so we certainly understand the importance of transportation mobility.

It is interesting, many international and domestic travelers alike are shocked to learn, when they are coming to Las Vegas, that a major metropolitan city, home to more than 2 million residents and playground and boardroom to over 42 million visitors a year, we just don't have access to passenger rail service.

Visitors from Europe or Asia are accustomed to taking trains from one city to another, and they face a sad reality when traveling to Las Vegas from other Southwestern tourist destinations.

From Los Angeles, for example, you would have to take a 7-hour train ride that drops you off in Kingman, Arizona, at 1:30 in the morning. There, you would have to find the bus station, which is 4 miles away, get on a bus at 4 in the morning to travel another 3 hours to downtown Las Vegas. That is just crazy.

The last Amtrak train on the Desert Wind line departed the back of the Plaza Hotel in May of 1997, bound for Los Angeles.

Well, a lot has changed since the late 1990s. Over the last 17 years, southern Nevada's population has grown by a million new residents, and 10 million more visitors travel to southern Nevada annually, putting enormous strain on our area's highways and the airport, which is among the top 10 busiest airports in the country.

More than 42,000 vehicles also cross the I-15 border between California and Nevada daily. If you have traveled along that busy stretch of road, you know the kind of traffic nightmares that you might encounter.

In fact, I recently spoke with an airline pilot who frequently makes the short flight between Los Angeles and Las Vegas, and he remarked that you can't get lost. All you have to do is follow the red brake lights on I-15 all the way to McCarran.

We can and we must do better; but this isn't just about Las Vegas. Cities like Phoenix, Arizona; Nashville, Tennessee; Columbus, Ohio; Louisville, Kentucky; and Boise, Idaho, don't have passenger rail service either.

In addition, there is no direct rail service between major metropolitan areas like Houston and Dallas, Atlanta and Orlando, and Kansas City and Oklahoma City. I believe that expanding rail service to unserved communities like those in southern Nevada should be a priority, but, unfortunately, this legislation before us does not really get us there.

At the end of April, I organized a roundtable back in my district to discuss the need to restore passenger service to Las Vegas, and I was really surprised by the high level of interest from local stakeholders.

We had participants from our State and local transportation authorities, the gaming and hotel industries, the chamber of commerce, labor unions and economic development organizations, all in agreement that southern Nevada should have passenger rail service as part of our long-term economic viability plans. This type of development is a regional and should be a national priority.

Now, a lot of attention has been paid to the Northeast corridor, where travelers frequent Amtrak service along the East Coast, but we should not forget that it was the railroad that built the West and still, today, remains a critical piece of our transportation network.

China is investing $128 million in rail in 2015 alone and India, $137 billion over the next 5 years; yet we are investing only $1.1 billion.

Mr. Chairman, since this amendment really has no monetary impact, I would respectfully ask that you accept it. It is my hope that we recognize this mode of transportation that is so tied to our Nation's history and that we can continue to work together to see that it gets the attention and support that it deserves.

Thank you very much for your time and your consideration. I hope that, together, we can work to be sure that passenger rail service is expanded throughout the country and especially in the Southwest.

I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Titus).

The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Brooks of Alabama

Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

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

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama.

Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, America recently suffered four straight trillion dollar deficits. In the past few months, America's debt blew through the $18 trillion mark.

America pays over $200 billion per year in debt service, which is more than four times what the Federal Government spends on highways, bridges, and interstates each year. America's Comptroller General warns that America's deficits and debt paths are unsustainable.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office warns that our debt service cost is on a path to increase by another $600 billion within a decade, to more than $800 billion per year. That is more than America spends each year on national defense. The CBO also warns that, within a decade, if current trends continue, America will face yearly trillion dollar deficits in perpetuity.

Per then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen's testimony before the House Armed Services Committee, debt is America's

``greatest threat to our national security.''

As a result of America's debt, in a few short years, America's uniformed military personnel numbers will be our smallest since before World War II, America's Navy will have the smallest number of operational naval vessels since World War I, and America's Air Force will have its smallest number of operational aircraft in its history. Debt, not our enemies, is slowly but surely stripping America of its ability to defend itself.

In sum, Washington's financial irresponsibility, this House of Representatives' financial irresponsibility, is pushing America into a debilitating insolvency and bankruptcy that will destroy the American Dream for our children and grandchildren.

It is in this setting that I beseech this House of Representatives to be financially responsible by supporting my amendment that eliminates Federal Government operating subsidies of Amtrak, thus forcing Amtrak to operate in the black.

How bad is the Amtrak subsidy problem? The Congressional Research Service reports that, from 1971 to 2015, Federal Amtrak subsidies totaled $78 billion in constant 2015 dollars. In fiscal year 2014, Amtrak had a net loss of $1.1 billion. Who paid for that loss? America's children and grandchildren, that is who.

How so? It is because America does not have the money and had to borrow every penny of that $1.1 billion, thus burdening Americans for generations to come.

Mr. Chairman, a business that relies on subsidies and tax dollars to cover losses has little incentive to operate efficiently or effectively or, for that matter, as safely as it should.

It is appalling that the Federal Government undermines and threatens the future of America's children and grandchildren in order to subsidize Amtrak passenger service that would be self-sufficient if Amtrak riders stopped mooching off of hard-working American taxpayers and, instead, simply paid for the actual cost of their rides.

Amtrak supporters often claim that Amtrak will go out of business if it is not subsidized by American taxpayers. That is bunk unsupported by facts.

This same ``woe is me'' argument was made about freight train subsidies; yet, when freight rail subsidies ended and freight rail was sold to private investors in the 1980s, freight rail did not go out of business and still operates today.

Similarly, the Federal Government does not operate or subsidize national airlines or national bus services; yet airlines and buses operate profitably in the private sector, despite Federal Government subsidies for Amtrak, their competitor.

Just as airlines, bus services, and freight rail operate without government subsidies, Amtrak will do the same if this House of Representatives has the courage to wean Amtrak from the taxpayer nipple.

Mr. Chairman, after more than 40 years, it is time to stop the runaway Amtrak train. It is time to force Amtrak riders to pay their own way by ending their subsidized rides on the backs of American taxpayers.

I urge adoption of my amendment to do just that.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I seek time in opposition.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment which, purely and simply, would end intercity passenger rail for our Nation.

I remind colleagues, there is not a single mode of transportation in this country that is not subsidized, contrary to what we have just heard.

To make the case further, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Brown), a distinguished member of the authorizing committee.

Ms. BROWN of Florida. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Chairman, when I was coming up, I used to like this television show, ``Robin Hood.'' My colleagues practice what I call reverse Robin Hood, robbing from the working people and the poor people and the transit people to give tax breaks to the rich.

Just a few weeks ago, the House Republicans passed a bill cutting taxes by $269 billion--I guess that didn't affect the deficit--for their wealthiest friends, but can't find the $2 billion that we need for Amtrak--shameful.

The funding cuts proposed in this amendment would simply force Amtrak to shut down, strand millions of rail passengers, disrupt commuter operations, add to our already congested roads and airports, eliminate over 20,000 jobs nationwide, and jeopardize local economies and businesses that depend on Amtrak's service.

Amtrak provides the majority of all intercity passenger rail service in the United States, with more States and localities across America turning to passenger rail to meet the transportation needs of our citizens.

Amtrak has done an excellent job, based on the fact that 9/11, when we were attacked, Amtrak was the only means that you could move away.

When we had Hurricane Katrina, Amtrak is the only way that we could move people out of harm's way by evacuating and delivering food and water and supplies.

Amtrak has made significant improvement in its system over the last several years, has steady increase in ridership numbers, played a vital role in disaster recovery, and has an ambitious agenda for future growth.

I encourage all Members to vote against this ill-willed and ill-

thought-out amendment.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I would respond that there is no factual basis for the gentlewoman's comments that have just been made.

Socialism does not work. We need to get Amtrak passengers off the backs of all taxpayers, including those that are poor, that can't afford the taxes that they are already having to pay to benefit those Amtrak riders. Let's set them free.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield to my colleague from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah).

Mr. FATTAH. Let me thank the ranking member.

The fact of the matter is, notwithstanding what was offered to the House as the picture of America, we actually live in the greatest country in the world. We have the strongest economy. We are the wealthiest country. There is no country, based on the IMF, that would want to trade our position vis-a-vis debt-to-wealth ratio.

I hear the gentleman saying, Woe is America, and we can't afford to subsidize rail. I think the ranking member makes it clear that there is no form of transportation that is not subsidized.

I heard this utterance that we don't subsidize airplane travel. This is nonsensical. Just the facts of this bill itself outline some of our country's subsidies for our airline industry.

{time} 2215

But I want to talk about Amtrak.

When it is said that there is a $1 billion subsidy and that somehow we can't afford that from last year, I want to remind this House that for each and every month we have been in Afghanistan, we have been spending $2 billion a week for well over a decade, as a Nation. The idea that we can't afford to have a first-rate passenger rail system defies logic. It is just a matter of political will.

We need to make a decision about America's place in the world, and our economy is dependent on our ability to transport not just freight but human beings, and Amtrak is critical to that.

I thank the gentleman from North Carolina for yielding me time.

I hope this House will reconsider this thrust of the majority to move away from passenger rail. I heard some talk from the gentleman that we have got to stop this runaway train, but we tried to stop a train in Philadelphia, and if we had made the investments, there would be people who would be alive today.

We need to make these investments, and we need to move our country forward. It is not about political philosophy. It is about practicality.

Our economic competitors are subsidizing rail. And if we want to make our economy work, we are going to have to make Amtrak work. And we can do that through some of the efforts on this bill today.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I thank the gentleman for his wise words and join him in wholeheartedly opposing this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Brooks).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.

Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Alabama will be postponed.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

capital and debt service grants to the national railroad passenger corporation

To enable the Secretary of Transportation to make grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation for capital investments as authorized by sections 101(c), 102, and 219(b) of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008

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

amendment offered by ms. brown of florida

Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 47, line 11, after the dollar amount insert

``(increased by $861,500,000)''.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentlewoman's amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.

Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentlewoman from Florida and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.

Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, my amendment increases capital grants to Amtrak by $861 million. This will bring the total funding for Amtrak in the bill to $2 billion, equal to Amtrak's fiscal year 2016 budget request to Congress.

This bill, as if it wasn't bad enough, cut $290 million from Amtrak's capital program, which is used to repair and replace aging infrastructure on the Northeast corridor, including 140-year-old bridges and tunnels, and implement positive train control, a system that, according to the National Transportation Safety Board, would have prevented the recent Amtrak derailment in Philadelphia.

According to the April 2015 report to Congress, ``At the current rate of available funding, it would take over 300 years to replace all of the bridges on the Northeast corridor, well beyond the timeframe in which assets would simply be shut down.''

The list of critical needs extends far beyond just bridges and tunnels. Major portions of Amtrak's electrical power supply system date back to 1930.

According to the commission, in total, $21.1 billion is needed to achieve a state of good repair on the corridor, $8.7 billion of which is needed to address critical infrastructure needs over the next 5 years.

We cannot point to the recent Amtrak derailment and say that it was directly caused by a lack of investment. That is true. But we do know from the NTSB that it was preventable had positive train control been installed on that section of track.

Amtrak included $36.4 million in their $2 billion fiscal year 2016 budget request to Congress. Amtrak testified at a hearing in the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee yesterday that had they been provided adequate funding from the get-go, they would have been able to implement positive train control sooner.

The impact of this tragic accident could also have been lessened had the Republican-controlled Congress not denied Amtrak's request for funding to replace passenger cars that date back to 1975 with newer cars.

At this time, I yield to the gentleman from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah).

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment.

I think it is critically important that we understand that the President requested an increase in capital allotments for Amtrak. Not only was that not honored, but we actually went with the wisdom of the majority: we actually cut last year's number by over $250-plus million.

This is a move in the wrong direction for our country, and I hope that through the gentlewoman's amendment, we can reverse that. So I stand in support of it, and I hope that the majority would allow us to proceed to a vote.

Ms. BROWN of Florida. I reserve the balance of my time.

point of order

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill.

The amendment is not in order under section 3(d)(3) of House Resolution 5 of the 114th Congress, which states the following:

``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''

The amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill in violation of such section.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order?

Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I wish to be heard on the point of order.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Florida is recognized.

Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, just a few short weeks ago, House Republicans passed a bill cutting taxes by $269 billion for their wealthiest friends, yet we can't find $2 billion for Amtrak to make it safe?

My friend from Florida, this is unacceptable; shame.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman needs to confine her remarks to the point of order.

Ms. BROWN of Florida. I thought I was speaking to the point of order, sir.

That is my point. We cut $269 billion, and we can't find $2 billion to make Amtrak safe? That is the point.

The Acting CHAIR. The Chair is prepared to rule.

The gentleman from Florida makes a point of order that the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Florida violates section 3(d)(3) of House Resolution 5.

Section 3(d)(3) establishes a point of order against an amendment proposing a net increase in budgetary authority in the pending bill.

As persuasively asserted by the gentleman from Florida, the amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill. Therefore, the point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.

amendment offered by mr. brooks of alabama

Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

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

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama.

Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, my first amendment, Brooks No. 19, strikes $288.5 million in operating subsidies for Amtrak. This second amendment, which is Brooks No. 21, strikes capital and debt service subsidies that total $850 million per year to get to the point where we can strike all taxpayer subsidies for Amtrak.

I would rely on the arguments previously made with respect to my first amendment to support this second amendment.

I would add, however, that I have heard some comments about the safety associated with Amtrak. I would emphasize at this point that if you want safety with rail service, probably the best thing to do is to put it in the private sector and eliminate Amtrak altogether.

Look at airlines, air carriers; they are private sector and are much safer than Amtrak. Look at buses; they are private sector and are safer than Amtrak. And I would submit that if lives are what concern the opponents to these amendments that they would propose putting Amtrak into private hands in order to have the same kind of safety record that we have with buses, air carriers, and other modes of private transportation.

Mr. Chairman, at this point, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I very strongly oppose this amendment which, like the gentleman's previous amendment, would essentially end passenger rail service in this country. It is just that drastic. It is also targeting passenger rail in a way that obscures the fact that every mode of transportation in this country is subsidized. It is in the public interest to maintain diverse modes of transportation that serve our various transportation needs and our various population centers.

Amtrak provides an invaluable service to this country: 500 destinations in 46 States, connecting small communities that don't have access to air service.

Amtrak is popular with the American people. It is increasingly being taken advantage of. In the last 11 years, 10 consecutive years of record ridership, serving nearly 32 million passengers last year.

Without Amtrak's service in the Northeast corridor, where would we be? There would be virtual gridlock in New York's airports, but it is not just the Northeast corridor. I come from a State that had the insight years ago to invest in State Amtrak service, and now Amtrak is the preferred mode of transportation for thousands of people between Raleigh and Charlotte, with three full routes a day in each direction.

This is an irresponsible amendment. It will eliminate thousands of jobs. It will harm local economies. And it will violate labor agreements. There is so much wrong with this.

I urge its rejection and yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BROOKS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, I would submit that the argument that this would end rail service is absolutely false and is not supported by history. Nothing in history supports the gentleman's argument. However well-intentioned, the evidence is clear.

Freight rail, the same kind of argument was made. Subsidies were ended. It went into the private sector. It survives and thrives today.

There is an argument that buses and air carriers are somehow or another subsidized. I would submit that what we are talking about, there are user fees and there are gasoline taxes and diesel taxes that pay for those roads that buses use, and there are air passenger charges that pay for the cost of those airports that air carriers use.

So with that as a backdrop, I would submit that it is time for Amtrak passengers to pay their own way. It is time for Amtrak passengers to quit riding on the backs of other taxpayers. They have the ability to pay their own way. The rest of the country is expected to pay their own way when they travel. As such, I would ask this body to adopt my amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Brooks).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Alabama will be postponed.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

administrative provisions--federal railroad administration

Sec. 150. The Secretary of Transportation may receive and expend cash, or receive and utilize spare parts and similar items, from non-United States Government sources to repair damages to or replace United States Government owned automated track inspection cars and equipment as a result of third-party liability for such damages, and any amounts collected under this section shall be credited directly to the Safety and Operations account of the Federal Railroad Administration, and shall remain available until expended for the repair, operation and maintenance of automated track inspection cars and equipment in connection with the automated track inspection program.

Sec. 151. None of the funds provided to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation may be used to fund any overtime costs in excess of $35,000 for any individual employee: Provided, That the President of Amtrak may waive the cap set in the previous proviso for specific employees when the President of Amtrak determines such a cap poses a risk to the safety and operational efficiency of the system: Provided further, That Amtrak shall report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations each quarter of the calendar year on waivers granted to employees and amounts paid above the cap for each month within such quarter and delineate the reasons each waiver was granted: Provided further, That the President of Amtrak shall report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by March 1, 2016, a summary of all overtime payments incurred by the Corporation for 2015 and the three prior calendar years: Provided further, That such summary shall include the total number of employees that received waivers and the total overtime payments the Corporation paid to those employees receiving waivers for each month for 2015 and for the three prior calendar years.

Federal Transit Administration

administrative expenses

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

{time} 2230

Amendment Offered by Mr. Langevin

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 50, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert

``(decreased by $2,000,000)''.

Page 52, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $2,000,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Rhode Island.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, the amendment I am offering today with my good friends Congressmen Quigley and Butterfield will return funding for FTA Technical Assistance and Training back to its 2014 level. Older adults and individuals with disabilities disproportionately rely on public transit to live, learn, get to work and access recreation in their communities. The Technical Assistance and Training dollars made available by this amendment will help increase mobility for people with disabilities and older adults. By providing this assistance to our transit systems and services, we can ensure that they become more accessible for those who rely on them the most.

Mr. Chairman, FTA has a long history of working with Easter Seals, the National Association of Area Agencies on Aging, and others to provide training, technical assistance, and other problem-solving support to the transit industry, people with disabilities, and older adults; and it is imperative that this work continue as more people age and more people with disabilities seek to live as independently as possible.

Now, in order to realize this goal, FTA needs adequate resources to support these technical assistance activities. To that end, my amendment will increase funding by $2 million for FTA Technical Assistance and Training and reduce, by an equivalent amount, funding for FTA administrative expenses.

Mr. Chairman, the House adopted this exact amendment last year to restore FTA Technical Assistance and Training to $5 million. Unfortunately, it was cut to $3 million in this bill. My amendment will simply restore the funds back to the fiscal year '15 House-adopted level of $5 million.

With that, Mr. Chairman, I ask that my colleagues support this amendment, which will provide a world of benefit to all those that it serves.

I thank my colleagues today for their consideration.

Again, I urge passage of the amendment, and with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).

The amendment was agreed to.

The Clerk will read.

Clerk read as follows:

transit formula grants

(liquidation of contract authorization)

(limitation on obligations)

(highway trust fund)

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

transit research

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

$26,000,000.

technical assistance and training

For necessary expenses to carry out 49 U.S.C. 5314

$3,000,000.

capital investment grants

For necessary expenses to carry out 49 U.S.C. 5309,

$1,921,395,000, to remain available until expended.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Grothman

Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 52, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $230,000,000)''.

Page 156, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $230,000,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, as you know, we are very in debt in this country. This budget is on path to balance the budget eventually years down the road, but, really, we should be looking to cut spending right now.

You look at things the Federal Government is paying for that should be done locally, and one of those things is these new capital improvements on mass transit projects. I think normally these things do not get the ridership that justifies these projects, and we would not be doing these projects, local governments would not be applying for these projects or building these projects if they had to pay their money themselves. The only reason these things go ahead is the Federal Government is paying for them, and the Federal Government has no money.

Mr. Chairman, this proposal will bring back down the funding on this line to what the Appropriations Committee wanted only 2 years ago, and for whatever reason, apparently in negotiations, this amount went up last year. But I don't think it is too much to ask that this House not zero out this line--and we could argue that we shouldn't be doing this at all--but at least go back to the levels of 2013, especially given the huge amount of debt that is being piled up at this time.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, the committee carefully calculated the New Start number to be able to accommodate the signed FFGAs and Small Starts Grant Agreements at the beginning of the fiscal year.

Again, as I submitted before, I am a firm believer that once you sign a grant agreement, then we should, frankly, honor that. This reduction would impact those signed agreements, and I reluctantly oppose the gentleman's amendment. I know the passion that he has for this, but I again have to reluctantly oppose the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), the ranking member.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the chairman's yielding. I would like to echo his opposition to this amendment.

I have just retrieved here a list of New Start projects that, under the present funding levels of the bill, probably aren't going to be able to be addressed. We are talking about the Westside project in Los Angeles. We are talking about San Diego, Denver, Baltimore, the Washington, D.C. area, the Maryland National Capital Purple Line, Minneapolis, Fort Worth. These are ready to go. These are ready to go with strong support in their communities, a strong impact on moving people and providing jobs. It is just unthinkable that we would cut this further.

Transit is an extremely important mode of transportation in many of our cities and suburban areas too, and the bill is inadequate. We need to find ways to make it more adequate going forward.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment would move exactly in the wrong direction, so I urge its defeat.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, it is all fine and good to move forward, but we are going to borrow about 14 percent of this budget, and we have got to stop saying whenever we see a spending item it is time to move forward. I think what we have to do here is--I can certainly understand if we made commitments today, I can understand how people of goodwill would not want this amendment. But if this amendment doesn't pass, then I think we have to make doubly certain that a year from now we have a dramatic reduction here.

If there are any of these projects that are that important, the local unit of government can fund it. There is no surer way to overspend than have the Federal Government give grants to local units of government that they would never dream of spending themselves.

That is what is going on here, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman).

The amendment was rejected.

The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

grants to the washington metropolitan area transit authority

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

Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Mica

Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

The text of the amendment is as follows:

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

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. MICA. My colleagues, at this late hour, this is a simple amendment. It strikes a waiver that was granted to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, and it is a waiver that has been in place for several years. It waives the requirements for them to complete installation of cellular service in the tunnels of the Metro system in Washington, D.C. That waiver allows them to continue to receive Federal funds but not have made the installation.

It is funny because congressional staffers said: Well, Mr. Mica, why are you doing this? I am doing this because, as the chairman of a subcommittee on transportation oversight, I had to conduct a hearing after the January 12 deadly incident in the Washington area Metro. You may recall at L'Enfant Plaza, on the Yellow Line, there was an incident in which smoke filled the tunnel. A passenger train was left outside of the station.

I might say that, back in 2008, we set up a requirement that we have at the stations, within 1 year, Metro cellular service, and then by 4 years later, the entire system. So they were given from 2008 to 2012 to complete the system. They never completed the system. One individual died, others were injured, and we disrupted service. It was a day from hell in Washington, D.C.

Mr. Chairman, they never completed the job. They said they were going to complete the job right after 2012. They did not complete the job. They said it would be done in 2015. The last time I checked, it is 2015. It won't be done in 2015. They will not even sit down with the carriers who will install this equipment, and it is really at no cost to Metro.

I have talked to Mr. Connolly, the gentleman from Virginia; I have talked to Mrs. Comstock, the gentlewoman from Virginia; I have talked to Mr. Hoyer, the gentleman from Maryland; and others. We have all had it with Metro not complying with us.

This waiver was put in to give them the opportunity to comply, and they haven't complied. Now it is in here again, and I am offering, in this amendment, to take it out.

I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida

(Mr. Diaz-Balart), the chairman, for comment.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. I want to thank the gentleman for yielding to me.

Mr. Chairman, when the gentleman from Florida is talking about this issue, I think all of us should be very, very concerned. I will tell you I think that the gentleman from Florida has been beyond reasonable, has tried to get folks to do what they were, again, supposed to do, and they have not done it.

So I just want to let the gentleman from Florida know that I am looking forward, and I am committed to making sure that this issue is solved one way or another. I am hoping that it is solved in a nice, positive way. But otherwise, I want to let the gentleman from Florida know that I will be working with him to make sure that we hold folks accountable.

Mr. MICA. Again, Mr. Chairman, I am willing to work with everyone. Again, I have had to conduct oversight over a tragedy that could have and should have been prevented.

Here is the latest headline: ``Can You Hear Me Now? In Metro Tunnels, Answer Is `Not Yet.'''

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly).

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend.

Mr. Chairman, I sympathize deeply with the concerns expressed by my friend and colleague from Florida (Mr. Mica), and I know Metro is committed to working with the wireless carriers to ensure seamless coverage throughout the rail system. I appreciate his willingness ultimately to withdraw the amendment so as not to jeopardize other vital safety improvements underway at Metro by conditioning the Federal commitment, which has already been reduced and which is matched by our State and local partners, on completion of this wireless upgrade.

Without question, the January arcing incident at L'Enfant Plaza underscored the urgent need for having working communications in Metro's underground stations and tunnels. While faulty electrical wiring was to blame for the fire and hazardous smoke, a breakdown in communications, as Mr. Mica has indicated, led to passengers being stranded in dangerous conditions aboard that Yellow Line train for an extended period of time. It wasn't just public safety personnel who experienced problems communicating. Stranded riders also reported having spotty or no cellular service in the tunnel.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly), our colleague, so he can complete his statement.

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from North Carolina, the distinguished ranking member.

Tragically, one rider--Carol Glover of Virginia, my home State--died as a result of smoke inhalation, and dozens of others required medical treatment and/or hospitalization.

{time} 2245

This was, and remains, an unacceptable situation, and I and all of the members of the national capital region delegation are committed to working with the NSTB, FTA, Metro, and our regional partners to ensure corrective actions are taken to restore public confidence.

I would note for my colleagues, the current Federal law already includes language requiring Metro riders to have underground access to wireless telecommunications services if the service providers work with Metro to install such services. Unfortunately, they have lagged behind again, as my friend from Florida has indicated.

Congress approved that requirement as part of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008. One year later, as required by the law, the wireless providers did successfully establish service in the 20 busiest underground rail stations. However, Congress has granted an extension on the timeline to install wireless service to the tunnels and the rest of the system because Metro and the wireless providers have run into delays with scheduling work while Metro trains are not running, performing higher priority safety improvements as directed by the NTSB, and other factors. However, they continue to work toward meeting this requirement, albeit at a very slow and glacial pace.

Metro is particularly motivated to complete this work as it also involves a parallel upgrade of its own underground radio communications services. Metro is an essential component of this region's transportation network, moving hundreds of thousands of commuters every day, including a significant portion of Federal employees. It also serves as America's subway, transporting 12 million visitors from across the country to the Nation's Capital each year.

It is critical that we maintain this bipartisan commitment to match local and State funding so that Metro can continue working with the NTSB and FTA on its critical safety upgrades.

Mr. Mica is right, and all of us from the national capital region agree with him. I pledge upon withdrawal of this amendment we will work with Mr. Mica to ensure that Metro meets deadlines at a much more expeditious pace than has been the case in the past.

Again, I thank my friend from North Carolina for yielding, and I thank Mr. Mica for his leadership.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MICA. Will the gentleman from North Carolina yield?

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I just want to conclude. I want to thank Mr. Connolly. I want to thank Mrs. Comstock, and the chairman particularly, for working on this.

I think we have gotten the attention of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. We have an agreement to bring the parties together as a result of this pending amendment. That is set. If it does not go through, I can assure you we will find a way to put this waiver in.

At this time, though, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment. I will bring the parties together and hopefully common sense and good faith will prevail.

The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Florida?

There was no objection.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Connolly

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 52, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $50,000,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chair.

I rise to offer an amendment with my colleagues in the national capital region that would restore full funding of the Federal commitment for vital rider safety improvements to ``America's Subway,'' the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, or Metro.

Let me remind my colleagues, this is not like the traditional transit or capital funding under the Department of Transportation. The Passenger Rail Investment Improvement Act of 2008 specifically authorized a $150 million annual Federal commitment for 10 years, and Congress has worked in bipartisan fashion the past 6 years to fulfill that. It was a Republican initiative initiated and authored by my predecessor, Republican member Tom Davis of Virginia.

As required by law, the Federal funding is matched dollar for dollar, with $150 million coming from Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia.

I appreciate the efforts of my fellow Virginian, Mr. Rigell, and the subcommittee chairman, my friend, Mr. Diaz-Balart, to try to work with us to restore some of the funding at full committee markup. But reducing any of this funding would renege on the Federal commitment and jeopardize the successful local-State-Federal partnership we have worked so hard to create.

It would also open the door for our partners to pull back on their commitments commensurately, which would only exacerbate Metro's challenge in upgrading its aging infrastructure.

This partnership is funding critical safety improvements throughout the system identified by Metro itself, the National Transportation Safety Board, and the Federal Transit Administration following the tragic 2009 Red Line accident and the recent tragedy on the Yellow Line this past January. The most visible improvement is the purchase of 7000-series new rail cars with advanced crash-resilient technology and extra capacity to replace the oldest and original cars in the fleet.

Congress and the Federal Government have a responsibility in the operation and safety of Metro. Half of all Metro stations are located on Federal property, and approximately 40 percent of rush-hour riders on Metro are, in fact, Federal employees, including many Members of Congress and their staffs.

It is critical we maintain this bipartisan commitment to match local and State funding so that Metro can continue making these safety upgrades.

I want to thank Mr. Hoyer, Ms. Norton, Mr. Van Hollen, Ms. Edwards, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Delaney, Mr. Beyer, and my friend Mrs. Comstock for working with us on this regional priority.

I now yield the balance of my time to the distinguished delegate from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friend for yielding and as a cosponsor of this amendment, which has profound safety implications for America's subway. I think it is so urgent that a member of the Appropriations Committee has already restored $25 million.

This was a partnership, a partnership between the Federal Government and Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia. It became real after there was a crash that took the lives of nine District of Columbia residents in 2009.

This is a unique transit agency. This is where staff of this body, this is where visitors from all over the world ride. If this funding is delayed, it will delay the crashworthy 7000-series trains. It is in trains that were not crashworthy that we lost lives. We beg that this funding be restored.

The District, Maryland, and Virginia are each fulfilling their part of the partnership. It is up to the Federal Government to do our part and fulfill our part. Don't break the partnership open now.

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, and I continue to reserve my point of order.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from Virginia (Mrs. Comstock), who, obviously, is very passionate about this issue.

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I rise as a cosponsor of the amendment in support of the amendment.

=========================== NOTE ===========================

June 3, 2015, on page H3854, the following appeared: Ms. COMSTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I

The online version should be corrected to read: Mrs. COMSTOCK. Mr. Chairman, I

========================= END NOTE =========================

Mr. Chairman, as been pointed out by my colleagues, Congress did make a 10-year statutory commitment as a Federal partner, a 50-50 partner, to provide capital grant money to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. This funding has been used for vital capital and safety improvements on the Metro system that so many of our constituents and our staff and tourists, people from all over the world, travel on every day.

As part of that agreement, matching grant money from the Commonwealth of Virginia, the District of Columbia, and the State of Maryland have all supplemented this in a full 50-50 match. This is truly a good partnership that has worked well since the bill was passed in 2008, and we should continue to fulfill that commitment.

This amendment would restore the already obligated funding to the bill and keep the promise that we have already made. Metro needs these important funds for capital improvements that will address important safety concerns.

I appreciate the opportunity to join my colleagues in the national capital area in support of this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Point of Order

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I insist on my point of order.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman will state his point of order.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill.

The amendment is not in order under section 3(d)(3) of House Resolution 5, 114th Congress, which states the following:

``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.

Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill in violation of such section.

I respectfully ask for a ruling from the Chair.

The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order?

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the invocation of the point of order.

This is a provision that has been in law for the past 6 years, and I believe that it ought to be enshrined in law for a 7th. We represent the entire National Capital Region. This is a unique region. This is the Nation's Capital. And we ought not to be reneging on a deal that was worked out with great effort 6 years ago based on a point of order.

With that, I oppose the point of order, Mr. Chairman.

The Acting CHAIR. The Chair is prepared to rule.

The gentleman from Florida makes a point of order that the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia violates section 3(d)(3) of House Resolution 5.

Section 3(d)(3) establishes a point of order against an amendment proposing a net increase in budget authority in the pending bill.

As persuasively asserted by the gentleman from Florida, the amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill. Therefore, the point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

administrative provisions--federal transit administration

Sec. 160. The limitations on obligations for the programs of the Federal Transit Administration shall not apply to any authority under 49 U.S.C. 5338, previously made available for obligation, or to any other authority previously made available for obligation.

Sec. 161. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, funds appropriated or limited by this Act under the heading Fixed Guideway Capital Investment of the Federal Transit Administration for projects specified in this Act or identified in reports accompanying this Act not obligated by September 30, 2020, and other recoveries, shall be directed to projects eligible to use the funds for the purposes for which they were originally provided.

Sec. 162. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any funds appropriated before October 1, 2015, under any section of chapter 53 of title 49, United States Code, that remain available for expenditure, may be transferred to and administered under the most recent appropriation heading for any such section.

Sec. 163. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none of the funds made available in this Act shall be used to enter into a full funding grant agreement for a project with a New Starts share greater than 50 percent.

Sec. 164. (a) Loss of Eligibility.--Except as provided in subsection (b), none of the funds in this or any other Act may be available to advance in any way a new light or heavy rail project towards a full funding grant agreement as defined by 49 U.S.C. 5309 for the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas if the proposed capital project is constructed on or planned to be constructed on Richmond Avenue west of South Shepherd Drive or on Post Oak Boulevard north of Richmond Avenue in Houston, Texas.

(b) Exception for a New Election.--The Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas, may attempt to construct or construct a new fixed guideway capital project, including light rail, in the locations referred to in subsection (a) if--

(1) voters in the jurisdiction that includes such locations approve a ballot proposition that specifies routes on Richmond Avenue west of South Shepherd Drive or on Post Oak Boulevard north of Richmond Avenue in Houston, Texas; and

(2) the proposed construction of such routes is part of a comprehensive, multi-modal, service-area wide transportation plan that includes multiple additional segments of fixed guideway capital projects, including light rail for the jurisdiction set forth in the ballot proposition. The ballot language shall include reasonable cost estimates, sources of revenue to be used and the total amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred as well as a description of each route and the beginning and end point of each proposed transit project.

Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation

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

operations and maintenance

(harbor maintenance trust fund)

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

Maritime Administration

maritime security program

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

operations and training

For necessary expenses of operations and training activities authorized by law, $164,158,000, of which

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

ship disposal

For necessary expenses related to the disposal of obsolete vessels in the National Defense Reserve Fleet of the Maritime Administration, $4,000,000, to remain available until expended. maritime guaranteed loan (title xi) program account

(including transfer of funds)

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

administrative provisions--maritime administration

Sec. 170. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, in addition to any existing authority, the Maritime Administration is authorized to furnish utilities and services and make necessary repairs in connection with any lease, contract, or occupancy involving Government property under control of the Maritime Administration: Provided, That payments received therefor shall be credited to the appropriation charged with the cost thereof and shall remain available until expended: Provided further, That rental payments under any such lease, contract, or occupancy for items other than such utilities, services, or repairs shall be covered into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts.

Sec. 171. None of the funds available or appropriated in this Act shall be used by the United States Department of Transportation or the United States Maritime Administration to negotiate or otherwise execute, enter into, facilitate or perform fee-for-service contracts for vessel disposal, scrapping or recycling, unless there is no qualified domestic ship recycler that will pay any sum of money to purchase and scrap or recycle a vessel owned, operated or managed by the Maritime Administration or that is part of the National Defense Reserve Fleet: Provided, That such sales offers must be consistent with the solicitation and provide that the work will be performed in a timely manner at a facility qualified within the meaning of section 3502 of Public Law 106-398: Provided further, That nothing contained herein shall affect the Maritime Administration's authority to award contracts at least cost to the Federal Government and consistent with the requirements of 54 U.S.C. 308704, section 3502, or otherwise authorized under the Federal Acquisition Regulation.

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

operational expenses

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

hazardous materials safety

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

pipeline safety

(pipeline safety fund)

(oil spill liability trust fund)

For expenses necessary to conduct the functions of the pipeline safety program, for grants-in-aid to carry out a pipeline safety program, as authorized by 49 U.S.C. 60107, and to discharge the pipeline program responsibilities of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, $145,870,000, of which $19,500,000 shall be derived from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund and shall remain available until September 30, 2018; and of which

$124,500,000 shall be derived from the Pipeline Safety Fund, of which $66,309,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2018: Provided, That not less than $1,000,000 of the funds provided under this heading shall be for the One-Call state grant program.

{time} 2300

Amendment Offered by Mrs. Capps

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 61, line 22, strike the period at the end insert the following: ``: Provided further, That not less than

$1,000,000 of the funds provided under this heading shall be for the finalization and implementation of rules required under section 60102(n) of title 49, United States Code, and section 8(b)(3) of the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011 (49 U.S.C. 60108 note; 125 Stat. 1911).''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment that will take a modest step forward to improve pipeline safety. This issue is of particular importance to me and to my constituents.

Two weeks ago, more than 100,000 gallons of crude oil spilled from the ruptured Plains All American Pipeline along the treasured Gaviota Coast, in my district, just north of Santa Barbara. The oil quickly flowed under the highway, onto the beach, and into the ocean where the oil slick spread south for miles along the coastline, affecting pristine environmental habitats, recreational interests, and commercial fishing operations.

While the exact causes of this spill are still being investigated, it is already clear that woefully inadequate Federal pipeline safety standards played a significant role, but it didn't have to be this way.

In 2011, the House worked in a bipartisan way to pass the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act. This law, which passed the House unanimously, directed the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, or PHMSA, to update and strengthen key pipeline safety standards.

The law called on PHMSA to issue a rule requiring automatic shutoff valves on new pipelines and to strengthen requirements for the inclusion of leak detection technologies on pipelines.

The law required these rules to be finalized by January of last year; yet, here today, we are still waiting. PHMSA has not even issued a proposed rule on these commonsense regulations, which passed the House unanimously. PHMSA continues to drag its feet, and communities like mine continue to pay the price. It is time for PHMSA to follow the law and the bipartisan will of Congress.

My amendment is simple. It would set aside $1 million of PHMSA's own budget for the finalization and implementation of these overdue pipeline safety and spill mitigation rules.

My amendment would simply help ensure that section 4 and section 8 of the bipartisan 2011 pipeline safety law are finally implemented so that our Federal regulations are in line with today's reality.

My amendment does not cost a dime, and it does not authorize any new programs. Section 4 requires new pipelines to install automatic shutoff valves, and section 8 requires pipeline operators to use the latest leak detection technologies. Both of these provisions were enacted unanimously by this House in 2011.

The pipeline that burst in my district did not have an automatic shutoff valve despite the fact that other comparable pipelines in the area do use this technology. An automatic shutoff valve would not have prevented the spill necessarily, but it certainly would have minimized it. It took over 2 hours for the pipeline operator to even identify where the pipeline had ruptured, let alone to actually stop the flow of crude oil.

That is unacceptable. If the standards required under section 4 and section 8 had been required of the Plains pipeline in my district, the spill likely would have been much less severe. My amendment would take a small, yet important step forward to address these troubling issues by pushing PHMSA to get its act together and finalize these rules.

Mr. Chairman, oil and gas development, by its nature, is a dangerous and dirty business. The mere fact that the Plains and other companies have oil spill contingency funds shows that there is no such thing as a safe pipeline. Spills do happen, and they will continue to happen as long as we depend on fossil fuels for our energy needs. We have a responsibility, therefore, to do all we can to make these pipelines as safe as possible.

Congress has repeatedly directed PHMSA to strengthen its standards; yet this agency has done little. My amendment would help hold their feet to the fire and get commonsense safety standards finalized and implemented. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).

The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mrs. Capps

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 61, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $27,604,000)''.

Page 61, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $27,604,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, it is no secret that Federal pipeline safety standards are in serious need of improvement. Despite repeated bipartisan efforts to strengthen these standards, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, PHMSA, has dragged its feet on implementing the new rules.

Not only has this agency failed to keep up with new statutory requirements, they struggle to even enforce the rules they already have on the books. There are several reasons for this, including rapid growth in the miles of new pipelines to inspect and the need to compete with the private sector for the best talent while using limited resources.

PHMSA's preliminary estimate of serious incidents on pipelines showed an increase in 2014; and, with the miles of pipelines only multiplying, these numbers will surely grow. That is why my amendment would increase funding for PHMSA's pipeline safety program by $27 million, to simply match the President's own fiscal year 2016 budget request. While this would not solve the multitude of problems facing the agency, it would certainly make a big difference in two key areas.

First, it would help PHMSA retain and recruit the best inspectors and staff. Last year, Congress provided funding for 100 additional full-

time employees to help PHMSA adjust to the increasing demand; and, as part of its fiscal year 2016 request, PHMSA requested $15 million to fully fund and annualize these employees. The current bill only provides enough funding for 1 year of salaries for these new employees.

How is the agency supposed to attract the best talent when they can't count on paying their new employees for more than a year at a time?

Second, my amendment would also provide requested funding for the national pipeline information exchange. This information exchange would be a comprehensive database of integrated pipeline safety information from PHMSA, from State regulators, industry, and other Federal resources.

Of the 2.6 million miles of pipeline in the United States, PHMSA inspects only 20 percent, while States monitor the remaining 80 percent. However, the information the States gather through inspections is neither shared among the States, nor with PHMSA. That is kind of unbelievable. It makes no sense. We should be doing everything we can to analyze and understand this data.

My amendment would fund this exchange to help regulators be more effective and to better protect communities like mine from future spills. There are currently pilot information exchange programs in 7 States, and the funding provided by my amendment would allow PHMSA to expand these information exchanges to 25 States.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment costs absolutely nothing from the American taxpayers, not one dime. The increased funding would come from a modest increase in user fees paid into the pipeline safety fund. These user fees are paid for by the oil companies that profit enormously from the oil and gas flowing through the pipelines that PHMSA oversees.

Oil companies are seeing record profits from a booming oil and gas development industry. This is leading to more miles of pipeline and more risks for local communities like mine. The least they can do is ensure that the Federal oversight of the industry is keeping pace with the growth because, when pipelines fail, it is our local communities and our constituents, not the oil companies, who suffer the most.

My amendment takes a small step forward to help strengthen the pipeline safety and oversight, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Will the gentlewoman yield?

Mrs. CAPPS. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. I commend my colleague for offering this amendment, and I want to offer my strong support.

Mr. Chairman, we are talking here about annualizing the funding--in other words, bringing these people on board permanently--for pipeline safety inspectors who were hired in fiscal year 2015. We are also talking about the better coordination of enforcement activities between Federal, State, and local officials.

I would like to remind my colleagues we have 2.6 million miles of pipeline across this country. I think the number is maybe 548 personnel in the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.

This is an enormous task. The gentlewoman's amendment would greatly improve our capacity to address this challenge, and I urge its adoption.

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. The authorization for this program expires this year, Mr. Chairman. Frankly, there are many questions, and it is not really clear whether or not the next authorization would accommodate this funding fee level. I understand the gentlewoman's passion, but I must respectfully urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, again, I urge the adoption of this amendment. I have a classic example of why it is needed, and I ask for your consideration.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes appeared to have it.

Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California will be postponed.

The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

emergency preparedness grants

(emergency preparedness fund)

For necessary expenses to carry out 49 U.S.C. 5128(b),

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

Office of Inspector General

salaries and expenses

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

Surface Transportation Board

salaries and expenses

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

General Provisions--Department of Transportation

Sec. 180. During the current fiscal year, applicable appropriations to the Department of Transportation shall be available for maintenance and operation of aircraft; hire of passenger motor vehicles and aircraft; purchase of liability insurance for motor vehicles operating in foreign countries on official department business; and uniforms or allowances therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-5902).

Sec. 181. Appropriations contained in this Act for the Department of Transportation shall be available for services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for individuals not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the rate for an Executive Level IV.

Sec. 182. None of the funds in this Act shall be available for salaries and expenses of more than 110 political and Presidential appointees in the Department of Transportation: Provided, That none of the personnel covered by this provision may be assigned on temporary detail outside the Department of Transportation.

Sec. 183. (a) No recipient of funds made available in this Act shall disseminate personal information (as defined in 18 U.S.C. 2725(3)) obtained by a State department of motor vehicles in connection with a motor vehicle record as defined in 18 U.S.C. 2725(1), except as provided in 18 U.S.C. 2721 for a use permitted under 18 U.S.C. 2721.

(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), the Secretary shall not withhold funds provided in this Act for any grantee if a State is in noncompliance with this provision.

Sec. 184. Funds received by the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and Federal Railroad Administration from States, counties, municipalities, other public authorities, and private sources for expenses incurred for training may be credited respectively to the Federal Highway Administration's

``Federal-Aid Highways'' account, the Federal Transit Administration's ``Technical Assistance and Training'' account, and to the Federal Railroad Administration's

``Safety and Operations'' account, except for State rail safety inspectors participating in training pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 20105.

Sec. 185. None of the funds in this Act to the Department of Transportation may be used to make a loan, loan guarantee, line of credit, or grant unless the Secretary of Transportation notifies the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not less than 3 full business days before any project competitively selected to receive a discretionary grant award, any discretionary grant award, letter of intent, loan commitment, loan guarantee commitment, line of credit commitment, or full funding grant agreement totaling $750,000 or more is announced by the department or its modal administrations from:

(1) any discretionary grant or federal credit program of the Federal Highway Administration including the emergency relief program;

(2) the airport improvement program of the Federal Aviation Administration;

(3) any program of the Federal Railroad Administration;

(4) any program of the Federal Transit Administration other than the formula grants and fixed guideway modernization programs;

(5) any program of the Maritime Administration; or

(6) any funding provided under the headings ``National Infrastructure Investments'' in this Act:

Provided, That the Secretary gives concurrent notification to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations for any

``quick release'' of funds from the emergency relief program: Provided further, That no notification shall involve funds that are not available for obligation.

Sec. 186. Rebates, refunds, incentive payments, minor fees and other funds received by the Department of Transportation from travel management centers, charge card programs, the subleasing of building space, and miscellaneous sources are to be credited to appropriations of the Department of Transportation and allocated to elements of the Department of Transportation using fair and equitable criteria and such funds shall be available until expended.

Sec. 187. Amounts made available in this or any other Act that the Secretary determines represent improper payments by the Department of Transportation to a third-party contractor under a financial assistance award, which are recovered pursuant to law, shall be available--

(1) to reimburse the actual expenses incurred by the Department of Transportation in recovering improper payments; and

(2) to pay contractors for services provided in recovering improper payments or contractor support in the implementation of the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002: Provided, That amounts in excess of that required for paragraphs (1) and (2)--

(A) shall be credited to and merged with the appropriation from which the improper payments were made, and shall be available for the purposes and period for which such appropriations are available: Provided further, That where specific project or accounting information associated with the improper payment or payments is not readily available, the Secretary may credit an appropriate account, which shall be available for the purposes and period associated with the account so credited; or

(B) if no such appropriation remains available, shall be deposited in the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts: Provided further, That prior to the transfer of any such recovery to an appropriations account, the Secretary shall notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations of the amount and reasons for such transfer: Provided further, That for purposes of this section, the term ``improper payments'' has the same meaning as that provided in section 2(d)(2) of Public Law 107-300.

Sec. 188. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if any funds provided in or limited by this Act are subject to a reprogramming action that requires notice to be provided to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, transmission of said reprogramming notice shall be provided solely to the Committees on Appropriations, and said reprogramming action shall be approved or denied solely by the Committees on Appropriations: Provided, That the Secretary may provide notice to other congressional committees of the action of the Committees on Appropriations on such reprogramming but not sooner than 30 days following the date on which the reprogramming action has been approved or denied by the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.

Sec. 189. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available under this Act may be used by the Surface Transportation Board of the Department of Transportation to charge or collect any filing fee for rate or practice complaints filed with the Board in an amount in excess of the amount authorized for district court civil suit filing fees under section 1914 of title 28, United States Code.

Sec. 190. Funds appropriated in this Act to the modal administrations may be obligated for the Office of the Secretary for the costs related to assessments or reimbursable agreements only when such amounts are for the costs of goods and services that are purchased to provide a direct benefit to the applicable modal administration or administrations.

Sec. 191. The Secretary of Transportation is authorized to carry out a program that establishes uniform standards for developing and supporting agency transit pass and transit benefits authorized under section 7905 of title 5, United States Code, including distribution of transit benefits by various paper and electronic media.

Sec. 192. None of the funds made available by this Act shall be used by the Surface Transportation Board to take any actions with respect to the construction of a high speed rail project in California unless the permit is issued by the Board with respect to the project in its entirety.

Sec. 193. None of the funds made available in this Act may be used to facilitate new scheduled air transportation originating from the United States if such flights would land on, or pass through, property confiscated by the Cuban Government, including property in which a minority interest was confiscated, as the terms confiscated, Cuban Government, and property are defined in paragraphs (4), (5), and (12)(A), respectively, of section 4 of the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996 (22 U.S.C. 6023

(4), (5), and (12)(A)): Provided, That for this section, new scheduled air transportation shall include any flights not already regularly scheduled prior to March 31, 2015.

This title may be cited as the ``Department of Transportation Appropriations Act, 2016''.

TITLE II

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Management and Administration

executive offices

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

administrative support offices

(including transfer of funds)

For necessary salaries and expenses for Administrative Support Offices, $547,000,000, of which $45,600,000, to remain available until expended, in addition to amounts made available under this heading for the Office of the Chief Financial Officer and the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer, shall be for funding shared service agreements between the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of the Treasury; $39,000,000 shall be available for the Office of the Chief Financial Officer;

$93,000,000 shall be available for the Office of the General Counsel; $199,000,000 shall be available for the Office of Administration; $40,000,000 shall be available for the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer;

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

Program Office Salaries and Expenses

public and indian housing

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

community planning and development

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

housing

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

policy development and research

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

fair housing and equal opportunity

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

office of lead hazard control and healthy homes

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

Public and Indian Housing Programs

tenant-based rental assistance

For activities and assistance for the provision of tenant-based rental assistance authorized under the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.)

(``the Act'' herein), not otherwise provided for,

$15,918,643,000 to remain available until September 30, 2018, shall be available on October 1, 2015 (in addition to the

$4,000,000,000 previously appropriated under this heading that became available on October 1, 2015), and

$4,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2019, shall be available on October 1, 2016: Provided, That the amounts made available under this heading are provided as follows:

(1) $18,151,000,000 shall be available for renewals of expiring section 8 tenant-based annual contributions contracts (including renewals of enhanced vouchers under any provision of law authorizing such assistance under section 8(t) of the Act) and including renewal of other special purpose or incremental vouchers: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of law, from amounts provided under this paragraph and any carryover, the Secretary for the calendar year 2016 funding cycle shall provide renewal funding for each public housing agency based on validated voucher management system (VMS) leasing and cost data for the prior calendar year and by applying an inflation factor as established by the Secretary, by notice published in the Federal Register, and by making any necessary adjustments for the costs associated with the first-time renewal of vouchers under this paragraph including tenant protection, HOPE VI, and Choice Neighborhoods vouchers: Provided further, That in determining calendar year 2016 funding allocations under this heading for public housing agencies, including agencies participating in the Moving To Work (MTW) demonstration, the Secretary may take into account the anticipated impact of changes in targeting and utility allowances, on public housing agencies' contract renewal needs: Provided further, That none of the funds provided under this paragraph may be used to fund a total number of unit months under lease which exceeds a public housing agency's authorized level of units under contract, except for public housing agencies participating in the MTW demonstration, which are instead governed by the terms and conditions of their MTW agreements: Provided further, That the Secretary shall, to the extent necessary to stay within the amount specified under this paragraph (except as otherwise modified under this paragraph), prorate each public housing agency's allocation otherwise established pursuant to this paragraph: Provided further, That except as provided in the following provisos, the entire amount specified under this paragraph (except as otherwise modified under this paragraph) shall be obligated to the public housing agencies based on the allocation and pro rata method described above, and the Secretary shall notify public housing agencies of their annual budget by the latter of 60 days after enactment of this Act or March 1, 2016: Provided further, That the Secretary may extend the notification period with the prior written approval of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations: Provided further, That public housing agencies participating in the MTW demonstration shall be funded pursuant to their MTW agreements and shall be subject to the same pro rata adjustments under the previous provisos: Provided further, That the Secretary may offset public housing agencies' calendar year 2016 allocations based on the excess amounts of public housing agencies' net restricted assets accounts, including HUD held programmatic reserves (in accordance with VMS data in calendar year 2015 that is verifiable and complete), as determined by the Secretary: Provided further, That public housing agencies participating in the MTW demonstration shall also be subject to the offset, as determined by the Secretary, excluding amounts subject to the single fund budget authority provisions of their MTW agreements, from the agencies' calendar year 2016 MTW funding allocation: Provided further, That the Secretary shall use any offset referred to in the previous two provisos throughout the calendar year to prevent the termination of rental assistance for families as the result of insufficient funding, as determined by the Secretary, and to avoid or reduce the proration of renewal funding allocations: Provided further, That up to $75,000,000 shall be available only: (1) for adjustments in the allocations for public housing agencies, after application for an adjustment by a public housing agency that experienced a significant increase, as determined by the Secretary, in renewal costs of vouchers resulting from unforeseen circumstances or from portability under section 8(r) of the Act; (2) for vouchers that were not in use during the 12-month period in order to be available to meet a commitment pursuant to section 8(o)(13) of the Act;

(3) for adjustments for costs associated with HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH) vouchers; (4) for adjustments for public housing agencies with voucher leasing rates at the end of the calendar year that exceed the average leasing for the 12-month period used to establish the allocation, and for additional leasing of vouchers that were issued but not leased prior to the end of such calendar year;

(5) for public housing agencies that despite taking reasonable cost savings measures, as determined by the Secretary, would otherwise be required to terminate rental assistance for families as a result of insufficient funding; and (6) for adjustments in the allocations for public housing agencies that experienced a significant increase, as determined by the Secretary, in renewal costs as a result of participation in the Small Area Fair Market Rent demonstration: Provided further, That the Secretary shall allocate amounts under the previous proviso based on need, as determined by the Secretary;

(2) $130,000,000 shall be for section 8 rental assistance for relocation and replacement of housing units that are demolished or disposed of pursuant to section 18 of the Act, conversion of section 23 projects to assistance under section 8, the family unification program under section 8(x) of the Act, relocation of witnesses in connection with efforts to combat crime in public and assisted housing pursuant to a request from a law enforcement or prosecution agency, enhanced vouchers under any provision of law authorizing such assistance under section 8(t) of the Act, HOPE VI and Choice Neighborhood vouchers, mandatory and voluntary conversions, and tenant protection assistance including replacement and relocation assistance or for project-based assistance to prevent the displacement of unassisted elderly tenants currently residing in section 202 properties financed between 1959 and 1974 that are refinanced pursuant to Public Law 106-569, as amended, or under the authority as provided under this Act: Provided, That when a public housing development is submitted for demolition or disposition under section 18 of the Act, the Secretary may provide section 8 rental assistance when the units pose an imminent health and safety risk to residents: Provided further, That the Secretary may only provide replacement vouchers for units that were occupied within the previous 24 months that cease to be available as assisted housing, subject only to the availability of funds: Provided further, That of the amounts made available under this paragraph, $5,000,000 may be available to provide tenant protection assistance, not otherwise provided under this paragraph, to residents residing in low vacancy areas and who may have to pay rents greater than 30 percent of household income, as the result of

(1) the maturity of a HUD-insured, HUD-held or section 202 loan that requires the permission of the Secretary prior to loan prepayment; (2) the expiration of a rental assistance contract for which the tenants are not eligible for enhanced voucher or tenant protection assistance under existing law; or (3) the expiration of affordability restrictions accompanying a mortgage or preservation program administered by the Secretary: Provided further, That such tenant protection assistance made available under the previous proviso may be provided under the authority of section 8(t) or section 8(o)(13) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(t)): Provided further, That the Secretary shall issue guidance to implement the previous provisos, including, but not limited to, requirements for defining eligible at-risk households within 120 days of the enactment of this Act: Provided further, That any tenant protection voucher made available from amounts under this paragraph shall not be reissued by any public housing agency, except the replacement vouchers as defined by the Secretary by notice, when the initial family that received any such voucher no longer receives such voucher, and the authority for any public housing agency to issue any such voucher shall cease to exist: Provided further, That the Secretary, for the purpose under this paragraph, may use unobligated balances, including recaptures and carryovers, remaining from amounts appropriated in prior fiscal years under this heading for voucher assistance for nonelderly disabled families and for disaster assistance made available under Public Law 110-329;

(3) $1,530,000,000 shall be for administrative and other expenses of public housing agencies in administering the section 8 tenant-based rental assistance program, of which up to $10,000,000 shall be available to the Secretary to allocate to public housing agencies that need additional funds to administer their section 8 programs, including fees associated with section 8 tenant protection rental assistance, the administration of disaster related vouchers, Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing vouchers, and other special purpose incremental vouchers: Provided, That no less than $1,520,000,000 of the amount provided in this paragraph shall be allocated to public housing agencies for the calendar year 2016 funding cycle based on section 8(q) of the Act (and related Appropriation Act provisions) as in effect immediately before the enactment of the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-276): Provided further, That if the amounts made available under this paragraph are insufficient to pay the amounts determined under the previous proviso, the Secretary may decrease the amounts allocated to agencies by a uniform percentage applicable to all agencies receiving funding under this paragraph or may, to the extent necessary to provide full payment of amounts determined under the previous proviso, utilize unobligated balances, including recaptures and carryovers, remaining from funds appropriated to the Department of Housing and Urban Development under this heading from prior fiscal years, excluding special purpose vouchers, notwithstanding the purposes for which such amounts were appropriated: Provided further, That all public housing agencies participating in the MTW demonstration shall be funded pursuant to their MTW agreements, and shall be subject to the same uniform percentage decrease as under the previous proviso: Provided further, That amounts provided under this paragraph shall be only for activities related to the provision of tenant-based rental assistance authorized under section 8, including related development activities;

(4) $107,643,210 for the renewal of tenant-based assistance contracts under section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013), including necessary administrative expenses: Provided, That administrative and other expenses of public housing agencies in administering the special purpose vouchers in this paragraph shall be funded under the same terms and be subject to the same pro rata reduction as the percent decrease for administrative and other expenses to public housing agencies under paragraph (3) of this heading;

(5) The Secretary shall separately track all special purpose vouchers funded under this heading.

{time} 2315

Amendment Offered by Mr. Al Green of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 74, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $75,000,000)''.

Page 75, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $75,000,000)''.

Page 77, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $75,000,000)''.

Page 78, line 9, before the semicolon insert the following:

``, except that of the amount made available by this proviso,

$75,000,000 shall be used only for the purpose under this clause''.

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

The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman?

There was no objection.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.

Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman from Texas and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise tonight in support of the people who make it possible for us to be here. Of course, I speak of those persons who go to distant places, those persons who serve us in our military who don't always return the same way they left.

I rise tonight because we have had a successful program. The HUD VASH program has been successful, and it has contributed to the decline in homelessness among those persons who make it possible for us to be here, who make real the great and noble American ideals: liberty and justice for all; government of the people, by the people, for the people.

Mr. Chairman, homelessness has declined 33 percent among our veteran population since 2010, and this is because the President made it a priority. President Obama indicated that he would reduce homelessness among veterans, and he had 2015 as a targeted date.

I am proud to say that in my city of Houston, Texas, our mayor, Annise Parker, had an event just recently with three HUD Secretaries, and it was announced at that event that in Houston, Texas, the resources were available to accommodate a veteran in need of a place to call home.

Tonight, Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment that would accord $75 million to the HUD VASH program. This $75 million would be used to make sure that what we have done we will not only continue to do, but we can do even better.

I believe that the people who have served us and who find themselves now living on the streets of life should have a better quality of life. For this reason, I will promote this amendment tonight, understanding that a point of order has been made, but also understanding that it is necessary for us to continue to remind ourselves that we have people who are willing to make the sacrifice and that we should make sacrifices for them.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. I want to thank the gentleman, again, for his passion for this issue and for talking to me about this issue, and I look forward to continuing to work with the gentleman.

Obviously, all of us know that there is never anything, there is never enough that we could ever do for our veterans. So again, I thank the gentleman, and I look forward to continuing to work with the gentleman.

I thank you for yielding your time.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman and I thank the Congress of the United States of America because Congress has appropriated money for these VASH vouchers, this program. I have always tried to get more because I think our veterans deserve as much as we can give them, but I am appreciative for what Congress has done, and I am appreciative for what the chairman has done.

So tonight I will withdraw my amendment, Mr. Chairman, but I do so with the understanding that as we move forward, knowing that we have done a great job, the President has done well, that the cities and municipalities have worked well with the President, this has been an integrated system, holistic approach to ending homelessness among our veterans, but I still believe that we cannot allow ourselves to relax. We must never assume that we have done enough for those who are willing to do all for us.

With that, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?

There was no objection.

The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.

=========================== NOTE ===========================

June 3, 2015, on page H3860, the following appeared: There was no objection. AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MS. NORTON

The online version should be corrected to read: There was no objection. The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn. AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MS. NORTON

========================= END NOTE ========================= amendment offered by ms. norton

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 74, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $512,000,000)''.

Page 75, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $512,000,000)''.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentlewoman's amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.

Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment to H.R. 2577, the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriation Act, that would fully fund the existing Housing Choice Vouchers and replenish the 67,000 vouchers lost to the fiscal year 2013 sequestration.

It is difficult, Mr. Chair, to think of a more urgent issue confronting the American people. Affordable housing has reached zero in many communities of our country. It is estimated that 2.1 million low-

income families utilize the Housing Choice Voucher program. These are the most vulnerable among us, including children, senior citizens, veterans, and persons with disabilities who rely on this important program to keep their families from becoming homeless.

Most families must make roughly $18.92 per hour to afford a two-

bedroom apartment, which is more than 2\1/2\ times the Federal minimum wage. In the District of Columbia, where affordable housing has virtually disappeared, families must make $28.25 per hour to afford a two-bedroom apartment, making the Nation's Capital one of the most expensive housing markets in the Nation.

The District mirrors cities and suburbs throughout the country, however. For over a decade, District residents have faced increasing rents, stagnant incomes, and the disappearance of affordable rental units. As a result, the city has had to close--actually close altogether--its housing waiting list, which includes vouchers, leaving more than 72,000 people waiting to be placed and thousands more waiting for a chance even to get on the list.

My amendment would fund President Obama's budget request to restore 67,000 vouchers lost during the fiscal year 2013 sequestration, bringing urgently needed relief to struggling families across the country. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. What is Congress here for if not to bring some relief to millions of families across the country, those who are most in need?

I reserve the balance of my time.

point of order

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I insist on my point of order.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida may state his point of order.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is not in order under section 3(d)(3) of House Resolution 5 of the 114th Congress which states the following:

``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''

The amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill in violation of such section.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order?

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to be heard.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from the District of Columbia is recognized.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, but for sequestration probably most of these housing vouchers would have gone through. They are already cut. These are cuts that were never anticipated. These were sequestration cuts. The Congress cannot ignore forever the neediest people for housing as homelessness increases and as there is no relief whatsoever.

I understand the point of order. I can't agree with it. I think at some point this Congress must face what it must do for people who but for sequestration, something none of us wanted, none of us anticipated, would at least among them have some who would have these housing vouchers.

The Acting CHAIR. The Chair is prepared to rule.

The gentleman from Florida makes a point of order that the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia violates section 3(d)(3) of House Resolution 5.

Section 3(d)(3) establishes a point of order against an amendment proposing a net increase in budget authority in the pending bill.

As persuasively asserted by the gentleman from Florida, the amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill. Therefore, the point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Nadler

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 74, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $1,204,853,210)''.

Page 75, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $182,816,000)''.

Page 79, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $20,000,000)''.

Page 81, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $490,037,000)''.

Page 83, after line 10, insert the following:

(5) $277,000,000 shall be for incremental rental voucher assistance under section 8(o) of the Act to be distributed based on relative need, as determined by the Secretary: Provided, That the Secretary shall make such funding available, notwithstanding section 204 (competition provision) of this title;

(6) $177,500,000 shall be used for incremental rental voucher assistance for use by families, veterans, and tribal families who are experiencing homelessness, as well as victims of domestic and dating violence: Provided, That eligibility for veterans is made without regard to discharge status: Provided further, That the Secretary shall make such funding available through a competitive process to public housing agencies that partner with eligible Continuums of Care, as identified by the Secretary and to recipients eligible to receive block grants under the Native American Housing Assistance and Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA)

(25 U.S.C. 4101 et seq.): Provided further, That assistance provided to recipients eligible under NAHASDA shall be subject to requirements of NAHASDA: Provided further, That the Secretary may waive, or specify alternative requirements for any provision or statute or regulation that the Secretary administers in connection with the use of funds made available under this paragraph upon a finding by the Secretary that any such waivers or alternative requirements are necessary for the effective delivery and administration of such voucher assistance: Provided further, That the Secretary shall issue guidance to implement the previous proviso;

(7) $37,500,000 shall be made available to provide incremental rental voucher assistance for victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking, as defined by the Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization Act of 2013 (Public Law 113-4), who require an emergency transfer: Provided, That the Secretary shall issue guidance to implement this paragraph;

(8) $20,000,000 shall be made available for new incremental voucher assistance through the Family Unification Program: Provided, That the assistance made available under this paragraph shall continue to remain available for family unification upon turnover: Provided further, That the amounts made available under this paragraph shall be used only in connection with tenant-based assistance on behalf of--

(A) any family--

(i) who is otherwise eligible for such assistance; and

(ii) who the public child welfare agency for the jurisdiction has certified is a family for whom the lack of adequate housing is a primary factor in the imminent placement of the family's child or children in out-of-home care; and

(B) for a period not to exceed 60 months, otherwise eligible youths who have attained at least 18 years of age and not more than 21 years of age and who have left foster care at age 16 or older.

Page 83, line 11, strike ``(5)'' and insert ``(9)''

Mr. NADLER (during the reading). Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to waive the reading of the bill.

The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New York?

There was no objection.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.

Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman from New York and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, the funding levels provided in this bill are unrealistic and unsustainable and clearly demonstrate that our current budget process has failed. This bill reveals where the majority's priorities lie, and they clearly do not lie in serving the most basic function of government: to provide for the safety and well-being of its citizens.

This bill makes major cuts to critical HUD programs. The public housing capital fund is slashed by $200 million, barely reaching its 1989 level, almost 30 years ago. This will cover less than half of the basic maintenance needs and does nothing to address the $25 billion in deferred projects.

For the first time since 2007, this body will provide no new funding to provide housing and support to homeless veterans. The Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control program is cut by 32 percent, even as The Washington Post reported 2 months ago that in low-income West Baltimore neighborhoods, more than 3 percent of children under the age of 6 had dangerously high levels of lead in their blood, which we know leads to learning disabilities and can lead to lifelong dependency, not to mention lifelong dependency on the taxpayers.

But perhaps most startling is the bill's failure to provide low-

income seniors and hard-working families adequate access to affordable housing through HUD's Section 8 program. Rental assistance helps 2.1 million very-low-income households to rent modest homes in the private market at affordable costs. Households that use vouchers have an average income of $13,000 per year, well below the Federal poverty line, and nearly all include children, seniors, or people with disabilities. Only about one in four eligible low-income families receives Federal rental assistance. Long waiting lists remain in nearly every community, and these long waits are exacerbated by a lack of administrative funding for public housing agencies.

Sequestration has only made this situation worse. As of June of last year, an estimated 100,000 fewer families were receiving assistance from Section 8 due to the sequestration cuts; 100,000 families cut off. These cuts have had a severe impact on communities at a time when the number of very-low-income renters with worst case housing needs remains 30 percent higher than it was before the Great Recession.

Through the fiscal year 2014 and fiscal year 2015 appropriations bills, Congress began the work of reversing the deep cuts in assistance caused by sequestration, but nearly 67,000 vouchers have yet to be restored. My amendment would finally restore those lost vouchers by providing an additional $512 million to the voucher renewal account. This amendment mirrors the President's request and targets 30,000 vouchers to those families and individuals most in need of housing assistance: homeless families; veterans, including those not covered by the VASH program; victims of domestic violence; and Native Americans.

{time} 2330

The bill does include important and helpful language directing HUD to target vouchers to the vulnerable populations as they become available but provides no funds for HUD to do so.

My amendment sets aside specific funding for these targeted vouchers to make sure the most vulnerable populations have access to safe, affordable housing.

This additional funding will go a long way toward ensuring that every family that qualifies for rental assistance finds a home. However, at the funding levels for administrative fees in this legislation, it would be impossible for public housing agencies to hire and maintain enough staff to process and renew vouchers.

We cannot continue to undermine our hard-working public housing agencies by failing to provide them enough money to function. My amendment would finally address the undercutting of public housing agencies by providing an additional $490 million to match the President's request.

Mr. Chairman, this is the minimum we can do to meet the vital needs of our lowest-income citizens and of our veterans. I urge adoption of this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

POINT OF ORDER

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I insist on the point of order.

The amendment is not in order under section 3(d)(3) of House Resolution 5, 114th Congress, which states:

``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''

The amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill in violation of such section.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order?

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, we can all agree that this amendment is necessary. We are talking about denying tens of thousands of families and seniors access to an efficient, cost-effective program that keeps families together and lowers the government's costs over the long term. Without this amendment, we will see a spike in homelessness, a spike in medical costs, and a spike in hungry children.

I understand the point of order. I understand that the rules demand an offset for any funding increase in the bill. I also appreciate the chairman's efforts to support Section 8 and public housing. However, when funding levels are as restrictive as this bill provides across the board, it is impossible to offset such drastic underfunding without hurting other people in need.

When faced with a funding bill----

The Acting CHAIR. Does the gentleman from New York wish to speak to the point of order?

The gentleman will confine his remarks to the point of order.

Mr. NADLER. When faced with a funding bill that fails to provide any new funding to support homeless veterans and is leaving victims of domestic violence and homeless families with no access to secure housing, we need to take action to support the most vulnerable among us.

I hope that as we go forward, we can find a way to provide these funds so that kids, working families, and seniors are not out on the street.

The Acting CHAIR. The Chair is prepared to rule.

The gentleman from Florida makes a point of order that the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York violates section 3(d)(3) of House Resolution 5.

Section 3(d)(3) establishes a point of order against an amendment proposing a net increase in budget authority in the pending bill.

As persuasively asserted by the gentleman from Florida, the amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill. Therefore, the point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I think it is very important that this moment not pass without us expressing appreciation to Mr. Nadler and to Ms. Norton for these amendments they have offered, because they are addressing a critical issue, a critical deficiency in this bill. And believe me, Mr. Chairman, this is just the tip of the iceberg.

The President proposed in his budget to provide additional rental vouchers to compensate for those lost earlier to sequestration. He also proposed funding for 30,000 new targeted vouchers, as Mr. Nadler was indicating: homeless families, veterans, Native Americans, victims of domestic violence and stalking, reuniting families.

Because of this budget policy that has us so hamstrung, we are simply not addressing in this bill any of these desperate needs. I invite colleagues to talk to their local housing authorities, if they haven't already. Ask how many are on the waiting list. Ask how many people are desperate for decent housing. There is nothing more basic to our communities' well-being than decent housing.

I don't know of a single housing program that isn't underresourced, and all this because of a budget policy that really isn't working as fiscal policy. That is what it is supposed to be doing, but it is decimating these investments that our country needs to be making.

I said the tip of the iceberg. Here is what I mean. The Choice Neighborhoods initiative is the successor to HOPE VI. That has been an enormously successful program in my area of Raleigh-Durham in North Carolina. That is $20 million. That is a token amount. I hope we will revisit that amount later.

Public housing capital fund, $1.68 billion. That is $194 million cut from last year. That goes back to where we were 26 years ago. And then we have a $25 billion backlog--not even beginning to address that.

Mr. Chairman, my district displays rental housing for the elderly, housing for the disabled. Local congregations have taken on these projects. We have group homes for the disabled that have done a wonderful job. This budget simply turns them into rental renewal programs. No capital funding, no increase in the supply. And so it goes.

So Mr. Nadler and Ms. Norton have done us a great service tonight in pressing the case for tenant-based rental assistance--for these vouchers--and for addressing some of these very needy categories of our fellow citizens. But it is the tip of the iceberg. It is only one of an array of programs that we very much need to address.

I am hopeful that the inadequacy of this bill tonight, and the kind of debate we are having tonight, the kind of sharp relief that these needs are being put into, will motivate us very strongly sooner rather than later.

Let's not wait for a Presidential veto. Let's not wait for some kind of governmental shutdown. Let's show that we can govern. Let's show that we can take hold of our situation, invest the way a great country should invest, and do a budget agreement that secures our fiscal future but also makes room for the kind of investments that we should make.

So I thank my colleagues for bringing up these critical housing needs. We simply must address them in the weeks ahead.

I yield back the balance of my time.

amendment offered by mr. grothman

Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 74, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $614,000,000)''.

Page 75, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by $434,000,000)''.

Page 81, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $180,000,000)''.

Page 81, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $180,000,000)''.

Page 156, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $614,000,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, I am glad to be here. It shows different people look at this budget and see different things.

I look at this budget and see a $614 million increase in Section 8 housing, and I look at the huge debt we have, and I say: Why are we spending more? Other people apparently look at the $614 million increase and say: Why, that is just a pittance.

Obviously, a 3 percent increase in any program at a time we are in the huge debt we are should be viewed skeptically. I have an amendment here to get rid of the $614 million increase.

Now, as I understand, the reason there is an increase is because we are getting in less receipts on the Section 8 housing and, therefore, we feel that the citizens of this country have to make up the difference.

My opinion is they have done nothing that we have to take more out of their pocket, either in taxes or by way of inflation, and we should not be increasing this funding by $614 million.

In the debate over the last amendment it was said that there is a waiting list on a lot of these programs. That doesn't mean we have to spend more money on the programs. If we are giving away something for free, there is always going to be a waiting list. If you go out in society, if a store says, we are going to give away something for free, you have a waiting list, right?

This is a flawed program for a couple of reasons. I don't object to using it for disabled people. I don't object to using it for elderly people. But like many welfare-related programs, two things help you in eligibility for this program.

First of all, you are required not to work very hard. And the gentleman made a point that the income level of a lot of these people in the projects isn't that high. That is because if they made more money, they wouldn't be eligible for the generous subsidies. So, of course they are not making a lot of money. It is wrong to set up a program that discourages industry.

The second thing wrong with this program is it discourages marriage. A lot of these housing things are set up such that if somebody marries the mother or father of their children who is working harder, you lose the subsidy. I can't imagine anything more foolish than setting up a program that says we will give you an apartment if you raise a child out of wedlock, but if you get married, we will take away your apartment.

The last time we really looked at this program was 1994. It is time we look at it again. And the idea of pouring another $614 million into this program is out of line.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition with considerable enthusiasm.

It is as though what I said 5 minutes ago about the deficiencies of this bill--this whole budget strategy that has left us so unable to address our needs--it is as though the gentleman took that and went in exactly the opposite direction.

His amendment reduced an allocation that is already far too low, and it takes these rental assistance programs and reduces them further. Not only does it not meet the need that we are seeing but actually reduces what we are already doing. This means evictions. I promise you, it means large-scale evictions. It means a cutting back in communities across this country of the housing alternatives that people have.

I have always thought, Mr. Chairman, that rental assistance--Section 8--should be a housing program that conservatives should love because it is market-based. It is not, contrary to what the gentleman says, a total free ride. As a matter of fact, people pay a third of their income in rent. What Section 8 provides is a modest boost so that these housing developments and these apartment buildings can work. People can live there. They put their own money in, and they get a boost. They are able to move toward self-sufficiency.

So it is not public housing. It is housing for people who are able to do more for themselves and who are receiving support as they do that. This would be unconscionable to cut this program further.

With great conviction I believe this would be a mistaken amendment, a hard-hearted amendment, and one that this body should reject.

I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman).

The amendment was rejected.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

housing certificate fund

(including rescissions)

Unobligated balances, including recaptures and carryover, remaining from funds appropriated to the Department of Housing and Urban Development under this heading, the heading

``Annual Contributions for Assisted Housing'' and the heading

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

public housing capital fund

For the Public Housing Capital Fund Program to carry out capital and management activities for public housing agencies, as authorized under section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437g) (``the Act''),

$1,681,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2019: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of law or regulation, during fiscal year 2016 the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may not delegate to any Department official other than the Deputy Secretary and the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing any authority under paragraph (2) of section 9(j) regarding the extension of the time periods under such section: Provided further, That for purposes of such section 9(j), the term ``obligate'' means, with respect to amounts, that the amounts are subject to a binding agreement that will result in outlays, immediately or in the future: Provided further, That up to $3,000,000 shall be to support ongoing Public Housing Financial and Physical Assessment activities: Provided further, That of the total amount provided under this heading, not to exceed $20,000,000 shall be available for the Secretary to make grants, notwithstanding section 204 of this Act, to public housing agencies for emergency capital needs including safety and security measures necessary to address crime and drug-related activity as well as needs resulting from unforeseen or unpreventable emergencies and natural disasters excluding Presidentially declared emergencies and natural disasters under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.) occurring in fiscal year 2016: Provided further, That of the total amount provided under this heading $30,000,000 shall be for supportive services, service coordinator and congregate services as authorized by section 34 of the Act

(42 U.S.C. 1437z-6) and the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4101 et seq.): Provided further, That of the total amount made available under this heading, up to $15,000,000 may be used for a Jobs-Plus initiative modeled after the Jobs-Plus demonstration: Provided further, That the funding provided under the previous proviso shall provide competitive grants to partnerships between public housing authorities, local workforce investment boards established under section 117 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, and other agencies and organizations that provide support to help public housing residents obtain employment and increase earnings: Provided further, That applicants must demonstrate the ability to provide services to residents, partner with workforce investment boards, and leverage service dollars: Provided further, That the Secretary may set aside a portion of the funds provided for the Resident Opportunity and Self-Sufficiency program to support the services element of the Jobs-Plus Pilot initiative: Provided further, That the Secretary may allow PHAs to request exemptions from rent and income limitation requirements under sections 3 and 6 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 as necessary to implement the Jobs-Plus program, on such terms and conditions as the Secretary may approve upon a finding by the Secretary that any such waivers or alternative requirements are necessary for the effective implementation of the Jobs-Plus initiative as a voluntary program for residents: Provided further, That the Secretary shall publish by notice in the Federal Register any waivers or alternative requirements pursuant to the preceding proviso no later than 10 days before the effective date of such notice: Provided further, That for funds provided under this heading, the limitation in section 9(g)(1) of the Act shall be 25 percent: Provided further, That the Secretary may waive the limitation in the previous proviso to allow public housing agencies to fund activities authorized under section 9(e)(1)(C) of the Act: Provided further, That from the funds made available under this heading, the Secretary shall provide bonus awards in fiscal year 2016 to public housing agencies that are designated high performers: Provided further, That the Department shall notify public housing agencies of their formula allocation within 60 days of enactment of this Act.

public housing operating fund

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

choice neighborhoods initiative

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

family self-sufficiency

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

native american housing block grants

For the Native American Housing Block Grants program, as authorized under title I of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA) (25 U.S.C. 4111 et seq.), $650,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2020: Provided, That, notwithstanding the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996, to determine the amount of the allocation under title I of such Act for each Indian tribe, the Secretary shall apply the formula under section 302 of such Act with the need component based on single-race census data and with the need component based on multi-race census data, and the amount of the allocation for each Indian tribe shall be the greater of the two resulting allocation amounts: Provided further, That of the amounts made available under this heading, $3,500,000 shall be contracted for assistance for national or regional organizations representing Native American housing interests for providing training and technical assistance to Indian housing authorities and tribally designated housing entities as authorized under NAHASDA: Provided further, That of the funds made available under the previous proviso, not less than $2,000,000 shall be made available for a national organization as authorized under section 703 of NAHASDA (25 U.S.C. 4212): Provided further, That of the amounts made available under this heading, $2,000,000 shall be to support the inspection of Indian housing units, contract expertise, training, and technical assistance in the training, oversight, and management of such Indian housing and tenant-based assistance, including up to $300,000 for related travel: Provided further, That of the amount provided under this heading, $2,000,000 shall be made available for the cost of guaranteed notes and other obligations, as authorized by title VI of NAHASDA: Provided further, That such costs, including the costs of modifying such notes and other obligations, shall be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended: Provided further, That these funds are available to subsidize the total principal amount of any notes and other obligations, any part of which is to be guaranteed, not to exceed

$17,452,007: Provided further, That the Department will notify grantees of their formula allocation within 60 days of the date of enactment of this Act: Provided further, notwithstanding section 302(d) of NAHASDA, if on January 1, 2016, a recipient's total amount of undisbursed block grants in the Department's line of credit control system is greater than three times the formula allocation it would otherwise receive under this heading, the Secretary shall adjust that recipient's formula allocation down by the difference between its total amount of undisbursed block grants in the Department's line of credit control system on January 1, 2016, and three times the formula allocation it would otherwise receive: Provided further, That grant amounts not allocated to a recipient pursuant to the previous proviso shall be allocated under the need component of the formula proportionately among all other Indian tribes not subject to an adjustment: Provided further, That the two previous provisos shall not apply to any Indian tribe that would otherwise receive a formula allocation of less than

$5,000,000: Provided further, That to take effect, the three previous provisos do not require the issuance of any regulation.

indian housing loan guarantee fund program account

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

Community Planning and Development

housing opportunities for persons with aids

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

{time} 2345

Amendment Offered by Mr. Nadler

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 94, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $3,000,000)''.

Page 116, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.

Mr. NADLER (during the reading). Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to waive the reading of the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New York?

There was no objection.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.

Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman from New York and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, since 1992, the Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS has provided a vital safety net. In the United States, 50,000 people become infected with HIV every year, and 1.2 million people are living with HIV/AIDS. More than 500,000 of these individuals will need some form of housing assistance during the course of their illness, but 145,000 individuals have unmet housing needs.

HOPWA combines housing support with additional services to help people living with HIV/AIDS and their families stay in stable, safe housing; manage their illness; and remain active in their communities. Housing interventions are critical in our continued fight against HIV/

AIDS, and research clearly shows that stable housing leads to better health outcomes.

Providing stable housing to people living with HIV/AIDS reduces the risk of transmission to a partner by 96 percent; it reduces emergency room visits and expense to the public by 36 percent and hospitalizations by 57 percent. In other words, investing a modest amount in HOPWA today saves us millions, if not billions of Federal taxpayer dollars in the future.

HOPWA is the only Federal housing program to provide cities and States with dedicated resources to address the housing crisis facing people living with HIV/AIDS, and the program traditionally enjoys strong bipartisan support.

Congressional support for HOPWA is clear in this legislation. While nearly every other program in the bill has been slashed by millions of dollars and often funded at levels below the point of actually functioning, HOPWA saw a slight increase in funding during the committee's consideration of the bill.

Some hail the bill's slim $332 million for HOPWA as a victory. I also applaud any additional funding for HOPWA, but I cannot call it a victory to fund this program below its 2010 funding level when wait lists for HOPWA services continue to grow and thousands of Americans die on the streets and in shelters because we refuse to provide a few extra million dollars to provide them with the care they need.

I will not claim that my amendment completely solves that problem. The National AIDS Housing Coalition estimates that, in FY16, they will need $364 million to provide HOPWA services to those who need them and to fund vital administrative support to improve the program.

To reach that goal, we would need to find $32 million somewhere in this bill to transfer to HOPWA, but the funding levels we are considering today are so abysmally low, it is nearly impossible to move that much money without gutting other important programs.

What we do, at the very least, is pass my amendment to restore HOPWA to its FY10 funding level of $335 million, a scant $3 million increase. That funding level makes only a small dent in HOPWA's real need, but it will give hundreds more people and families access to lifesaving services. It is a very small step, but it is in the right direction, and I believe if we have the chance to save even one life, let alone hundreds, we have a duty to act.

To protect those living with HIV/AIDS and to stay within the House rules, my amendment offsets this additional funding to cuts to HUD's information technology fund.

I recognize the importance of providing HUD with phones and computers and understand the chairman and ranking member's concerns about additional cuts to this account, but nothing is more important than, quite simply, saving lives.

We must pass this amendment and give those families battling HIV/AIDS a fighting chance. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of a point of order.

The Acting CHAIR. The reservation of the point of order is withdrawn.

Does any Member seek time in opposition?

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, let me inquire of the chairman, does he plan to claim the time in opposition?

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I will not be claiming the time in opposition.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, although, as a formality, I will then claim that time, although I am not opposed; I am enthusiastically in support of Mr. Nadler's amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

There was no objection.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I do want to take a little extra time to mention some things connected to this that I think need to come to our colleagues' attention.

First of all, this is not an ideal offset that Mr. Nadler has chosen. This is simply an example of the problem we have had all evening. Any funding amendment will fill only one hole by digging another, and so that is just the reality we are dealing with.

I do support this amendment. It runs the risk of further delaying HUD's acquisition of improved IT systems. We are going to need to attend to that. In this bill, HUD's IT account is already $150 million below the fiscal year '15 level and $234 million below the President's request. This is not an account that has a lot to spare, so I hope we can revisit that.

It may be relatively easy to target this funding line. We have got to provide HUD with the tools it needs to properly administer HOPWA and other programs.

We need, of course, eventually, a bipartisan budget agreement that will allow for a more credible bill that will adequately fund HOPWA and HUD's IT account both, both of those.

Let me say, Mr. Chairman, I, in addition, hope that the chairman and other longtime supporters of HOPWA are going to be able to work--we are all going to be able to work together moving forward to get this HOPWA formula updated once and for all.

The formula hasn't been updated for the distribution of funds, the allocation of funds, that formula hasn't been updated since the inception of program in the early nineties. Without an update, many Americans who are living with HIV in areas of the country with the fastest growing infection rates--namely, the South and rural America--

are not getting the housing support they desperately need.

As a Member from a State with an AIDS death rate higher than the national average, this issue, getting this formula right, is a matter of life and death for many of my constituents.

As we work on this bill in the months to come, try to get the funding levels where they need to be, we also very much need to address that formula issue, and I pledge my readiness to work with colleagues to have an equitable funding formula.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York has 1\1/2\ minutes remaining.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. I won't use it.

I simply want to express my appreciation first to the ranking member for supporting the amendment, despite the very painful offset which he will have to deal with, which I won't have to deal with, except as a single Member of the House.

I want to thank the chairman for not opposing this amendment. This amendment is a matter of life or death for a large number of people, and I urge my colleagues to adopt it.

I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).

The amendment was agreed to.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

community development fund

For assistance to units of State and local government, and to other entities, for economic and community development activities, and for other purposes, $3,060,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2018, unless otherwise specified: Provided, That of the total amount provided,

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

community development loan guarantees program account

(including rescission)

Subject to section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, during fiscal year 2016, commitments to guarantee loans under section 108 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5308), any part of which is guaranteed, shall not exceed a total principal amount of

$300,000,000, notwithstanding any aggregate limitation on outstanding obligations guaranteed in subsection (k) of such section 108: Provided, That the Secretary shall collect fees from borrowers, notwithstanding subsection (m) of such section 108, to result in a credit subsidy cost of zero for guaranteeing such loans, and any such fees shall be collected in accordance with section 502(7) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, That all unobligated balances, including recaptures and carryover, remaining from funds appropriated to the Department of Housing and Urban Development under this heading are hereby permanently rescinded.

home investment partnerships program

(including transfer of funds)

For the HOME investment partnerships program, as authorized under title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, as amended, $767,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2019: Provided, That notwithstanding the amount made available under this heading, the threshold reduction requirements in sections 216(10) and 217(b)(4) of such Act shall not apply to allocations of such amount: Provided further, That the requirements under provisos 2 through 6 under this heading for fiscal year 2012 and such requirements applicable pursuant to the ``Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013'', shall not apply to any project to which funds were committed on or after August 23, 2013, but such projects shall instead be governed by the Final Rule titled ``Home Investment Partnerships Program; Improving Performance and Accountability; Updating Property Standards'' which became effective on such date: Provided further, That notwithstanding paragraphs (1)(B)(i) or

(2)(B)(i) of section 1337(a) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 4567(a)), amounts allocated under such paragraphs shall be credited to, made available, and merged with this account: Provided further, That no amounts made available by any provision of law may be transferred, reprogrammed, or credited to the Housing Trust Fund.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Al Green of Texas

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

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

In the ``Department of Housing and Urban Development--Community Planning and Development--HOME Investment Partnerships Program'' account, strike the last two provisos.

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

The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?

There was no objection.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.

Pursuant to House Resolution 287, the gentleman from Texas and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let me please start by acknowledging the Honorable Maxine Waters. What I present tonight is an amendment that she actually authored, and I would like to present it. In so doing, I want to remind us that this amendment deals with two programs that are near and dear to my heart, the affordable housing trust fund and the HOME program.

These programs are near and dear to my heart because the greatness of a nation will not be measured by how we treat people who live in the suites of life, how we treat the well off, the well heeled, and the well to do.

The greatness of a nation is often measured by how we treat people who live in the streets of life, those who are too often among the least, the last, and the lost.

This amendment seeks to provide aid and comfort for those who, but for the grace of God, could be you or me, but those who find themselves living in the streets of life. This amendment, in dealing with the affordable housing trust fund, will restore it.

The current bill would actually eliminate the affordable housing trust fund. This amendment provides some degree of aid and comfort for those who are living at 30 percent of the area median income, wherever they happen to live.

In Ms. Maxine Waters' district, this would mean an annual income of

$20,200 for a family of four. I would dare say that there are few among us who would dare attempt to live off of $20,200 as an individual. This helps a family of four with $20,200. This is what the affordable housing trust fund does. It helps people who are extremely low of income.

My hope is that we will be able to prevent this elimination of the affordable housing trust fund, and this amendment does it.

This amendment also will help those who can benefit from the HOME program. The HOME program can serve a family of four that earns up to

$53,900 per year. This program is a partnership, if you will, between State, municipal, and Federal Government.

It has been a program that has been of great benefit across the length and breadth of this country. There is not a State in the country, I would dare say, that has not benefited from the HOME program.

It is my hope that we can meet the President's request for the HOME program. Right now, it is about $293 million short of the President's request. This amendment would add that $293 million that the President has requested.

I started by indicating that these are two programs that are near and dear to me. Mr. Chairman, I believe that Ruth Meltzer was right when she indicated that some measure their lives by days and years, others by heartthrobs, passions, and tears; but the surest measure under God's sun is what for others in your lifetime have you done.

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

I reserve the balance of my time.

Point of Order

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I insist on my point of order.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill.

The amendment is not in order under section 3(d)3 of House Resolution 5, 114th Congress, which states the following:

``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''

The amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill in violation of such section.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order?

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. If I may, Mr. Chairman.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized on the point of order.

Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, on the point of order, understanding the rules, I still would beseech us, Mr. Chairman, to give some consideration to the salvation of these programs.

Perhaps I will be able to work with the chairman and in some way help those who are not in a position to help themselves.

The Acting CHAIR. The Chair is prepared to rule.

The gentleman from Florida makes a point of order that the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas violates section 3(d)(3) of House Resolution 5.

Section 3(d)(3) establishes a point of order against an amendment proposing a net increase in budget authority in the pending bill.

As persuasively asserted by the gentleman from Florida, the amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill. Therefore, the point of order is sustained. The amendment is not in order.

{time} 0000

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

self-help and assisted homeownership opportunity program

For the Self-Help and Assisted Homeownership Opportunity Program, as authorized under section 11 of the Housing Opportunity Program Extension Act of 1996, as amended,

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

homeless assistance grants

(including transfer of funds)

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

Housing Programs

project-based rental assistance

For activities and assistance for the provision of project-based subsidy contracts under the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.) (``the Act''), not otherwise provided for, $10,254,000,000, to remain available until expended, shall be available on October 1, 2015 (in addition to the

$400,000,000 previously appropriated under this heading that became available October 1, 2015), and $400,000,000, to remain available until expended, shall be available on October 1, 2016: Provided, That the amounts made available under this heading shall be available for expiring or terminating section 8 project-based subsidy contracts

(including section 8 moderate rehabilitation contracts), for amendments to section 8 project-based subsidy contracts

(including section 8 moderate rehabilitation contracts), for contracts entered into pursuant to section 441 of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11401), for renewal of section 8 contracts for units in projects that are subject to approved plans of action under the Emergency Low Income Housing Preservation Act of 1987 or the Low-Income Housing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990, and for administrative and other expenses associated with project-based activities and assistance funded under this paragraph: Provided further, That of the total amounts provided under this heading, not to exceed $150,000,000 shall be available for performance-based contract administrators for section 8 project-based assistance, for carrying out 42 U.S.C. 1437(f): Provided further, That the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may also use such amounts in the previous proviso for performance-based contract administrators for the administration of: interest reduction payments pursuant to section 236(a) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1(a)); rent supplement payments pursuant to section 101 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s); section 236(f)(2) rental assistance payments (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1(f)(2)); project rental assistance contracts for the elderly under section 202(c)(2) of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q); project rental assistance contracts for supportive housing for persons with disabilities under section 811(d)(2) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013(d)(2)); project assistance contracts pursuant to section 202(h) of the Housing Act of 1959 (Public Law 86-372; 73 Stat. 667); and loans under section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959

(Public Law 86-372; 73 Stat. 667): Provided further, That amounts recaptured under this heading, the heading ``Annual Contributions for Assisted Housing'', or the heading

``Housing Certificate Fund'', may be used for renewals of or amendments to section 8 project-based contracts or for performance-based contract administrators, notwithstanding the purposes for which such amounts were appropriated: Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon the request of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, project funds that are held in residual receipts accounts for any project subject to a section 8 project-based Housing Assistance Payments contract that authorizes HUD or a Housing Finance Agency to require that surplus project funds be deposited in an interest-bearing residual receipts account and that are in excess of an amount to be determined by the Secretary, shall be remitted to the Department and deposited in this account, to be available until expended: Provided further, That amounts deposited pursuant to the previous proviso shall be available in addition to the amount otherwise provided by this heading for uses authorized under this heading.

housing for the elderly

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

amendment offered by mr. grayson

Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 105, line 9, after the dollar amount insert

``(increased by $2,500,000)''.

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

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, this amendment seeks to increase the housing for the elderly account in this bill by $2.5 million and decrease the policy development and research account within the Department of Housing and Urban Development by an equal amount.

I hope my good friend from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart) across the aisle agrees with me on this one. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in support of this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Grayson).

The amendment was agreed to.

The Acting CHAIR.

The Clerk will read.

=========================== NOTE ===========================

June 3, 2015, on page H3868, the following appeared: The amendment was agreed to. The Clerk will read. The Clerk read as follows:

The online version should be corrected to read: The amendment was agreed to. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read. The Clerk read as follows:

========================= END NOTE =========================

The Clerk read as follows:

housing for persons with disabilities

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

Housing Counseling Assistance

For contracts, grants, and other assistance excluding loans, as authorized under section 106 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, as amended, $47,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2017, including up to

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

rental housing assistance

For amendments to contracts under section 101 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s) and section 236(f)(2) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1) in State-aided, noninsured rental housing projects,

$30,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That such amount, together with unobligated balances from recaptured amounts appropriated prior to fiscal year 2006 from terminated contracts under such sections of law, and any unobligated balances, including recaptures and carryover, remaining from funds appropriated under this heading after fiscal year 2005, shall also be available for extensions of up to one year for expiring contracts under such sections of law.

payment to manufactured housing fees trust fund

For necessary expenses as authorized by the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5401 et seq.), up to $11,000,000, to remain available until expended, of which $11,000,000 is to be derived from the Manufactured Housing Fees Trust Fund: Provided, That not to exceed the total amount appropriated under this heading shall be available from the general fund of the Treasury to the extent necessary to incur obligations and make expenditures pending the receipt of collections to the Fund pursuant to section 620 of such Act: Provided further, That the amount made available under this heading from the general fund shall be reduced as such collections are received during fiscal year 2016 so as to result in a final fiscal year 2016 appropriation from the general fund estimated at zero, and fees pursuant to such section 620 shall be modified as necessary to ensure such a final fiscal year 2016 appropriation: Provided further, That for the dispute resolution and installation programs, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may assess and collect fees from any program participant: Provided further, That such collections shall be deposited into the Fund, and the Secretary, as provided herein, may use such collections, as well as fees collected under section 620, for necessary expenses of such Act: Provided further, That, notwithstanding the requirements of section 620 of such Act, the Secretary may carry out responsibilities of the Secretary under such Act through the use of approved service providers that are paid directly by the recipients of their services.

Federal Housing Administration

mutual mortgage insurance program account

New commitments to guarantee single family loans insured under the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund shall not exceed

$400,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2017: Provided, That during fiscal year 2016, obligations to make direct loans to carry out the purposes of section 204(g) of the National Housing Act, as amended, shall not exceed

$5,000,000: Provided further, That the foregoing amount in the previous proviso shall be for loans to nonprofit and governmental entities in connection with sales of single family real properties owned by the Secretary and formerly insured under the Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund: Provided Further, That for administrative contract expenses of the Federal Housing Administration, $130,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2017.

general and special risk program account

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

Government National Mortgage Association

guarantees of mortgage-backed securities loan guarantee program account

New commitments to issue guarantees to carry out the purposes of section 306 of the National Housing Act, as amended (12 U.S.C. 1721(g)), shall not exceed

$500,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2017: Provided, That $23,000,000 shall be available for necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of Government National Mortgage Association: Provided further, That receipts from Commitment and Multiclass fees collected pursuant to title III of the National Housing Act, as amended, shall be credited as offsetting collections to this account.

Policy Development and Research

research and technology

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

Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity

fair housing activities

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

amendment offered by mr. stivers

Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 114, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert

``(reduced by $28,375,000) (increased by $28,375,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Diaz-Balart as well as Ranking Member Price for their hard work on this bill and for preparing a bill that is the best we can do.

I do rise in support of an amendment that seeks to curb lawsuit abuse and help fund our local governments. This creates congressional intent to redirect funds away from the private enforcement account to the administrative enforcement account.

My amendment would decrease by $28.375 million the Private Enforcement Initiative and redirect those resources to the Administrative Enforcement Initiative in the Fair Housing Initiatives Program.

I believe that the most efficient and effective way to protect Fair Housing is through the Administrative Enforcement Initiative of the Fair Housing Initiatives Program, which helps State and local governments who administer laws that include rights and remedies every day. They act to help Fair Housing. They know their communities, and they can enforce in their communities best.

My amendment would help protect more consumers. In fact, I believe administrative enforcement is less expensive to taxpayers. It is more certain. It has faster resolution. It has less conflicts of interest than some of these nonprofit proxy agencies that use the Private Enforcement Initiative.

In fact, there is a 1997 GAO study, Mr. Chairman, that revealed that more than half of the Private Enforcement Initiative dollars were concentrated in just 6 of the 27 awardees. I have asked the GAO to update that study and to look at private enforcement as far as its effectiveness because, as I said, it is slower and more expensive than administrative enforcement.

Therefore, I would ask my colleagues to support my congressional intent amendment to redirect these resources to our State and local governments who can more effectively administer justice. I ask my colleagues to support this amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to this amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. We have only recently received it, and I haven't fully analyzed it; but, on the face of it, it does appear to be shifting the support among private enforcement and public enforcement, the kind of private enforcement that involves community-based groups, that involves often more flexible ways of resolving conflicts and issues.

I simply think it is ill advised here tonight to undertake that kind of internal shifting of funds and would suggest that we reject this, understanding that we can return to it and examine this more fully to see exactly what is implied by this kind of internal shifting of funds within Fair Housing accounts.

I suggest that we reject this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I would simply say to my colleague from North Carolina that administrative enforcement is more effective, it is more efficient. That is why we should redirect these resources internally inside Fair Housing. It doesn't change Fair Housing dollars one penny.

It redirects the resources to more efficient and effective means of enforcement, from folks who enforce these laws every day and can do it faster and more effectively, to make sure the people that might be discriminated against get their redress sooner.

I am excited about this amendment. I think it will lead to much more effective enforcement. It does so without the conflict of interest of these private organizations that can have conflicts of interest, and that has been another issue that I have asked the GAO to look at in my letter to them today.

I apologize that the minority is just seeing this for the first time. I did talk about it at the Rules Committee the other day. It is something I have been working on just for a couple of days since that Rules Committee meeting when it came up. I apologized for not giving the gentleman from North Carolina more notice.

I would urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Stivers).

The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Grayson

Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Page 114, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert

``(increased by $150,000)''.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chair, this amendment seeks to raise the cap on funding for the Limited English Proficiency Initiative under the Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity section of the bill by 50 percent.

I want to highlight that we are not taking away anything from other programs. We are simply lifting the cap on this particular initiative. This amendment has passed by voice vote for the last 2 years, and it is my hope that it will do so again.

There are more than 40 million Americans who do not speak English as their first language. This tiny, but vital program demonstrates to the American people that we have equal protection under the law, regardless of what language we speak.

I hope to once again have the support of my friend from Florida and from the House as a whole.

I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Grayson).

The amendment was agreed to.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes

lead hazard reduction

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

information technology fund

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

Office of Inspector General

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

General Provisions--Department of Housing and Urban Development

(including rescissions)

Sec. 201. Eighty five percent of the amounts of budget authority, or in lieu thereof 85 percent of the cash amounts associated with such budget authority, that are recaptured from projects described in section 1012(a) of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Amendments Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 1437 note) shall be rescinded or in the case of cash, shall be remitted to the Treasury. Notwithstanding the previous sentence, the Secretary may award up to 15 percent of the budget authority or cash recaptured and not rescinded or remitted to the Treasury to provide project owners with incentives to refinance their project at a lower interest rate. Any amounts of budget authority or cash recaptured and not rescinded, returned to the Treasury, or otherwise awarded by September 30, 2016 shall be rescinded or in the case of cash, shall be remitted to the Treasury.

Sec. 202. None of the amounts made available under this Act may be used during fiscal year 2016 to investigate or prosecute under the Fair Housing Act any otherwise lawful activity engaged in by one or more persons, including the filing or maintaining of a nonfrivolous legal action, that is engaged in solely for the purpose of achieving or preventing action by a Government official or entity, or a court of competent jurisdiction.

Sec. 203. Sections 203 and 209 of division C of Public Law 112-55 (125 Stat. 693-694) shall apply during fiscal year 2016 as if such sections were included in this title, except that during such fiscal year such sections shall be applied by substituting ``fiscal year 2016'' for ``fiscal year 2011'' and for ``fiscal year 2012'' each place such terms appear, and shall be amended to reflect revised delineations of statistical areas established by the Office of Management and Budget pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3504(e)(3), 31 U.S.C. 1104(d), and Executive Order No. 10253.

Sec. 204. Except as explicitly provided in law, any grant, cooperative agreement or other assistance made pursuant to title II of this Act shall be made on a competitive basis and in accordance with section 102 of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 (42 U.S.C. 3545).

Sec. 205. Funds of the Department of Housing and Urban Development subject to the Government Corporation Control Act or section 402 of the Housing Act of 1950 shall be available, without regard to the limitations on administrative expenses, for legal services on a contract or fee basis, and for utilizing and making payment for the services and facilities of the Federal National Mortgage Association, Government National Mortgage Association, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, Federal Financing Bank, Federal Reserve banks or any member thereof, Federal Home Loan banks, and any insured bank within the meaning of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Act, as amended (12 U.S.C. 1811-11).

Sec. 206. Unless otherwise provided for in this Act or through a reprogramming of funds, no part of any appropriation for the Department of Housing and Urban Development shall be available for any program, project or activity in excess of amounts set forth in the budget estimates submitted to Congress.

Sec. 207. Corporations and agencies of the Department of Housing and Urban Development which are subject to the Government Corporation Control Act are hereby authorized to make such expenditures, within the limits of funds and borrowing authority available to each such corporation or agency and in accordance with law, and to make such contracts and commitments without regard to fiscal year limitations as provided by section 104 of such Act as may be necessary in carrying out the programs set forth in the budget for 2016 for such corporation or agency except as hereinafter provided: Provided, That collections of these corporations and agencies may be used for new loan or mortgage purchase commitments only to the extent expressly provided for in this Act (unless such loans are in support of other forms of assistance provided for in this or prior appropriations Acts), except that this proviso shall not apply to the mortgage insurance or guaranty operations of these corporations, or where loans or mortgage purchases are necessary to protect the financial interest of the United States Government.

Sec. 208. The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall provide quarterly reports to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations regarding all uncommitted, unobligated, recaptured and excess funds in each program and activity within the jurisdiction of the Department and shall submit additional, updated budget information to these Committees upon request.

Sec. 209. The President's formal budget request for fiscal year 2017, as well as the Department of Housing and Urban Development's congressional budget justifications to be submitted to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall use the identical account and sub-account structure provided under this Act.

Sec. 210. A public housing agency or such other entity that administers Federal housing assistance for the Housing Authority of the county of Los Angeles, California, and the States of Alaska, Iowa, and Mississippi shall not be required to include a resident of public housing or a recipient of assistance provided under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 on the board of directors or a similar governing board of such agency or entity as required under section (2)(b) of such Act. Each public housing agency or other entity that administers Federal housing assistance under section 8 for the Housing Authority of the county of Los Angeles, California and the States of Alaska, Iowa and Mississippi that chooses not to include a resident of public housing or a recipient of section 8 assistance on the board of directors or a similar governing board shall establish an advisory board of not less than six residents of public housing or recipients of section 8 assistance to provide advice and comment to the public housing agency or other administering entity on issues related to public housing and section 8. Such advisory board shall meet not less than quarterly.

Sec. 211. No funds provided under this title may be used for an audit of the Government National Mortgage Association that makes applicable requirements under the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 661 et seq.).

Sec. 212. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, subject to the conditions listed under this section, for fiscal years 2016 and 2017, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may authorize the transfer of some or all project-based assistance, debt held or insured by the Secretary and statutorily required low-income and very low-income use restrictions if any, associated with one or more multifamily housing project or projects to another multifamily housing project or projects.

(b) Transfers of project-based assistance under this section may be done in phases to accommodate the financing and other requirements related to rehabilitating or constructing the project or projects to which the assistance is transferred, to ensure that such project or projects meet the standards under subsection (c).

(c) The transfer authorized in subsection (a) is subject to the following conditions:

(1) Number and bedroom size of units.--

(A) For occupied units in the transferring project: the number of low-income and very low-income units and the configuration (i.e., bedroom size) provided by the transferring project shall be no less than when transferred to the receiving project or projects and the net dollar amount of Federal assistance provided to the transferring project shall remain the same in the receiving project or projects.

(B) For unoccupied units in the transferring project: the Secretary may authorize a reduction in the number of dwelling units in the receiving project or projects to allow for a reconfiguration of bedroom sizes to meet current market demands, as determined by the Secretary and provided there is no increase in the project-based assistance budget authority.

(2) The transferring project shall, as determined by the Secretary, be either physically obsolete or economically nonviable.

(3) The receiving project or projects shall meet or exceed applicable physical standards established by the Secretary.

(4) The owner or mortgagor of the transferring project shall notify and consult with the tenants residing in the transferring project and provide a certification of approval by all appropriate local governmental officials.

(5) The tenants of the transferring project who remain eligible for assistance to be provided by the receiving project or projects shall not be required to vacate their units in the transferring project or projects until new units in the receiving project are available for occupancy.

(6) The Secretary determines that this transfer is in the best interest of the tenants.

(7) If either the transferring project or the receiving project or projects meets the condition specified in subsection (d)(2)(A), any lien on the receiving project resulting from additional financing obtained by the owner shall be subordinate to any FHA-insured mortgage lien transferred to, or placed on, such project by the Secretary, except that the Secretary may waive this requirement upon determination that such a waiver is necessary to facilitate the financing of acquisition, construction, and/or rehabilitation of the receiving project or projects.

(8) If the transferring project meets the requirements of subsection (d)(2), the owner or mortgagor of the receiving project or projects shall execute and record either a continuation of the existing use agreement or a new use agreement for the project where, in either case, any use restrictions in such agreement are of no lesser duration than the existing use restrictions.

(9) The transfer does not increase the cost (as defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended) of any FHA-insured mortgage, except to the extent that appropriations are provided in advance for the amount of any such increased cost.

(d) For purposes of this section--

(1) the terms ``low-income'' and ``very low-income'' shall have the meanings provided by the statute and/or regulations governing the program under which the project is insured or assisted;

(2) the term ``multifamily housing project'' means housing that meets one of the following conditions--

(A) housing that is subject to a mortgage insured under the National Housing Act;

(B) housing that has project-based assistance attached to the structure including projects undergoing mark to market debt restructuring under the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Housing Act;

(C) housing that is assisted under section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959, as amended by section 801 of the Cranston-Gonzales National Affordable Housing Act;

(D) housing that is assisted under section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959, as such section existed before the enactment of the Cranston-Gonzales National Affordable Housing Act;

(E) housing that is assisted under section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzales National Affordable Housing Act; or

(F) housing or vacant land that is subject to a use agreement;

(3) the term ``project-based assistance'' means--

(A) assistance provided under section 8(b) of the United States Housing Act of 1937;

(B) assistance for housing constructed or substantially rehabilitated pursuant to assistance provided under section 8(b)(2) of such Act (as such section existed immediately before October 1, 1983);

(C) rent supplement payments under section 101 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965;

(D) interest reduction payments under section 236 and/or additional assistance payments under section 236(f)(2) of the National Housing Act;

(E) assistance payments made under section 202(c)(2) of the Housing Act of 1959; and

(F) assistance payments made under section 811(d)(2) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act;

(4) the term ``receiving project or projects'' means the multifamily housing project or projects to which some or all of the project-based assistance, debt, and statutorily required low-income and very low-income use restrictions are to be transferred;

(5) the term ``transferring project'' means the multifamily housing project which is transferring some or all of the project-based assistance, debt, and the statutorily required low-income and very low-income use restrictions to the receiving project or projects; and

(6) the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.

(e) Public Notice and Research Report.--

(1) The Secretary shall publish by notice in the Federal Register the terms and conditions, including criteria for HUD approval, of transfers pursuant to this section no later than 30 days before the effective date of such notice.

(2) The Secretary shall conduct an evaluation of the transfer authority under this section, including the effect of such transfers on the operational efficiency, contract rents, physical and financial conditions, and long-term preservation of the affected properties.

Sec. 213. (a) No assistance shall be provided under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f) to any individual who--

(1) is enrolled as a student at an institution of higher education (as defined under section 102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002));

(2) is under 24 years of age;

(3) is not a veteran;

(4) is unmarried;

(5) does not have a dependent child;

(6) is not a person with disabilities, as such term is defined in section 3(b)(3)(E) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)(3)(E)) and was not receiving assistance under such section 8 as of November 30, 2005; and

(7) is not otherwise individually eligible, or has parents who, individually or jointly, are not eligible, to receive assistance under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f).

(b) For purposes of determining the eligibility of a person to receive assistance under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f), any financial assistance (in excess of amounts received for tuition and any other required fees and charges) that an individual receives under the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.), from private sources, or an institution of higher education (as defined under the Higher Education Act of 1965

(20 U.S.C. 1002)), shall be considered income to that individual, except for a person over the age of 23 with dependent children.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of the bill through page 156, line 8 be considered read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.

The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Florida?

There was no objection.

The text of the remainder of the bill through page 156, line 8, is as follows:

Sec. 214. The funds made available for Native Alaskans under the heading ``Native American Housing Block Grants'' in title II of this Act shall be allocated to the same Native Alaskan housing block grant recipients that received funds in fiscal year 2005.

Sec. 215. Notwithstanding the limitation in the first sentence of section 255(g) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-20(g)), the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development may, until September 30, 2016, insure and enter into commitments to insure mortgages under such section 255.

Sec. 216. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in fiscal year 2016, in managing and disposing of any multifamily property that is owned or has a mortgage held by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and during the process of foreclosure on any property with a contract for rental assistance payments under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 or other Federal programs, the Secretary shall maintain any rental assistance payments under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 and other programs that are attached to any dwelling units in the property. To the extent the Secretary determines, in consultation with the tenants and the local government, that such a multifamily property owned or held by the Secretary is not feasible for continued rental assistance payments under such section 8 or other programs, based on consideration of

(1) the costs of rehabilitating and operating the property and all available Federal, State, and local resources, including rent adjustments under section 524 of the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (``MAHRAA'') and (2) environmental conditions that cannot be remedied in a cost-effective fashion, the Secretary may, in consultation with the tenants of that property, contract for project-based rental assistance payments with an owner or owners of other existing housing properties, or provide other rental assistance. The Secretary shall also take appropriate steps to ensure that project-based contracts remain in effect prior to foreclosure, subject to the exercise of contractual abatement remedies to assist relocation of tenants for imminent major threats to health and safety after written notice to and informed consent of the affected tenants and use of other available remedies, such as partial abatements or receivership. After disposition of any multifamily property described under this section, the contract and allowable rent levels on such properties shall be subject to the requirements under section 524 of MAHRAA.

Sec. 217. The commitment authority funded by fees as provided under the heading ``Community Development Loan Guarantees Program Account'' may be used to guarantee, or make commitments to guarantee, notes or other obligations issued by any State on behalf of non-entitlement communities in the State in accordance with the requirements of section 108 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974: Provided, That any State receiving such a guarantee or commitment shall distribute all funds subject to such guarantee to the units of general local government in non-entitlement areas that received the commitment.

Sec. 218. Public housing agencies that own and operate 400 or fewer public housing units may elect to be exempt from any asset management requirement imposed by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development in connection with the operating fund rule: Provided, That an agency seeking a discontinuance of a reduction of subsidy under the operating fund formula shall not be exempt from asset management requirements.

Sec. 219. With respect to the use of amounts provided in this Act and in future Acts for the operation, capital improvement and management of public housing as authorized by sections 9(d) and 9(e) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437g(d) and (e)), the Secretary shall not impose any requirement or guideline relating to asset management that restricts or limits in any way the use of capital funds for central office costs pursuant to section 9(g)(1) or 9(g)(2) of the United States Housing Act of 1937

(42 U.S.C. 1437g(g)(1), (2)): Provided, That a public housing agency may not use capital funds authorized under section 9(d) for activities that are eligible under section 9(e) for assistance with amounts from the operating fund in excess of the amounts permitted under section 9(g)(1) or 9(g)(2).

Sec. 220. No official or employee of the Department of Housing and Urban Development shall be designated as an allotment holder unless the Office of the Chief Financial Officer has determined that such allotment holder has implemented an adequate system of funds control and has received training in funds control procedures and directives. The Chief Financial Officer shall ensure that there is a trained allotment holder for each HUD sub-office under the accounts ``Executive Offices'' and ``Administrative Support Offices'', as well as each account receiving appropriations for ``Program Office Salaries and Expenses'', ``Government National Mortgage Association--Guarantees of Mortgage-Backed Securities Loan Guarantee Program Account'', and ``Office of Inspector General'' within the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Sec. 221. The Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development shall, for fiscal year 2016, notify the public through the Federal Register and other means, as determined appropriate, of the issuance of a notice of the availability of assistance or notice of funding availability

(NOFA) for any program or discretionary fund administered by the Secretary that is to be competitively awarded. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for fiscal year 2016, the Secretary may make the NOFA available only on the Internet at the appropriate Government web site or through other electronic media, as determined by the Secretary.

Sec. 222. Payment of attorney fees in program-related litigation must be paid from the individual program office and Office of General Counsel personnel funding. The annual budget submissions for program offices and Office of General Counsel personnel funding must include program-related litigation costs for attorney fees as a separate line item request.

Sec. 223. The Disaster Housing Assistance Programs, administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, shall be considered a ``program of the Department of Housing and Urban Development'' under section 904 of the McKinney Act for the purpose of income verifications and matching.

Sec. 224. (a) The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall take the required actions under subsection

(b) when a multifamily housing project with a section 8 contract or contract for similar project-based assistance:

(1) receives a Real Estate Assessment Center (REAC) score of 30 or less; or

(2) receives a REAC score between 31 and 59 and:

(A) fails to certify in writing to HUD within 60 days that all deficiencies have been corrected; or

(B) receives consecutive scores of less than 60 on REAC inspections.

Such requirements shall apply to insured and noninsured projects with assistance attached to the units under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f), but do not apply to such units assisted under section 8(o)(13) (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(13)) or to public housing units assisted with capital or operating funds under section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437g).

(b) The Secretary shall take the following required actions as authorized under subsection (a)--

(1) The Secretary shall notify the owner and provide an opportunity for response within 30 days. If the violations remain, the Secretary shall develop a Compliance, Disposition and Enforcement Plan within 60 days, with a specified timetable for correcting all deficiencies. The Secretary shall provide notice of the Plan to the owner, tenants, the local government, any mortgagees, and any contract administrator.

(2) At the end of the term of the Compliance, Disposition and Enforcement Plan, if the owner fails to fully comply with such plan, the Secretary may require immediate replacement of project management with a management agent approved by the Secretary, and shall take one or more of the following actions, and provide additional notice of those actions to the owner and the parties specified above:

(A) impose civil money penalties;

(B) abate the section 8 contract, including partial abatement, as determined by the Secretary, until all deficiencies have been corrected;

(C) pursue transfer of the project to an owner, approved by the Secretary under established procedures, which will be obligated to promptly make all required repairs and to accept renewal of the assistance contract as long as such renewal is offered; or

(D) seek judicial appointment of a receiver to manage the property and cure all project deficiencies or seek a judicial order of specific performance requiring the owner to cure all project deficiencies.

(c) The Secretary shall also take appropriate steps to ensure that project-based contracts remain in effect, subject to the exercise of contractual abatement remedies to assist relocation of tenants for imminent major threats to health and safety after written notice to and informed consent of the affected tenants and use of other remedies set forth above. To the extent the Secretary determines, in consultation with the tenants and the local government, that the property is not feasible for continued rental assistance payments under such section 8 or other programs, based on consideration of (1) the costs of rehabilitating and operating the property and all available Federal, State, and local resources, including rent adjustments under section 524 of the Multifamily Assisted Housing Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (``MAHRAA'') and (2) environmental conditions that cannot be remedied in a cost-effective fashion, the Secretary may, in consultation with the tenants of that property, contract for project-based rental assistance payments with an owner or owners of other existing housing properties, or provide other rental assistance. The Secretary shall report semi-annually on all properties covered by this section that are assessed through the Real Estate Assessment Center and have physical inspection scores of less than 30 or have consecutive physical inspection scores of less than 60. The report shall include:

(1) The enforcement actions being taken to address such conditions, including imposition of civil money penalties and termination of subsidies, and identify properties that have such conditions multiple times; and

(2) Actions that the Department of Housing and Urban Development is taking to protect tenants of such identified properties.

Sec. 225. None of the funds made available by this Act, or any other Act, for purposes authorized under section 8 (only with respect to the tenant-based rental assistance program) and section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437 et seq.), may be used by any public housing agency for any amount of salary, including bonuses, for the chief executive officer of which, or any other official or employee of which, that exceeds the annual rate of basic pay payable for a position at level IV of the Executive Schedule at any time during any public housing agency fiscal year 2016.

Sec. 226. None of the funds in this Act may be available for the doctoral dissertation research grant program at the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Sec. 227. None of the funds in this Act provided to the Department of Housing and Urban Development may be used to make a grant award unless the Secretary notifies the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations not less than 3 full business days before any project, State, locality, housing authority, tribe, nonprofit organization, or other entity selected to receive a grant award is announced by the Department or its offices.

Sec. 228. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to require or enforce the Physical Needs Assessment

(PNA).

Sec. 229. None of the funds made available in this Act shall be used by the Federal Housing Administration, the Government National Mortgage Administration, or the Department of Housing and Urban Development to insure, securitize, or establish a Federal guarantee of any mortgage or mortgage backed security that refinances or otherwise replaces a mortgage that has been subject to eminent domain condemnation or seizure, by a state, municipality, or any other political subdivision of a state.

Sec. 230. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to terminate the status of a unit of general local government as a metropolitan city (as defined in section 102 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5302)) with respect to grants under section 106 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 5306).

Sec. 231. Amounts made available under this Act which are either appropriated, allocated, advanced on a reimbursable basis, or transferred to the Office of Policy Development and Research in the Department of Housing and Urban Development and functions thereof, for research, evaluation, or statistical purposes, and which are unexpended at the time of completion of a contract, grant, or cooperative agreement, may be deobligated and shall immediately become available and may be reobligated in that fiscal year or the subsequent fiscal year for the research, evaluation, or statistical purposes for which the amounts are made available to that Office subject to reprogramming requirements in Section 405 of this Act.

Sec. 232. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to require a recipient or sub-recipient of funding for the purpose of land acquisition, affordable housing construction, or affordable housing rehabilitation to meet Energy Star standards or any other energy efficiency standards that exceed the requirements of applicable State and local building codes.

Sec. 233. Of the unobligated balances, including recaptures and carryover, remaining from funds appropriated in section 1497(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Public Law 111-203; 42 U.S.C. 5301 note) and section 2301(a) of title III of division B of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-289; 42 U.S.C. 5301 note), $7,000,000 is hereby rescinded.

Sec. 234. (a) All unobligated balances, including recaptures and carryover, remaining from funds appropriated to the Department of Housing and Urban Development under the heading ``Rural Housing and Economic Development'' are hereby rescinded.

(b) Effective October 1, 2015, all unobligated balances, including recaptures and carryover, remaining from funds appropriated to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for accounts under the headings ``Management and Administration'' and ``Program Office Salaries and Expenses'' in division K of Public Law 113-235 are rescinded.

This title may be cited as the ``Department of Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act, 2016''.

TITLE III--RELATED AGENCIES

Access Board

salaries and expenses

For expenses necessary for the Access Board, as authorized by section 502 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended,

$7,548,000: Provided, That, notwithstanding any other provision of law, there may be credited to this appropriation funds received for publications and training expenses.

Federal Maritime Commission

salaries and expenses

For necessary expenses of the Federal Maritime Commission as authorized by section 201(d) of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, as amended (46 U.S.C. 307), including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; hire of passenger motor vehicles as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343(b); and uniforms or allowances therefore, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902,

$25,660,000: Provided, That not to exceed $2,000 shall be available for official reception and representation expenses.

National Railroad Passenger Corporation Office of Inspector General

salaries and expenses

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

National Transportation Safety Board

salaries and expenses

For necessary expenses of the National Transportation Safety Board, including hire of passenger motor vehicles and aircraft; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for individuals not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the rate for a GS-15; uniforms, or allowances therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-5902),

$103,981,000, of which not to exceed $2,000 may be used for official reception and representation expenses. The amounts made available to the National Transportation Safety Board in this Act include amounts necessary to make lease payments on an obligation incurred in fiscal year 2001 for a capital lease.

Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation

payment to the neighborhood reinvestment corporation

For payment to the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation for use in neighborhood reinvestment activities, as authorized by the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation Act

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

(1) The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation (NRC) shall make grants to counseling intermediaries approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) (with match to be determined by NRC based on affordability and the economic conditions of an area; a match also may be waived by NRC based on the aforementioned conditions) to provide mortgage foreclosure mitigation assistance primarily to States and areas with high rates of defaults and foreclosures to help eliminate the default and foreclosure of mortgages of owner-occupied single-family homes that are at risk of such foreclosure. Other than areas with high rates of defaults and foreclosures, grants may also be provided to approved counseling intermediaries based on a geographic analysis of the Nation by NRC which determines where there is a prevalence of mortgages that are risky and likely to fail, including any trends for mortgages that are likely to default and face foreclosure. A State Housing Finance Agency may also be eligible where the State Housing Finance Agency meets all the requirements under this paragraph. A HUD-approved counseling intermediary shall meet certain mortgage foreclosure mitigation assistance counseling requirements, as determined by NRC, and shall be approved by HUD or NRC as meeting these requirements.

(2) Mortgage foreclosure mitigation assistance shall only be made available to homeowners of owner-occupied homes with mortgages in default or in danger of default. These mortgages shall likely be subject to a foreclosure action and homeowners will be provided such assistance that shall consist of activities that are likely to prevent foreclosures and result in the long-term affordability of the mortgage retained pursuant to such activity or another positive outcome for the homeowner. No funds made available under this paragraph may be provided directly to lenders or homeowners to discharge outstanding mortgage balances or for any other direct debt reduction payments.

(3) The use of mortgage foreclosure mitigation assistance by approved counseling intermediaries and State Housing Finance Agencies shall involve a reasonable analysis of the borrower's financial situation, an evaluation of the current value of the property that is subject to the mortgage, counseling regarding the assumption of the mortgage by another non-Federal party, counseling regarding the possible purchase of the mortgage by a non-Federal third party, counseling and advice of all likely restructuring and refinancing strategies or the approval of a work-out strategy by all interested parties.

(4) NRC may provide up to 15 percent of the total funds under this paragraph to its own charter members with expertise in foreclosure prevention counseling, subject to a certification by NRC that the procedures for selection do not consist of any procedures or activities that could be construed as a conflict of interest or have the appearance of impropriety.

(5) HUD-approved counseling entities and State Housing Finance Agencies receiving funds under this paragraph shall have demonstrated experience in successfully working with financial institutions as well as borrowers facing default, delinquency and foreclosure as well as documented counseling capacity, outreach capacity, past successful performance and positive outcomes with documented counseling plans (including post mortgage foreclosure mitigation counseling), loan workout agreements and loan modification agreements. NRC may use other criteria to demonstrate capacity in underserved areas.

(6) Of the total amount made available under this paragraph, up to $2,000,000 may be made available to build the mortgage foreclosure and default mitigation counseling capacity of counseling intermediaries through NRC training courses with HUD-approved counseling intermediaries and their partners, except that private financial institutions that participate in NRC training shall pay market rates for such training.

(7) Of the total amount made available under this paragraph, up to 5 percent may be used for associated administrative expenses for NRC to carry out activities provided under this section.

(8) Mortgage foreclosure mitigation assistance grants may include a budget for outreach and advertising, and training, as determined by NRC.

(9) NRC shall continue to report bi-annually to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations as well as the Senate Banking Committee and House Financial Services Committee on its efforts to mitigate mortgage default.

United States Interagency Council on Homelessness

operating expenses

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

$3,530,000.

TITLE IV

GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS ACT

Sec. 401. None of the funds in this Act shall be used for the planning or execution of any program to pay the expenses of, or otherwise compensate, non-Federal parties intervening in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act.

Sec. 402. None of the funds appropriated in this Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current fiscal year, nor may any be transferred to other appropriations, unless expressly so provided herein.

Sec. 403. The expenditure of any appropriation under this Act for any consulting service through a procurement contract pursuant to section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, shall be limited to those contracts where such expenditures are a matter of public record and available for public inspection, except where otherwise provided under existing law, or under existing Executive order issued pursuant to existing law.

Sec. 404. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act may be obligated or expended for any employee training that--

(1) does not meet identified needs for knowledge, skills, and abilities bearing directly upon the performance of official duties;

(2) contains elements likely to induce high levels of emotional response or psychological stress in some participants;

(3) does not require prior employee notification of the content and methods to be used in the training and written end of course evaluation;

(4) contains any methods or content associated with religious or quasi-religious belief systems or ``new age'' belief systems as defined in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Notice N-915.022, dated September 2, 1988; or

(5) is offensive to, or designed to change, participants' personal values or lifestyle outside the workplace.

(b) Nothing in this section shall prohibit, restrict, or otherwise preclude an agency from conducting training bearing directly upon the performance of official duties.

Sec. 405. Except as otherwise provided in this Act, none of the funds provided in this Act, provided by previous appropriations Acts to the agencies or entities funded in this Act that remain available for obligation or expenditure in fiscal year 2016, or provided from any accounts in the Treasury derived by the collection of fees and available to the agencies funded by this Act, shall be available for obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming of funds that:

(1) creates a new program;

(2) eliminates a program, project, or activity;

(3) increases funds or personnel for any program, project, or activity for which funds have been denied or restricted by the Congress;

(4) proposes to use funds directed for a specific activity by either the House or Senate Committees on Appropriations for a different purpose;

(5) augments existing programs, projects, or activities in excess of $5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less;

(6) reduces existing programs, projects, or activities by

$5,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less; or

(7) creates, reorganizes, or restructures a branch, division, office, bureau, board, commission, agency, administration, or department different from the budget justifications submitted to the Committees on Appropriations or the table accompanying the explanatory statement accompanying this Act, whichever is more detailed, unless prior approval is received from the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations: Provided, That not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, each agency funded by this Act shall submit a report to the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and of the House of Representatives to establish the baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer authorities for the current fiscal year: Provided further, That the report shall include:

(A) a table for each appropriation with a separate column to display the prior year enacted level, the President's budget request, adjustments made by Congress, adjustments due to enacted rescissions, if appropriate, and the fiscal year enacted level;

(B) a delineation in the table for each appropriation and its respective prior year enacted level by object class and program, project, and activity as detailed in the budget appendix for the respective appropriation; and

(C) an identification of items of special congressional interest.

Sec. 406. Except as otherwise specifically provided by law, not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated balances remaining available at the end of fiscal year 2016 from appropriations made available for salaries and expenses for fiscal year 2016 in this Act, shall remain available through September 30, 2017, for each such account for the purposes authorized: Provided, That a request shall be submitted to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations for approval prior to the expenditure of such funds: Provided further, That these requests shall be made in compliance with reprogramming guidelines under section 405 of this Act.

Sec. 407. No funds in this Act may be used to support any Federal, State, or local projects that seek to use the power of eminent domain, unless eminent domain is employed only for a public use: Provided, That for purposes of this section, public use shall not be construed to include economic development that primarily benefits private entities: Provided further, That any use of funds for mass transit, railroad, airport, seaport or highway projects, as well as utility projects which benefit or serve the general public

(including energy-related, communication-related, water-related and wastewater-related infrastructure), other structures designated for use by the general public or which have other common-carrier or public-utility functions that serve the general public and are subject to regulation and oversight by the government, and projects for the removal of an immediate threat to public health and safety or brownfields as defined in the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (Public Law 107-118) shall be considered a public use for purposes of eminent domain.

Sec. 408. None of the funds made available in this Act may be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States Government, except pursuant to a transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this Act or any other appropriations Act.

Sec. 409. No part of any appropriation contained in this Act shall be available to pay the salary for any person filling a position, other than a temporary position, formerly held by an employee who has left to enter the Armed Forces of the United States and has satisfactorily completed his or her period of active military or naval service, and has within 90 days after his or her release from such service or from hospitalization continuing after discharge for a period of not more than 1 year, made application for restoration to his or her former position and has been certified by the Office of Personnel Management as still qualified to perform the duties of his or her former position and has not been restored thereto.

Sec. 410. No funds appropriated pursuant to this Act may be expended by an entity unless the entity agrees that in expending the assistance the entity will comply with sections 2 through 4 of the Act of March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c, popularly known as the ``Buy American Act'').

Sec. 411. No funds appropriated or otherwise made available under this Act shall be made available to any person or entity that has been convicted of violating the Buy American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c).

Sec. 412. None of the funds made available in this Act may be used for first-class airline accommodations in contravention of sections 301-10.122 and 301-10.123 of title 41, Code of Federal Regulations.

Sec. 413. (a) None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to approve a new foreign air carrier permit under sections 41301 through 41305 of title 49, United States Code, or exemption application under section 40109 of that title of an air carrier already holding an air operators certificate issued by a country that is party to the U.S.-E.U.-Iceland-Norway Air Transport Agreement where such approval would contravene United States law or Article 17 bis of the U.S.-E.U.-Iceland-Norway Air Transport Agreement.

(b) Nothing in this section shall prohibit, restrict or otherwise preclude the Secretary of Transportation from granting a foreign air carrier permit or an exemption to such an air carrier where such authorization is consistent with the U.S.-E.U.-Iceland-Norway Air Transport Agreement and United States law.

Sec. 414. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used by the Federal Maritime Commission or the Administrator of the Maritime Administration to issue a license or certificate for a commercial vessel that docked or anchored within the previous 180 days within 7 miles of a port on property that was confiscated, in whole or in part, by the Cuban Government, as the terms confiscated, Cuban Government, and property are defined in paragraphs (4), (5), and (12)(A), respectively, of section 4 of the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996 (22 U.S.C. 6023).

The Acting CHAIR. Are there any amendments to that portion of the bill?

The Clerk will read.

The Clerk read as follows:

spending reduction account

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

amendment offered by mr. stivers

Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the following:

Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for the Private Enforcement Initiative of the Fair Housing Initiatives Program under section 561(b) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1987 (42 U.S.C. 3616a(b)) and section 125.401 of the regulations of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (24 C.F.R. 125.401).

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I will be fairly brief.

This is a followup amendment. We have already accepted the congressional intent that we will have a preference toward administrative enforcement. This is a followup limitation amendment that basically says we will not, for this calendar year, use the Private Enforcement Initiative.

As the gentleman from North Carolina said, we can always come back; but I think we need to have time for this GAO study that I have requested to come back because I would assert that administrative enforcement is less expensive to taxpayers than private enforcement.

It creates more certainty. It happens faster. It has less conflict of interest than the Private Enforcement Initiative. I would ask that my colleagues support this limitation amendment on the Private Enforcement Initiative for this year period.

I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 0015

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Again, Mr. Chairman, let me say how unfortunate I believe it is that we are dealing with this kind of amendment in this setting here tonight without really having much notice, much ability to understand the full implications.

I do think that we need to appreciate the role of what the gentleman calls private organizations. We are really talking here about nonprofits, about mediators, about the kind of working out of complaints, working out of problems, informal work with landlords, the kind of thing that actually helps avoid legal action and avoid litigation. There is a lot that can be mediated, a lot of things can be worked out in the fair housing arena. There are many nonprofit groups that do a good job of doing that.

Mr. Chairman, the gentleman apparently has lots of complaints about this, and there have been a couple of prominent cases. I am aware of that. But the notion that we would come in here tonight and make a change of this magnitude, of this importance, I simply don't think is responsible.

So I will speak for myself. I am perfectly willing to look at this matter down the road. I understand there may be some issues here, but this is a pretty drastic amendment, and you are taking a whole area here of mediation and informal conciliation, things that actually keep things out of the courts, keep things out of the legal system and out of litigation. I don't know why we would want to do that. It seems reckless to me.

I recommend that we reject this amendment and, at the same time, pledge to look at this carefully and work on it later.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Chair, does recognize that there are problems in the private enforcement initiative. He just admitted that. There is a lot of lawsuit abuse. In fact, many of these organizations sue first and ask questions later. They don't do their due diligence. They send interns in to actually look at these places and file lawsuits before they get the facts.

The gentleman asserted that we shouldn't make these kind of changes. That is why the people sent us here, to make things better. We are supposed to do it every day, and when we see problems, we need to fix them. This is a temporary, 1-year halt of the private enforcement initiative with the GAO study that is not directed in this bill, but I asked for by letter through the GAO, and they are always good about doing those when you ask them to. They haven't looked at this program since 1997.

Mr. Chairman, it is time to look at this program in detail. I would assert that our local and State governments can also do the mediation that the gentleman from North Carolina talked about, Mr. Chairman, and they can do it better, more efficiently, and without the conflicts of interest that some of these private organizations have done.

So I think we ought to give it a try. That is the great thing about an annual appropriations bill. Guess what; we get to do it again next year. I am certainly willing to admit if I am wrong and we find out through a GAO study that the private enforcement has worked well. But there have been articles in the paper about some of the lawsuit abuse that we have seen all across the country, and I think we should just take a strategic pause here and give the money to our State and local governments who can better enforce our laws. They do it every day, and they can do it through the mediation and things that the gentleman asserts that these private enforcement initiatives can do so well.

Mr. Chairman, I would urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I think it will help make our fair housing laws better, and it will protect more consumers.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Stivers).

The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes appeared to have it.

Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio will be postponed.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Grayson

Mr. GRAYSON. I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the following:

Sec. ___. None of the funds made available in this Act may be used to enter into a contract with any offeror or any of its principals if the offeror certifies, as required by the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that the offeror or any of its principals--

(1) within a three-year period preceding this offer has been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against it for: commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public

(Federal, State, or local) contract or subcontract; violation of Federal or State antitrust statutes relating to the submission of offers; or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, tax evasion, violating Federal criminal tax laws, or receiving stolen property; or

(2) are presently indicted for, or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity with, commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (1); or

(3) within a three-year period preceding this offer, has been notified of any delinquent Federal taxes in an amount that exceeds $3,000 for which the liability remains unsatisfied.

Mr. GRAYSON (during the reading). Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent that the reading be waived.

The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Florida?

There was no objection.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chair, this amendment is identical to other amendments that have been inserted by voice vote into every appropriations bill considered under an open rule during the 113th and 114th Congresses.

My amendment would expand the list of parties with whom the Federal Government is prohibited from contracting due to serious misconduct on the part of that contractor. It is my hope that this amendment will be noncontroversial, as it always has been, and again passed unanimously by the House.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Grayson).

The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Fitzpatrick

Mr. FITZPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the following:

Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used in contravention of section 121.584 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. FITZPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, my amendment will ensure that the FAA is doing everything that it can to certify that our aircraft are protected during a moment that pilots, flight attendants, and Federal law enforcement officers have all said that the aircraft is vulnerable to terror hijackings. Despite the effort to safeguard the cockpit after the 9/11 terror attacks, today, operational experience has highlighted that a critical vulnerability remains when a pilot must open the hardened, reinforced cockpit doors to eat, rest, or use the bathroom during long flights. Even the FAA recognizes that, ``During this door transition, the flight deck is vulnerable.''

Current FAA regulations require that the area outside the flight deck be secure before the reinforced cockpit door is opened. Currently, some airlines are using human shields or, in some cases, drink carts to try to block entry to the cockpit and claim it ``secure.'' But only one method has been thoroughly studied and proven to beat the threat of a trained hijacker exploiting this particular vulnerability, and that is an installed physical secondary barrier door. These barriers are light, inexpensive wire gates that are able to protect the flight deck long enough for the pilot to shut the reinforced door.

This double door security procedure is something that Israeli airlines have been using for over a decade. They understand the risk and how to mitigate it. A Cato study has shown these secondary barrier doors to be the most cost-effective way to protect the cockpit door when the reinforced door is opened.

This is not some hypothetical threat. We know for a fact that terrorists maintain their desire to exploit vulnerabilities in our aircraft safety protocols to bring down an airliner just like they did on September 11, 2001. A recent USA Today headline read, ``ISIS' Next Test Could Be a 9/11-Style Attack.'' In 2013, outgoing FBI Director Robert Mueller said that the terror scenario he fears most remains an attack with the use of an aircraft.

Perhaps no one knows the consequences of terrorists hijacking our aircraft more so than my constituent, Ellen Saracini. The terror hijackings of September 11 took the life of her husband, Victor Saracini, Captain of United Flight 175, which was hijacked and flown into the South Tower of the World Trade Center by al Qaeda terrorists.

Inspired by Ellen and the pilots and flight attendants that stand with her, I have been working with a bipartisan, bicameral group of lawmakers to have these commonsense, cost-effective security features installed on every single large passenger aircraft in the United States through my bill, H.R. 911, the Saracini Aviation Safety Act.

Some have pointed to the ``layered security'' approach to aircraft security as proof that we don't need secondary barriers, but one only need to read current headlines to see the huge gaps in our layered security. As we recently learned, undercover agents, we saw, this week, were able to get weapons past the TSA 95 percent of the time.

Mr. Chairman, a recent Advisory Circular issued by the FAA highlights the risk to the cockpit during door transition and calls for the use of effective protection measures. Support for this amendment today would build on this positive step used by the FAA by showing that Congress is serious about this issue and that installed physical secondary barriers are the only way that we can guarantee, as FAA regulations do require, that the flight deck be secure prior to that reinforced door being opened.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fitzpatrick).

The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Grayson

Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the following:

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

Mr. GRAYSON (during the reading). Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent that the reading be waived.

The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Florida?

There was no objection.

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

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, this is a good government amendment the House passed by voice vote last year. It simply states that bonus payments should not be paid to contractors whose projects are behind schedule or over budget.

I urge support for this amendment that combats waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer dollars, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back the balance of my time.

The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Grayson).

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

The motion was agreed to.

Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) having assumed the chair, Mr. Collins of Georgia, Acting Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill

(H.R. 2577) making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

____________________

SOURCE: Congressional Record Vol. 161, No. 88