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.
“FISCAL SOLVENCY OF CERTAIN TRUST FUNDS” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Labor was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H9016-H9023 on July 29, 2009.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
FISCAL SOLVENCY OF CERTAIN TRUST FUNDS
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3357) to restore sums to the Highway Trust Fund and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 3357
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. FUNDING OF THE HIGHWAY TRUST FUND.
Subsection (f) of section 9503 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to determination of trust fund balances after September 30, 1998) is amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (2), and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) Increase in fund balance.--Out of money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, there is hereby appropriated (without fiscal year limitation) to the Highway Trust Fund $7,000,000,000.''.
SEC 2. ADVANCES TO THE UNEMPLOYMENT TRUST FUND AND OTHER
FUNDS.
The item relating to ``Department of Labor--Employment and Training Administration--Advances to the Unemployment Trust Fund and Other Funds'' in title I of division F of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8; 123 Stat. 754) is amended by striking ``to remain available through September 30, 2010'' and all that follows (before the heading for the following item) and inserting `'such sums as may be necessary''.
SEC. 3. FHA MORTGAGE INSURANCE COMMITMENT AUTHORITY.
The item relating to ``Federal Housing Administration--Mutual Mortgage Insurance Program Account'' in title II of division I of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8; 123 Stat. 966) is amended by striking
``$315,000,000,000'' and inserting ``$400,000,000,000''.
SEC. 4. GNMA MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES GUARANTEE COMMITMENT
AUTHORITY.
The item relating to ``Government National Mortgage Association--Guarantees of Mortgage-Backed Securities Loan Guarantee Program Account'' in title II of division I of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8; 123 Stat. 967) is amended by striking ``$300,000,000,000'' and inserting ``$400,000,000,000''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Camp) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
General Leave
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the bill H.R. 3357, as amended.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Georgia?
There was no objection.
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, transportation is one of the most important issues in our country, so I am proud to have served on both the Ways and Means Committee and on what was then the Public Works and Transportation Committee.
I would like to thank Chairman Rangel and Chairman Oberstar for their leadership on this important issue.
The bipartisan bill before the House today will provide the necessary funds to keep important transportation projects operating in States around the country. As we all know, the Highway Trust Fund will run out of funding by September. We must act, and we must act now.
In 1998, Congress passed a highway bill that took more than $8 billion out of the trust fund and put it in the Treasury. In addition, Congress stopped the Highway Trust Fund from earning interest on its investment. If these steps had not been taken, the balance in the Highway Trust Fund would be nearly $20 billion more than it is now.
{time} 1545
Last year we transferred $8 billion back, and the legislation we are considering today would transfer $7 billion more.
I want to be clear, Mr. Speaker. No new money is spent under this bill. This bill should keep the Highway Trust Fund fully funded until 2009. If we fail to act today, our people, our States, and our economy will be harmed. In Georgia, where unemployment is already above 10 percent, we cannot afford to lose another 8,500 jobs because of failure to act.
Last year, all sides understood how critical highway funding is to our economy. I hope the legislation we are considering today will enjoy similar bipartisan support. I urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this important legislation.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CAMP. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. CAMP asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. CAMP. Last week, we appropriated an unlimited amount of general funds to the unemployment trust funds throughout fiscal year 2010, which starts in October, and today we're doing the same thing for the last 2 months of this year, ensuring these funds don't run out while Congress is on district work period. Both actions are needed because the Democrats' economic policy has resulted in record job loss, record deficits, and none of the job creation they promised.
Democrats predicted unemployment would top out at 8 percent if the stimulus passed; instead, it's 9.5 percent and rising. In Michigan, it's above 15 percent. There are now a record 9.2 million collecting unemployment checks instead of paychecks. That's 1.1 million more than when the stimulus was passed. So if the stimulus is stimulating anything, it's record unemployment, not jobs.
Where are the jobs? Americans can surely see the record unemployment, but they cannot see where the jobs are. That's because millions of jobs are disappearing, not being created. What's more, since President Obama was sworn in, the Nation's public debt and unemployment, combined, has risen by a shocking 40 percent. And that's before literally trillions of dollars in additional spending under the Democrats' stimulus, energy, and health plans, and whatever higher unemployment lies ahead.
This bill reflects the continued failure of Democratic economic policy to save or create millions of jobs they promised that would flow quickly from their stimulus bill. More unemployment benefits instead of paychecks have led directly to more State insolvency and more Federal loans to those insolvent States. And that has drained the Federal bailout funds so much, it now needs its own bailout. That's what this bill does.
We had a choice when it came to the stimulus last February. We could have chosen a better policy of stimulating private-sector growth creating twice the jobs at half the price. That was the Republican plan. Instead, Democrats insisted on their government focus plan, which has produced no jobs and a mountain of debt. Today, in my view, we don't really have a choice but to support this bill; otherwise, in the next 2 months, laid-off workers will not get the unemployment benefits they were promised. American workers should not be forced to pay for the mistakes and failures of the Democrats' so-called stimulus bill. So this bill is necessary.
But in the longer run, we need to work together to create jobs so Americans can receive more paychecks, not more unemployment checks.
I would also note, Mr. Speaker, that this bill provides an emergency transfer of $7 billion in the general fund revenue to prop up the Highway Trust Fund for the reminder of this fiscal year. This is not the first time Congress has had to fill a year-end shortfall in the trust fund to ensure that State highway projects can go forward. And unless we get serious about enacting long-term structural reforms as we move ahead with the next reauthorization bill, it surely won't be the last bill, either.
I don't think anyone in this Chamber thinks that yet another short-
term general fund transfer is the ideal solution to these chronic shortfalls, and I certainly hope that going forward, the majority focuses its attention on long-term structural reforms and not just on higher and higher spending levels.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota, the Chair of the Transportation Committee, Mr. Oberstar.
Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentleman for the time and his leadership on this issue and Mr. Neal, the Chair of the subcommittee, who spent a great amount of time in hearings last month and this month on the current status and future of the Highway Trust Fund.
I would just like to underscore, in response to the gentleman from Michigan, we share the pain of the drop in VMT on the miles traveled throughout the Nation and the consequent loss of revenue in the Highway Trust Fund. It started in 2007, and by 2008 we had registered, for the first time in the history of the Highway Trust Fund and the interstate highway program, a drop of 60 billion vehicle miles traveled. That had never happened before in the history of the Highway Trust Fund because of the condition of the national economy.
We are beginning to recover. We're beginning to see the statistics going in the right direction. VMT, reported by the Department of Transportation on a monthly basis, shows increases in January, February, March, April, and May. And all of the indicators, the rural interstate, the rural arterial, rural NHS, National Highway System rose, the urban interstate. All are a percentage, a small percentage, but percentage increases over the months a year ago.
There are two indicators that are down. Urban arterial and various urban roads are down about a half percent and 1.3 percent, respectively. The trend is in the right direction. I regret, too, that we have to take this step. We should have spent this week passing the committee's bill for the future of surface transportation. We do have a bipartisan product.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. I yield the gentleman another 1 minute.
Mr. OBERSTAR. And I welcome the support of the gentleman from Michigan for that initiative. It will address the long-term future, the 6-year future of transportation. It will totally transform the Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, make it easier to move projects into operation, and much more that is in our 775-page bill. We will do that in September.
This is an infusion, not an extension. We are not standing for the wish of the other body or of the administration for an extension of time. We're not going to let that happen. This committee has done and will continue to do its work in a partnership within our committee. And I hope the bill comes to the floor within the entire body.
Meanwhile, this $7 billion infusion will carry the trust fund through the end of the fiscal year and into October against any unforeseen drop in VMT or loss in revenue into the trust fund. I think the trends are all in the right direction and that we are not going to be losing revenue.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3357, to restore sums to the Highway Trust Fund.
This legislation, introduced by Chairman Rangel, Chairman Obey, and me, includes a provision restoring $7 billion to the Highway Account of the Highway Trust Fund to ensure that the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) can meet its existing commitments under the Federal-aid Highway program.
According to DOT, the Highway Account of the Trust Fund may run out of cash as early as the beginning of September and may not have enough funding to fully reimburse States for their Federal highway investments.
This situation makes clear that we have reached the logical conclusion of the course set by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). Unfortunately, the legacy that has been left for users is an over-
extended Trust Fund, uncertainty, and potential funding cuts.
SAFETEA-LU intentionally put the Highway Trust Fund on the path to a zero cash balance. Recent declines in vehicle miles traveled due to high fuel prices and the weak economy have merely exacerbated a pre-
existing imbalance between Trust Fund revenues and expenditures that was created by SAFETEA-LU.
The previous administration's unwillingness to make hard choices has left the 111th Congress, and particularly the Committee on Ways and Means and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, with the unenviable task of finding a way to finance the existing program level, in addition to much-needed increases in investment.
Since taking office, the Obama administration has implemented a system to closely track actual Trust Fund revenues, outlays, and balances, and has been communicating with Congress the need to take steps to address this situation before we reach the crisis point.
According to DOT, by September 4, the Highway Account will not have sufficient funds to fully reimburse States for highway projects (-$285 million), and DOT will immediately begin rationing reimbursements to States, creating cash flow problems for States and significant uncertainty for the future of the program.
By October 1, DOT estimates that, without action by Congress, the Highway Account balance will be -$1.9 billion.
However, this shortfall amount is only an estimate and the estimate is subject to a series of revenue and outlay adjustments that occur in August and September that could cause negative adjustments to the Trust Fund balance, including: the ``true-up'' of the account in which the Trust Fund will have to reimburse the General Fund if previous payments of estimated fuel taxes into the Trust Fund are greater than the taxes actually owed; the annual mid-session review of the President's Budget which updates economic assumptions and can affect vehicle miles travelled estimates; the receipt of actual revenues and outlays that differ from DOT's current estimates; and the need to maintain a minimum balance in the Trust Fund to continue daily reimbursements for the States.
In fact, last August, reconciling Trust Fund revenue receipts with prior revenue projections caused a downward adjustment in the Trust Fund balance of -$3.2 billion.
While such a dramatic swing in Trust Fund revenues is unlikely under the procedures adopted by the current administration, restoring $7 billion to the Highway Account of the Trust Fund will cover the projected shortfall and provide a cash balance to offset any additional shortfall if the DOT estimates are in error.
Failure to act will mean that the Federal Government will be unable to pay all of the bills submitted by the States for reimbursement under the Federal-aid highway program. If that were to occur, under current law, the Federal Government will be required to pay interest on unpaid bills.
In addition, many states would begin to experience immediate cash flow problems if they are not fully reimbursed for Federal-aid highway projects.
We must enact this critical legislation this week to avoid slowdowns or reductions in infrastructure investment, and the loss of any more American construction jobs.
Both the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation have determined that this proposal does not constitute a spending outlay, would not violate pay-go, and will have no revenue effect.
Enactment of this legislation will ensure full funding of the highway investment levels authorized by current law, and prevent devastating slowdowns or cuts in each state's Federal highway funds.
While H.R. 3357 is a short-term solution, it is essential that we resolve this immediate crisis. As we proceed with consideration of the
``Surface Transportation Authorization Act of 2009'', we will continue to work with the Committee on Ways and Means to develop a sustainable financing proposal to address the future of surface transportation.
I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), the distinguished Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, for his leadership in ensuring that these funds are provided to sustain the Highway Trust Fund.
I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 3357.
Mr. CAMP. I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).
Mr. MICA. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I want to join my Democrat counterpart who leads the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Mr. Oberstar, in requesting the $7 billion transfer. If we do not transfer these funds to keep the Highway Trust Fund secure through September 30, the consequences for the Nation at this time of economic difficulty would be an absolute disaster. In fact, we would close down probably every major highway transportation project in the Nation. That's how serious this is.
Unfortunately, as the Republican leader of the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Camp, said, we've been here and, unfortunately, had to do this before. This is the second bailout of the fund.
Mr. Oberstar has been working nonstop for months even before this session of Congress to bring forth a responsible bill. We've tried to act in a bipartisan administration. The day that we were about to announce our policy and plans for reauthorization, the administration came in and undermined the whole effort with an 18-month extension.
We need the transportation bill now. Unfortunately, we need this gap of money through September 30 or we will really see economic difficulty across this land. So this is a Band-Aid approach. I'm sorry that we have to do it. I know there are some Members that are concerned about this. We do need a long-term solution. We will work together to get that done. The minute this passes, we'll continue our efforts.
But if we do not act, it will have devastating consequences in every one of the States across this Nation as far as closing down transportation projects and closing down jobs at the most difficult time in the country's recent economic history.
So I want a long-term solution. I join Mr. Oberstar in requesting that we pass this measure. And unfortunately, we are put in this position of being between a rock and a hard place.
I would be glad to yield to the chairman.
Mr. OBERSTAR. Thank you for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I want to compliment my colleague on the committee, Mr. Mica, for the splendid partnership we have had personally and staff-to-
staff in crafting this bill, and the gentleman has stated the case right on. And were it not for the intrusion of the administration, we would be on the floor this week with that 6-year authorization. And I thank the gentleman for that splendid partnership that we have had.
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington, the Chair of the Income Security Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee, Congressman McDermott.
(Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, this legislation will allow the Federal unemployment trust funds to receive interest-bearing loans from the general Treasury. These loans will be repaid when the unemployment trust funds once again have adequate reserves.
Currently, the single biggest draw on Federal trust funds are loans to States' unemployment programs. Eighteen States already have loan balances exceeding $12 billion, and more are expected to request assistance in the coming weeks and months. This recession, which started in December of 2007, has placed enormous strains on State unemployment programs. But truth be told, too many State programs had inadequate reserves to provide benefits even in a mild downturn. In the future, more should be done to promote long-term solvency for the unemployment system; however, right now, our mandate is to ensure that the States can continue to pay their unemployment benefits to those entitled to them.
When economists and historians look back at this moment in history, I believe one of the things they will agree, what we did right was to reach out and help those Americans who lost their jobs through no fault of their own.
Last June, we enacted the quickest ever extension of unemployment benefits relative to the start of the recession. In November, we further extended benefits to dislocated workers. And earlier this year, we enacted a historic package of unemployment insurance reforms as part of the Recovery Act, including maintaining the availability of extended benefits, increasing the weekly UI benefit amount, and providing grants to States that modernize their unemployment programs.
Under these reforms, over half the States have enacted improvements to their unemployment programs such as improving coverage for low-wage and part-time workers. In addition, over 9 million UI recipients are receiving $100 more a month as we speak in order to help buy groceries and other necessities, and 3 billion unemployed workers are now receiving extended benefits.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Capuano). The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. I yield an additional 1 minute.
Mr. McDERMOTT. Many of our economists, as well as the stock market, believe our economy is now turning the corner to more prosperous days. Helping the unemployed has been a crucial part of the path to that recovery. But millions of jobs will not be restored overnight. We will continue to ensure a real safety net for the jobless Americans, and I expect Congress will continue this work in the fall.
{time} 1600
Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart).
Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the ranking member.
Look, it is too bad that we have to be here now. This is another Band-Aid. It is a necessary Band-Aid, unfortunately, to fix the Transportation trust fund. But it is imperative that we fix this trust fund once and for all.
Now, let me tell you, Chairman Oberstar has been working on a bill, a bipartisan bill. He has been working on it for a long, long time; and because of his leadership, his committee, along with Ranking Member Mica, are ready to go. They are ready to go. We are ready to go. I am privileged to be on that committee. They are ready to go right now.
Again, it is unfortunate that we are not doing that, because we also can't afford to lose any more jobs. And there is one thing we all agree on, that one way to create jobs is through transportation infrastructure. Unfortunately, we are not doing that.
It is pretty evident that the so-called stimulus bill has proven to be a dismal failure. That is why I introduced legislation to rescind the unspent stimulus money, so-called stimulus money, the nontransportation, unspent stimulus money, and put it into the DOT trust fund; to not continue to borrow more money and put more borrowing on our kids' and grandchildren's credit cards.
But, unfortunately, we are not discussing that either here today. Instead, we continue to waste billions of dollars and more, frankly, on the so-called stimulus, which is nothing more than a sham. We need to invest it in real job creation, focus on real job creation; and among the things that create jobs is transportation and infrastructure.
So, again, I hope that we finally get down to business. This is a Band-Aid. But we are ready to continue to work to fix this, to really fix it. One way to do it, while not indebting this country further, is to use those unspent stimulus moneys, to take away that sham and put it in transportation funding that will create jobs and help the country.
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal), the Chair of the Select Revenue Measures Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee.
Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Mr. Lewis for bringing this legislation to the floor. I am in full support of this proposal, and I want to speak additionally in support of the transfer of the Highway Trust Fund as it appears before us.
None of us would like to see pink slips issued around the country at vital road and bridge building projects, including about 4,000 jobs in Massachusetts. We are doing our best to create more of these jobs, not to end the current ones.
Last week, my subcommittee, the Select Revenue Measures Subcommittee, held a 4-hour, four-panel hearing on long-term financing options for the Highway Trust Fund. The consistent statement we heard was that States are desperate for funding.
We heard that roads and bridges are deteriorating at such a pace that current funding will not cover the maintenance, let alone the improvements that are needed. That is why our colleague, Mr. Oberstar, has pushed for a short-term patch while we continue to sort out the longer-term solutions for our transportation infrastructure. I am in support of the Oberstar position.
I understand the hesitance of some our colleagues to talk about increasing fund revenues in this economy. I want to assure you, they will be at every groundbreaking and they will be at every ribbon cutting, even though they question the financing we propose down the road.
But the reality of this situation is simple: we need to pay for these repairs. There were a variety of proposals discussed at our hearing, last week, good ones, by Republicans and Democrats. Good options were offered: tolls, vehicle miles traveled, excise taxes, the gas and diesel tax, among other ideas.
I want to say of interest, the United States Chamber of Commerce last week proposed a 10 cent increase in the gasoline tax for many of these long-term needs. I think that in and of itself speaks to the bipartisan nature of what we are trying to do now, and I hope in about another month a long-term proposal as well.
Now, whether these proposals are through triggers, indexing or commissions, we need to start working on the long-term plan in whatever politically feasible way we can find a way forward. Kicking the can down the road on infrastructure needs will not work. Our highways, our roadways, our airports, our bridges and our railroads are all in need of an infusion of public support. We all ought to be able to agree on that basic responsibility as Members of this House.
As one witness told us last week, the costs of delaying the longer-
term bill are higher than the costs to pass it. A reminder as well, there is an opportunity in this atmosphere with the downturn to get some great pricing, and we should take advantage of that as well.
So I want to urge support of this proposal today, and I hope it takes us on to a longer-term solution.
Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).
Mr. FLAKE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Here we are again: the second bout of highway robbery, taking money back into the trust fund from the general Treasury. We are told, well, sometime back in 1998, some money was taken from the trust fund into the general fund, so this is just payback.
How many times can we keep saying that? It may have made some sense the first time. It doesn't the second time. It won't the third or fourth time we do this. Yet we are told we are bemoaning the fact we don't have the reauthorization on the floor this week.
Thank goodness we don't. If you think we overspent what we had in the trust fund before, we are really going to do it the next time. A bill has been proposed that has twice the spending we currently have in the Highway Trust Fund, without revenue to pay for it. We don't have the revenue to pay for the one we have got. How can we double it with no revenue source?
Let's get serious about things here. If we really need a place for the money to come from, I would suggest, as the gentleman did before, take it from the stimulus. But part of the problem is that we are spending for things in this bill, or in the highway program, that are probably worth spending some of the things we have seen in the stimulus.
In the current highway program that we are taking money from the general fund to now fund, there is $3 million for a parking garage in suburban Chicago; $1.6 million for a bike path in Wisconsin; $1.2 million for improvements in the Blue Ridge Music Center in Virginia; $1 million for improvements to the Police Touch Museum in Pennsylvania. Why don't we rescind some of these programs in the highway bill, and we won't have to take so much money from the general fund?
We can't continue to do this, Mr. Speaker. We are spending money on a suspension bill. We are suspending the rules and passing a bill that is going to cost us $7 billion. I think the limit on suspension bills used to be something like $50 million. If it does more than that, you come under a general rule; $7 billion we are spending here, and it will go almost without dissent.
And that is a shame, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal).
Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. Speaker, I understand the desire of an individual or individuals to be professional scolds on any and every issue that comes to this floor. But the obligation that we have today is far greater than the examples that he cited.
To argue that we ought to hold up a Federal highway bill that benefits this entire Nation because of a handful of initiatives he doesn't like, the truth is he won't vote for the final bill anyway, and time and again we have rejected the proposals that he has come forward with, largely because there was a process and procedure for vetting these differences. And when we buy into the end-game solution, that is part of our responsibility as Members of Congress.
Let me close quickly on this note. One of the reasons that our highway system is the envy of the world is because we have not given in to the temptation to fall easy prey to demagoguery that surrounds some of these proposals. Scolding is one thing. Offering positive suggestions is quite another.
Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona
(Mr. Flake).
Mr. FLAKE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
You know, some of us did stand up and vote against the initial authorization back in 2005, I believe it was, because we were told by our Appropriations Committee chairman, we don't have the money to pay for this. We knew it. Everybody knew it. But the reason that passed, we all know, is because there were 6,300 earmarks in it. You spread enough of that around and people are going to vote for it. There were only eight votes against it here in the House, three in the Senate. And we will likely do the same again.
At some point we have got to say, let's pay for it. And for a State like Arizona, let me tell you, where we give a dollar to Washington for this highway bill and only get about 92 cents back, it is not a very good deal. We would rather keep the tax money and spend it on our own. We could get a lot more infrastructure for that, and that is our complaint, more than anything.
Money is sent here, then it comes back 92 cents on the dollar, and that that does come back is restricted in ways that diminish the value of the dollar, and then it is earmarked completely. It is simply not a good deal for people around the country. So we need a new model.
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am now pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), a member of the Ways and Means Committee, who long has been active in highways, waterways and many environmental efforts.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the courtesy of my good friend permitting me to speak on behalf of this.
I listened to my friend from Arizona. The fact is the last bill was paid for, but because of the Republican refusal to right-size the trust fund, it was scaled down. But it was paid for. It wasn't right-sized for America. Mr. Oberstar and the committee are working to try to do this.
I hope this is the last time we come to the floor to deal with the short-term deficit in the Highway Trust Fund; but, unfortunately, we are going to come back again. Mr. Oberstar and his Chair, my good friend Mr. DeFazio, have been working for months on a new vision for transportation; and I hope we have that on the floor sooner rather than later.
Along with this is the notion of how we squeeze more value out of each Federal dollar invested. That is part of the work of the new Department of Transportation. It is part of what the committee is working on, and we as Congress need to be involved with that.
New vision, more value, but, frankly, we are going to need more money. We haven't raised the gas tax since 1993. There aren't the resources available to meet what we are seeing in every community across the country. That is why there is a consensus that is building, as Mr. Neal said, from the chamber of commerce, to the garden club, to the Sierra Club, unions, environmentalists, local government officials, Republican and Democrat alike, who say come forward with a long-term funding proposal.
What we are going to have to do sometime this decade is increase the gas tax for inflation. What we are going to have to do sometime this decade is have a new mechanism in place that is a true user fee that will enable us to match the people who use the roads or the people who benefit with the financing.
This is within our capacity. And this is one area where I hope that we can get past some of the partisan bickering.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Oregon has expired.
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. I am pleased to yield to the gentleman an additional 1 minute.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, sir.
I hope that every Member will take the time to go back to their districts this next month and talk to the local chamber of commerce, talk to local government, talk to local business people that are attempting to solve these problems, and find out the support there is for Congress to be able to move forward with a broader vision for finance. It is there, if we will do it. And if we do, it is going to have more long-term impact on the financial health of this country than anything else that we will do.
I urge people to do their homework at home so they can come back and support the financing that is necessary for the long-term vision that Mr. Oberstar and Mr. DeFazio will give us in the months ahead.
{time} 1615
Mr. CAMP. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham).
Mr. LATHAM. I thank the gentleman from Michigan for the time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in reluctant support of this bill. I also rise to point out that what we're doing today, in considering the increase for the Highway Trust Fund, is exactly what I sought to do last week through an amendment presented to the Rules Committee. My amendment was aimed at employing a little common sense and transferring excessive resources in the rapid rail appropriations to the much-needed resource category in the Highway Trust Fund. I was seeking to transfer to the trust fund $3 billion of the $4 billion that is currently in the rapid rail appropriations in the House version of the FY 2010 transportation appropriations bill. That amendment would have left the $1 billion for rail that the President had requested. As things now stand, the $4 billion on top of the $8 billion in the stimulus package remains in the rail account, and at least $2 billion of that is parked for a future infrastructure bank, which is only just an idea, no authorization, nothing. It may be at least a year, and probably much longer, before any of these funds can be spent; and the Highway Trust Fund needs money now, which is what I said last week.
Had my amendment been made in order, it would have passed and been offset. Had it passed, we would be dealing with a much smaller amount today. Unfortunately, the Rules Committee didn't see fit to make the amendment in order and, in the process, make use of funding authority that will not be needed for some time. So once again, politics governed the process. It's very unfortunate. I think it is worth pointing out today to all the Members here that in a June 4 hearing this year, Secretary LaHood, in response to my question regarding offsets for the Highway Trust Fund bailout said, ``We have to pay for this. I mean, the administration is committed to paying for the $5 billion to $7 billion that is needed to plus up the trust fund in 2009, and it is about $8 billion or $10 billion for 2010. We are committed to paying for it; and I hope sooner rather than later, we will be coming back to all of you and saying, here is how we think we should do it.''
To my knowledge, in this bill there are no offsets. I know that technically this is an intergovernmental transfer, so there's no PAYGO and technically no scoring on this. But the money will soon be spent by the Treasury.
Just so folks understand what is going on here with this shell game, I will give you an example. I'm the government. I've got $1 in this pocket--in this case, we're talking about 7 billion of these, which would go to the Moon--and what we're doing is saying that we are transferring this dollar from the right pocket to the left pocket, even though we know that it's already spent in the left pocket. But it doesn't cost anything. It's free money. Why don't we transfer $1 trillion? It's all free, right? No offset. It's just from one pocket to another. The problem is, folks, we know this is being spent; and there's nothing in this pocket. We're borrowing from our kids and our grandchildren because there is nothing here. We're $2 trillion in deficit this one year and we're talking about, We don't have to pay for anything. It's all free money. In conclusion, I would just hope that we bring some sanity to this process.
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon, Congressman DeFazio, the Chair of the Highways and Transit Subcommittee of the Transportation Committee.
Mr. DeFAZIO. I thank the gentleman and my friend for the time. Five years ago, an obstinate penny-wise, pound-foolish Bush administration stonewalled a bipartisan proposal in Congress to increase trust fund revenues. They sent us on this path to insolvency. At the same time, they condemned us to a transportation system in America that is headed toward third-world status. On the National Highway System, 150,000 bridges are either functionally obsolete or structurally deficient. That means they could fall down. Then we have 40 percent of the pavement on the National Highway System in fair or poor condition. Billions of gallons of fuel wasted in congestion and traffic, Americans wasting their lives sitting, frustrated. Businesses losing tens of billions of dollars because of delayed deliveries in a just-in-time competitive world economy.
We need a 6-year investment in our transportation system with new policies and a new vision to move us toward a competitive 21st century transportation system, not living off the dregs of one that we built in the fifties. But on the way to that new future, we need this infusion of cash. The States are out there in good faith, putting millions of people to work, rebuilding as much as they can with inadequate resources. They're bringing in bills for over $1 billion a week. That's a lot of jobs, folks, out there in America going on today, rebuilding our infrastructure. We need to make good on those obligations with this infusion of money.
I'm willing to pay for the enhanced investment in the coming legislation, and I'd urge my Republican colleagues to keep an open mind. They're either going to deny us the investment we need and condemn us to a transportation system that can't meet America's needs, or they're going to join us in a 6-year bill with adequate investment and funding, fully paid for, investing in the future of America.
Mr. CAMP. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would just say that the Obama administration famously predicted that its so-called stimulus plan would save or create 3.5 million jobs. The gentleman referred to millions of jobs being created repairing our infrastructure. However, the unemployment rate is now at 9.5 percent, well above the 8 percent the administration projected if the stimulus passed. That means 2.5 million more Americans are unemployed than the President promised. So not only have no jobs been created in the private sector, in just 4 months, 2 million private sector jobs have been destroyed. Meanwhile, jobs in government have grown slightly, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
At this time, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, may inquire about how much time I have left?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Georgia has 3\1/2\ minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Michigan has 5 minutes remaining.
Mr. CAMP. I will say that we have no further speakers, and I believe the gentleman has the right to close.
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. I thank the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. Speaker, having one speaker remaining, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts, Congressman Olver from the Appropriations Committee.
Mr. OLVER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
As I think we all know, with the collapse of the subprime market and the steep drop in private mortgages available, 25 percent of mortgages written today are backed by FHA. That's up from just 3 percent 2 years ago; and because Ginnie Mae securitizes FHA loans, their volume has increased threefold. With that increased demand, both FHA and Ginnie Mae will reach their loan ceilings in the next few weeks and will be forced to stop operating unless we act today. With the housing market just starting to show some signs of growth and home sales rising for 3 straight months, a first since the year 2004, cutting out 25 percent of available mortgages would be a disaster, decimating the market and hurting million of prospective homeowners out shopping today. This bill ensures that FHA and Ginnie Mae can continue to play their important roles in the mortgage market.
The bill also transfers funds to the Highway Trust Fund to keep it solvent through the end of the fiscal year. Without that transfer, the Department of Transportation will not be able to continue reimbursing States for their highway projects; and States would likely have to scale back on the work they are now doing and would be doing in August and September. There is no question that we will have to eventually do something to guarantee the long-term solvency of the Highway Trust Fund; but we made infrastructure development an important part of the Economic Recovery Act; and it would be foolish and unwise for us to leave town without ensuring that States can continue with their highway projects as we are on recess in this next month. This needs to be done as quickly as possible. I would urge my colleagues to support this bill by voting ``yes.''
Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers on my side, so I will yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I fully support H.R. 3357. In the future, the Ways and Means Committee will need to look at different funding proposals and administrative changes to keep the Highway Trust Fund running for the long term. Today we need to make sure it doesn't run out of money. This very simple bill does not cost a single dollar, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this commonsense, bipartisan piece of legislation.
Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, if there was ever a time when the American public needed to pay close attention to the spending decisions being made in Congress, it is now.
It's ironic that in the week following the adoption of so-called
``Pay-Go Rules,'' the House would be debating a measure to set aside more than $14 billion--without offsets--to pay for two so-called trust funds that have run dry. ``Pay as we Go'' has been replaced with
``Spend as we Borrow.''
Today, the House will vote to borrow another $7 billion--that's $7 billion--out of the general fund to replenish the Highway Trust Fund which has become insolvent as a result of high gas prices and the sluggish economy. By this time next month, without a congressional bailout, the so-called Highway Trust Fund will be unable to reimburse states for their highway investments. It was only last year that Congress set aside $8 billion from the general fund to keep the highway fund solvent.
Clearly, this band-aid approach to fixing this re-occurring problem is not working. One more time, the House is voting to bail out another sector of the economy with money it does not have. This is on the heels of the bank bailout. It's on the heels of the so-called ``Recovery Act'' which has succeeded in spending billions but has thus far failed to create jobs. It's on the heels of the bailout of automakers in Detroit. And it follows another year of astronomical spending increases for every major government program run out of Washington, DC.
It was only last month that our former colleague, and the present Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, testified before the House Transportation Appropriations Committee. ``I want to assure you that we will soon have a plan to address the potential Trust Fund shortfall this summer,'' he said. ``We believe very strongly that any Trust fund fix must be paid for.''
An effort was made by the THUD-Appropriations Ranking Member, Tom Latham of Iowa, to pay for a solution to the Highway Trust Fund shortfall. But, because my friend Mr. Latham is a Republican, his amendment was rejected on a party-line vote in the full Appropriations Committee. In a sign of just how desperate the majority party in the House has become, Mr. Latham wasn't even allowed to offer his amendment during consideration of the transportation funding bill last week.
If the bailout of the Highway Trust Fund wasn't enough, Congress is also being called upon to replenish both the Unemployment Trust Fund and increase the limits for two mortgage lending programs under HUD. In the case of the unemployment trust fund, states have been hit with a double whammy of a halting economy and job losses causing more and more people to line up for unemployment benefits.
Over $400 million was appropriated through the so-called Recovery Act to address this shortfall but those funds have now been depleted. And, to this point, the authorizing committees have failed to take any action to help those presently receiving benefits or newly unemployed.
Mr. Speaker, with each passing day it's becoming increasingly clear that the public is growing ever more wary about the reliance of this Congress on government spending as a solution to every problem facing our country.
As the Congress spends trillions on bailouts and borrowing--and our record national deficit increases by the day--the President's response thus far has been almost laughable. Yesterday, with much fan fare, the White House proposed saving taxpayers money by double-sided copying of government documents and eliminating unused government e-mail accounts and phone lines. These examples hardly qualify as profiles in courage.
The President and this majority leadership have promised fiscal discipline and a return to economic prosperity. And yet, the record thus far shows nothing but one bailout after another and rising levels of government spending as far as the eye can see.
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker: I rise in support of H.R. 3357, a bill that would ensure the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund has the resources it needs to help those who have been hit the hard by the economic recession and are jobless.
However, I am concerned about a provision in this bill that would provide another General Fund transfer to the Highway Trust Fund and increase the deficit.
I support a strong highway program. It's important to our nation's economy and to my home state of Wisconsin that we have world class roads that let goods and people get where they need to go safely and efficiently.
The highway fund was intended to be user financed. Last year we transferred $8 billion from the General Fund to patch last year's shortfall. Earlier this year we provided $27 billion in stimulus funds from the General Fund for highways. Now the Highway Trust Fund would get another $7 billion under this legislation to pay its bills for the rest of Fiscal Year 2009.
Despite claims to the contrary, the real world impact of these transfers is an increase in the deficit, which is already over $1 trillion and is projected to reach $1.8 trillion by the end of this fiscal year under the President's budget.
The Highway Trust Fund is broken and needs to be permanently fixed. I want to find a solution that supports critical highway spending but does so responsibly, without adding more debt and deficits.
Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3357, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, this 15-
minute vote on suspending the rules and passing H.R. 3357, as amended, will be followed by 5-minute votes on motions to suspend the rules with regard to:
H. Res. 496, by the yeas and nays;
H.R. 3072, de novo;
H. Res. 483, de novo.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 363, nays 68, not voting 2, as follows:
YEAS--363
AbercrombieAckermanAderholtAdler (NJ)AlexanderAltmireAndrewsArcuriAustriaBacaBachmannBairdBaldwinBarrowBeanBecerraBerkleyBermanBerryBiggertBilbrayBishop (GA)Bishop (NY)BlumenauerBluntBoccieriBonnerBono MackBoozmanBorenBoswellBoucherBoustanyBoydBrady (PA)Braley (IA)BrightBrown (SC)Brown, CorrineBrown-Waite, GinnyBuchananBurton (IN)ButterfieldBuyerCalvertCampCaoCapitoCappsCapuanoCardozaCarnahanCarneyCarson (IN)CassidyCastleCastor (FL)ChandlerChildersChuClarkeClayCleaverClyburnCobleCohenColeConnolly (VA)ConyersCooperCostaCostelloCourtneyCrenshawCrowleyCuellarCummingsDahlkemperDavis (AL)Davis (CA)Davis (IL)Davis (KY)Davis (TN)DeFazioDeGetteDelahuntDeLauroDentDiaz-Balart, L.Diaz-Balart, M.DicksDingellDoggettDonnelly (IN)DoyleDriehausEdwards (MD)Edwards (TX)EhlersEllisonEllsworthEmersonEngelEshooEtheridgeFallinFarrFattahFilnerFlemingForbesFortenberryFosterFrank (MA)FrelinghuysenFudgeGalleglyGerlachGiffordsGonzalezGordon (TN)GravesGraysonGreen, AlGreen, GeneGriffithGrijalvaGuthrieGutierrezHall (NY)Hall (TX)HalvorsonHareHarmanHarperHastings (FL)Hastings (WA)HeinrichHellerHerseth SandlinHigginsHillHimesHincheyHinojosaHironoHodesHoekstraHoldenHoltHondaHoyerHunterInsleeIsraelJackson (IL)Jackson-Lee (TX)JenkinsJohnson (GA)Johnson (IL)Johnson, E. B.JonesKagenKanjorskiKapturKennedyKildeeKilpatrick (MI)KilroyKindKing (IA)King (NY)KirkKirkpatrick (AZ)KissellKlein (FL)Kline (MN)KosmasKratovilKucinichLangevinLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)LathamLaTouretteLee (CA)Lee (NY) LevinLewis (GA)LipinskiLoBiondoLoebsackLofgren, ZoeLoweyLucasLuetkemeyerLujanLungren, Daniel E.LynchMaffeiMaloneyManzulloMarkey (CO)Markey (MA)MarshallMassaMathesonMatsuiMcCollumMcCotterMcDermottMcGovernMcHenryMcHughMcIntyreMcKeonMcMahonMcMorris RodgersMcNerneyMeek (FL)Meeks (NY)MelanconMicaMichaudMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller (NC)Miller, GaryMiller, GeorgeMinnickMitchellMollohanMoore (KS)Moore (WI)Moran (KS)Moran (VA)Murphy (CT)Murphy (NY)Murphy, PatrickMurphy, TimMurthaNadler (NY)NapolitanoNeal (MA)NyeOberstarObeyOlsonOlverOrtizPallonePascrellPastor (AZ)PaulsenPaynePencePerlmutterPerrielloPetersPetersonPetriPingree (ME)PlattsPoe (TX)Polis (CO)PomeroyPoseyPrice (NC)PutnamQuigleyRahallRangelRehbergReichertReyesRichardsonRodriguezRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RooneyRos-LehtinenRoskamRossRothman (NJ)Roybal-AllardRuppersbergerRushRyan (OH)Ryan (WI)SalazarSanchez, Linda T.Sanchez, LorettaSarbanesSchakowskySchauerSchiffSchmidtSchockSchraderSchwartzScott (GA)Scott (VA)SerranoSestakShea-PorterShermanShulerShusterSiresSkeltonSlaughterSmith (NE)Smith (NJ)Smith (WA)SnyderSouderSpaceSpeierSprattStarkStupakSuttonTannerTaylorTeagueTerryThompson (CA)Thompson (MS)Thompson (PA)TiahrtTiberiTierneyTitusTonkoTownsTsongasTurnerUptonVan HollenVelazquezViscloskyWaldenWalzWampWasserman SchultzWatersWatsonWattWaxmanWeinerWelchWexlerWhitfieldWilson (OH)WittmanWolfWoolseyWuYarmuthYoung (AK)Young (FL)
NAYS--68
AkinBachusBarrett (SC)BartlettBarton (TX)BilirakisBlackburnBoehnerBrady (TX)Broun (GA)BurgessCampbellCantorCarterChaffetzCoffman (CO)ConawayCulbersonDeal (GA)DreierDuncanFlakeFoxxFranks (AZ)Garrett (NJ)Gingrey (GA)GohmertGoodlatteGrangerHensarlingHergerInglisIssaJohnson, SamJordan (OH)KingstonLambornLanceLattaLewis (CA)LinderLummisMackMarchantMcCarthy (CA)McCaulMcClintockMyrickNeugebauerNunesPaulPittsPrice (GA)RadanovichRohrabacherRoyceScaliseSensenbrennerSessionsShadeggShimkusSimpsonSmith (TX)StearnsSullivanThornberryWestmorelandWilson (SC)
NOT VOTING--2
Bishop (UT)McCarthy (NY)
{time} 1649
Messrs. BACHUS and COFFMAN of Colorado changed their vote from
``yea'' to ``nay.''
Messrs. YOUNG of Alaska, SPRATT, BURTON of Indiana, CRENSHAW, HOEKSTRA, and JONES changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
