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.
“OPERATION OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN WISCONSIN HIGHWAYS” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Transportation was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H4836 on July 22, 2013.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
OPERATION OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN WISCONSIN HIGHWAYS
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 2353) to amend title 23, United States Code, with respect to the operation of vehicles on certain Wisconsin highways, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 2353
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. OPERATION OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN WISCONSIN
HIGHWAYS.
Section 127 of title 23, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(j) Operation of Vehicles on Certain Wisconsin Highways.--If any segment of the United States Route 41 corridor, as described in section 1105(c)(57) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, is designated as a route on the Interstate System, a vehicle that could operate legally on that segment before the date of such designation may continue to operate on that segment, without regard to any requirement under subsection (a).''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman intend that the motion apply to the bill, as amended?
Mr. PETRI. Yes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, is pending.
Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
General Leave
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill before us.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Wisconsin?
There was no objection.
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
U.S. Highway 41 between Milwaukee and Green Bay is slated to become part of the U.S. interstate system early next year. H.R. 2353 would simply allow trucks that exceed Federal weight limits but are currently authorized to operate on this road to continue to operate after the interstate designation.
{time} 1700
This primarily involves agricultural crops during harvest season, milk, timber, scrap metal, and garbage. No new trucks in excess of Federal weight limits would be allowed on the new I-41. This would just maintain the status quo and not disrupt the current flow of commerce.
This is not unprecedented, as other roads which have become part of the interstate system have received this grandfather, including I-39 in Wisconsin, with no ill effect. In fact, the Wisconsin State Patrol, which is responsible for truck safety enforcement, has issued a statement in support of this bill, and is noting the safety benefits of not forcing these trucks off the safer interstate and onto State and local roads which are not designated to carry such traffic.
The bill before us is also supported by Republican and Democratic members of the Wisconsin House delegation, our two U.S. Senators, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, and many State and local officials and organizations. I ask my House colleagues to approve this bill, which is so important to my State.
I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair wishes to again clarify with the gentleman whether the bill is with or without an amendment.
Mr. PETRI. It is without an amendment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would announce that the pending motion is that the House suspend the rules and pass the Union Calendar version of the bill, which is without amendment.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Congress has previously grandfathered truck weights on roads that obtained interstate designation, including Interstate 99 in Pennsylvania, Interstate 39 in Wisconsin and Interstate 68 in Maryland. I point that out to note that what is being proposed in the pending legislation is not without precedent or justification.
While I support this legislation, consideration by the House of this bill should not be construed as an indicator of movement on the broader debate of whether to increase truck weights generally. This is a limited extension of current standards on one road in one State, and I am evaluating it as such. I support this bill, and I urge its adoption.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to my colleague from Wisconsin (Mr. Ribble).
Mr. RIBBLE. Thank you, Chairman Petri.
I also want to thank the ranking member, Mr. Rahall, for working with us. We advanced this bill through committee, and it passed our committee by voice vote.
Mr. Speaker, the bill is very simple. Chairman Petri mentioned it maintains the status quo on a single highway in Wisconsin that is being changed from a U.S. highway to a U.S. interstate. Highway 41, from Green Bay, Wisconsin, to Milwaukee, is slated to become an interstate next year. To do that without any disruption to safety, it's important that we grandfather the current weight limits that are currently on the road, and this bill does exactly that.
It ensures that any trucks that drive on the road today will be able to drive on the road after the conversion. Without this bill, shippers would simply have two options, and neither would be good for safety. One option would be to move these trucks onto side roads, which, in Wisconsin, are often rural or through small towns that are not suited for truck traffic. The other option would be to put more trucks on the highway in order to comply with the lower weight limits. Neither option is good for safety, and neither option is good for Wisconsin.
As Chairman Petri mentioned, it is supported by the Wisconsin State Patrol; it is supported by the Governor of Wisconsin; it is supported by the Wisconsin State Assembly, including the majority and ranking members; it is supported by the Wisconsin State Senate; and it is supported by the Wisconsin DOT.
As the ranking member mentioned, this is not a precedent-setting piece of legislation. In fact, it has happened in other parts of the country. I am in support of this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the legislation before us, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2353.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
