Providing for consideration of the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 3) to authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety programs, and transit programs, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. I would like to reciprocate and say I appreciate working with the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) and his staff. It has been a pleasant experience at a time when people are deploring this body in some corridors for its partisanship.

I think our committee, under the leadership of the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), has worked in a very constructive and bipartisan way. It does not mean we always agree, but I think we have a better product because I think we are each looking at things and sharing our different perspectives and trying to work out something that is in the best interest of our country.

I obviously would be remiss if I did not acknowledge and thank very heartily Debbie Gephardt on my staff, who has spent many years on the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure staff.

We sometimes up here do not properly acknowledge the hard-working career people, in this case at the United States Department of Transportation, who provide the analysis and, hopefully, the facts that enable us to at least have some idea of what we are trying to accomplish and whether we are succeeding in that effort. Susan Binder, Ross Kreiton, and Rita Merish in particular have been tireless and have been available 24 hours a day to do runs and to provide information and have helped the process enormously.

Mr. Speaker, today we come to the end of a 2-year odyssey as we have worked to put together a transportation reauthorization bill. We face tremendous expectations and pressures with a finite amount of money, much less than is necessary to meet the overwhelming transportation needs across our United States.

During this reauthorization effort, I and others on the committee have traveled to cities across the Nation and met with governors, mayors, business and labor interests and others, seen firsthand the many critical and necessary information projects that we as a Nation need to complete.

The report before us today is a step forward in helping to meet those needs. A total of $295 billion in contract authority and $286-plus billion in guaranteed spending over 6 years is provided for Federal highway, transit and safety programs.

The conferees were sensitive to the needs of donor States as well as donee States. Donor States will see increases in their rates of return, reaching a 92 percent rate of return in 2008 and 2009. There is a minimum growth rate of 19 percent to protect other States.

A revamped highway safety construction program has been included. Likewise, we have revised the current border program into a formula fund to meet increasing needs for States facing high infrastructure costs from increasing foreign trade growing traffic.

Environmental streamlining, planning and other administrative improvements seek to make project delivery more efficient without lessening needed environmental protections. Safety programs administered by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and the National Traffic Safety Administration will see increased funding. Important new initiatives to encourage seatbelt use, decrease drunk driving, and enhance motorcycle training and education opportunities are included in this legislation.

I am particularly pleased that this conference report contains many provisions that were included in legislation I introduced last Congress to help consumers who find themselves at the mercy of unscrupulous movers. While the overwhelming majority of household good movers are honest businesses, it has become clear that we need greater enforcement tools. In this bill we are providing authority to the States to enforce Federal regulations geared to protect consumers and supplement the efforts of the U.S. Department of Transportation in overseeing over 1.5 million interstate moves per year. New penalties are created and opportunities for consumer information will be enhanced.

The bill also looks to the future in assessing the critical issues that we must confront if we are to have a first-class infrastructure that is so necessary to remain competitive and to spur economic prosperity. The bill contains several important provisions regarding future transportation needs, in particular, freight needs and financing of the highway trust fund.

Currently, the trust fund is financed by the Federal gas taxes. With the rise of alternative fuels and greater fuel efficiency, this is just not cutting it any more. We are relying on a 20th century mechanism in a 21st century world. Future trust fund revenue projections are not encouraging, so we must confront this issue sooner rather than later.

It is perhaps appropriate that we are passing this conference report today as a tribute to the current Federal Highway Administrator, Mary Peters, who will be retiring on July 31 after more than 4 years of dedicated service at the Department of Transportation. I would like to wish Mary and her husband well as they ride their Harleys to their new life back in their home State of Arizona.

Our former colleague and chairman of the Public Works Committee, Secretary Norm Mineta, has also provided his usual reliable advice and counsel in crafting this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, one of the last items negotiated between House and Senate in this Conference Report were pending requests for exemptions from hours-of-service regulations for truck drivers in various industries. I personally believe that safety and economic realities require that there be greater flexibility in the rigid rules and regulations governing hours of service and I was disappointed that many of these exemptions did not receive more positive consideration.

One exemption that I supported, but was ultimately not accepted, would provide emergency flexibility that permits the re-rail industry to quickly respond to the true emergency needs that arise from railroad derailments and accidents. The failure to provide an emergency exemption for the Rerail Industry will result in a continuing denigration of our ability to protect the lives of citizens living along rights of way, assure highway safety and expedite interstate commerce by quickly clearing train derailments.

Today these emergency responders of the rail mode are often given the Hobson's choice of rapidly clearing wrecks that endanger lives and property and can cost millions of dollars in stacked up traffic or being penalized for violating hours of service. This is neither fair nor is it in the public interest. One of the best examples is the Weyauwega, Wisconsin derailment that took place in my own Congressional District. In this case a derailment overturned 15 cars of hazardous material and ruptured three cars of LPG and propane which ignited and threw fireballs 300 feet into the air. The derailed train was blocking a grade crossing and emergency responders could not reach a flaming feed mill and storage building. The resulting fire continued to burn and the entire town was evacuated for over 2 weeks.

According to the current rules, driver-operators may not legally be allowed to respond immediately to such an accident. But this is exactly the choice that must be made over and over again by the men and women who work in this industry. The situation these companies and their drivers are placed in is neither fair nor is it in the public interest. The issue here is balancing of hours of service flexibility against the terrible consequences of not responding quickly.

The exemption I sought was to provide rerail drivers with exactly the same treatment currently provided tow truck drivers under existing regulation during a declared emergency. As we learned in Weyauwega, consequences of a train derailment can be far more severe than your average highway accident and should be treated accordingly. I intend to continue to work with both the U.S. Department of Transportation and the U.S. Congress to provide those who respond to and rail wrecks with exactly the same treatment as tow truck operators.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. At long last no more, well, one extension, only so we can properly celebrate the adoption of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I want to join with the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young). I first want to thank the gentleman and other leaders on the Republican side for their extraordinary fairness in this process and recognizing that transportation, transportation efficiency is not a partisan issue; it serves all Americans. It serves all business in blue States, red States, Democratic, Republican, Independent.

We are here today gathered to make an extraordinary investment in the future of our country. I do not think there is anything this Congress could do more definitively to put people back to work, to stimulate our economy, to increase our efficiency, our competitiveness, both nationally and internationally than this legislation.

And the wonderful thing, at this time in our Nation's history, about this legislation is we are not borrowing the money to do it. We are spending taxes paid by all Americans at the gas pump: individuals, passenger car drivers, and commercial drivers and businesses.

And we are going to take that money, and we are going to invest it in ways that benefit this Nation for decades to come. We are going to help mitigate congestion, and congestion is at the top of my list, because the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) should have been here to join in this effort, but he is stuck in traffic. And hopefully by the time we finish spending the money in TEA-LU, the gentleman and other Americans will be able to get to work more readily in the future, in addition to benefiting business and other aspects of our country.

Mr. Speaker, particularly I want to thank the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) for his mentorship, his leadership on our side, his friendship, his advocacy, his knowledge, his history. I learned a lot during this bill. It was an extraordinary process for me. And he has been wonderful and helpful.

The gentleman also came to my State to recognize that my State has an extraordinary problem that transcends the boundaries of our State, something I started campaigning for a couple of years ago, to recognize that Interstate 5 is the lifeline of the western United States, joining the fifth largest economy in the world, California, to Oregon and Washington, two foreign nations, Mexico and Canada, serving the busiest port in the Nation, and a number of other very busy ports, the third busiest truck route in America.

Oregon has an extraordinary problem on Interstate 5, through an accident of history, having built our interstate before other States. Our bridges are virtually reaching simultaneous failure because we used an old 1950s and pre-1950s technology, where States who built the interstate later, California and others, used a very different technology, and they do not have the bridge problems we have.

My State has raised fees and licenses and bonded a tremendous amount of money to deal with this problem, but we are still short. And this bill will go a long way toward filling that gap and completing Interstate 5 so you will not have trucks detouring up over the Cascade Mountains, down the far side and back onto I-5.

But that is probably one of the many issues this bill will deal with. Other projects of national significance, something pioneered by the chairman of this committee and the House, which the Senate only tagged onto in the end, is going to make tremendous investments in the Alameda Corridor, other critical areas in California that are suffering from huge growth, and congestion all across the Nation.

We will be making very significant investments with major projects there, and then down the Missouri River Bridge all the way to the east coast and some of the problems dealing with freight movement across New York Harbor from New Jersey into New York. This is not everything we needed, but it is a tremendous and meaningful down payment.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank again all who joined in this effort. I want to join the chairman in thanking the Republican staff. He has done an able job of that. I would like to name a few folks on our side, and there have been a lot of sleepless nights.

First and foremost, my staff: Kathie Dedrick, who yesterday was her birthday, probably one she will never forget. She got all 24 hours out of it, because she did not sleep. So that is, I guess, one way to approach that.

I want to thank the Highway Subcommittee staff, Ken House, Art Chan, Stephanie Manning, Eric VanSchyndle, Jennifer Esposito, Jackie Schmitz, Homer Carlisle.

I particularly want to thank David Heysfeld, who brings almost as much history and knowledge to these issues as the ranking member and sometimes remembers some details that the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) has forgotten.

Ward McCarragher, Kathie Zern, Jen Walsh, Dara Schlieker, an administrative assistant without whom we never would have got through to people and coordinated things.

I want to thank some folks downtown, actually, at the Federal Highway Administration, Susan Binder, Rosi Crighton, because they spent an incredible amount of time analyzing what it was we were doing, because there are times when you start moving pieces around in this formula, we are not quite sure where it is all headed and who is going to be impacted.

Sometimes at 3 or 4 in the morning, they were doing analysis that was critical to the committee completing this bill in a fair way.

So I want to thank the chairman. I want to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) and his staff. He has just been wonderful to me as chairman. I am proud to serve under him as ranking member.

I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) because he and I may disagree over a number of things, but we found common cause here in investing in the future of this country. And he played an absolutely critical role in negotiating with the Senate, which is one of the most confounding processes, I do not know if you can even call it a process, that I have ever dealt with. I do not know that it is that organized.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown).

Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman. She has been a very able advocate for the economic interests of her State, as have other Members of the Florida delegation. I want to assure her that at least on this side of the aisle, and I am certain on the other side of the aisle, we understand these problems and assure her we will work with her to try to reach some resolution that is fair to all.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the leadership. I want to acknowledge the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert). I know the gentleman has played a key role; perhaps unlike any Speaker in history, with the difficult dynamic we had, he played a key role. I appreciate the committee leadership that has been acknowledged.

I would also like to express my appreciation for what people out in the country did. We have assembled the largest coalition in support of infrastructure investment in the history of the United States. Groups that ranged from the Women's Federated Garden Club of America, organized labor, environmentalists, people who move freight, people who build the facilities all came together with community activists to provide a critical push, given the political difficulties that all have acknowledged.

It was testimony also to the people who know how important these transportation investments are.

I appreciate being able to have a series of things in this legislation that I care deeply about. I have been working on small starts legislation that would help with streetcars, with commuter rail, with bus rapid transit, and I appreciate the committee having 3 years of investment that is going to help give communities more choices. And certainly with the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and the ranking committee member, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), we were assured that this was going to be the best bicycle bill in the history of the United States, and we have it.

I am also appreciative that we have been able, through all of the travails, to keep the fundamental framework of the historic 1991 ISTEA legislation. This legislation produced the flexibility, it produced new tools for communities, it had a bias for being able to plan and put together the pieces right.

We have had lots of upheaval in Washington, D.C. and in the countryside since 1991. It has not been without controversy, but the basic framework is intact. And it means, even though this is not as much money as I would like to see us invest in America's infrastructure, it will be spent more efficiently in ways that communities want.

Because it has taken us 2 years to get to this point, one other thing should be reflected upon. We only have 4 years before we are doing it all over again. I hope that we take this time, learn from the experience, keep the coalition alive in Congress and in the country to make sure that when we come back here in 4 years, which is, sadly, a very short time in terms of major policy, that we are able to build on this, not get hung up over the level of funding, and that we are able to deal with critical questions that cry out for adjustment.

We need to think about what the appropriate role is for Federal oversight. There is a lot of work that is done with the Department of Transportation, frankly, that costs people money in time and energy that may no longer be necessary. I hope we are able to look at that role and gear appropriate Federal oversight in ways that add value, not take it away.

I think it is time for us to look at the match methodology, to have a uniform set of match provisions so that we are not affecting the transportation decisions based on how many dollars we give to the particular project. We need to develop more new tools like the Small Starts project. We have to critically focus on urban freight mobility.

This legislation moves us in the right direction, but we have a long way to go, and I do not think individuals have spent enough time and energy working in their own districts to craft the appropriate solutions. We need to look at the critical connections and refine the connections between rail, air, and roads. The Speaker referenced them in his presentation, but it is not just investing in each of them, it is how they fit together and enhance one another.

Mr. Speaker, there is no better Federal investment than in infrastructure that deals with the environment and transportation in communities. Spent properly, it is the best dollar spent to strengthen that community, make our families safe, healthy, and economically secure. This bill is a step in the right direction, and I look forward to working to make sure that it is implemented properly.

Mr. Speaker, when Congress passed ISTEA, it revolutionized policy and how our transportation dollars are spent. Congress said that we were not just investing in highways, we were going to fund a broader range of transportation modes that truly help to build more livable communities. Transit, bikes, pedestrian access, a greater role for planning and coordination so that we make sure that we are doing the right thing to improve neighborhoods, protect the environment, provide working families with better access to jobs--these were key elements in the original legislation. I am very happy that TEA-LU continues to move us in the right direction as a nation.

The team from Oregon, the entire Congressional delegation, played a critical role in making sure that this bill maintained the funding flexibility and innovative tools that Oregon has come to rely on. We also worked hard to maximize the impact in our State and the Portland Metropolitan area.

The most important element is making sure that Oregon gets its fair share, which has

been achieved in no small part due to heroic efforts on the part of Peter DeFazio, who played a critical role in negotiating the final elements. The Oregon Senators recently released a joint list of over $100 million of projects of statewide significance with a number in the Portland metropolitan area. We have all worked to make sure that regional highway and transit projects are able to move along in times of difficult funding at the State level.

I am particularly pleased that we were able to secure authorization of the next round of expansion for the MAX light rail system. There are streetcar provisions that will help continue Portland's growing and nationally significant streetcar, so critical to the revitalization of neighborhoods. There are also elements that deal with vital freight movement and efforts for programs of statewide significance. There's also important bike funding, including safe routes to school and work that I had done with Congressman DeFazio to create a bike route from The Dalles to Eugene along the scenic Columbia River highway and down the Willamette Valley.

Most important, the delegation's work together has enabled us to begin laying the groundwork so that we will be in a stronger position from a local level and for Federal policy when it comes time for the next reauthorization. Since the current bill has been delayed for nearly two years with eleven extensions we will be right back in this process in just a couple of years, so it is critical that we take advantage of these investments and continue an aggressive future program.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-McDonald).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Mr. OBERSTAR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks, and include extraneous material.)

Mr. Speaker, there is an old saying, success has a thousand fathers, failure is an orphan. We bring to this House success with at least 435 parents, starting with the Speaker of the House, who is a strong advocate for the original bill that the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young) and I introduced, and nearly all of the members of our committee, for $375 billion, to respond to the Nation's transportation needs over the next 6 years. We did that in 2003 at a time when gasoline was selling for $1.34 a gallon.

I appreciate the Speaker being an advocate for a robust investment, but I even more appreciate the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young) for advocating before his conference this level of investment that we did not pick out of the thin air, but that was recommended by the Department of Transportation as directed in TEA-21 to evaluate paving condition, bridge condition, safety needs, and congestion across the country; and they came back with their estimates, after consulting with all of the States and all of the transportation experts, what it should be, and we did what we thought should be.

When the chairman broke his pick on that number after vigorous advocacy, we agreed to scale the bill back incrementally, further down the ladder to below $300 billion, and then down to $275 billion. We brought that bill to the House floor last year, and it passed; we went to conference with the Senate and they could come to no resolution, as we quaintly say in this body.

We had a little higher threshold. We came back this year, and while TV and newspaper stories report conflict and gridlock in Congress, there is no black smoke coming out of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure committee room. There is no discord or disagreement on how to approach policy issues. They are resolved in a thoughtful, constructive, and positive way that brought a bill that every one of us on both sides of the aisle could support, as if there were no aisle. For that, I express my deep appreciation and admiration for the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman Young), whose patience nurtured the process along, whose impatience prodded the other body along, whose smile deflected critics, and whose scowl sent them skittering.

The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri), the chairman of the subcommittee, whose thoughtful and deliberative approach over many years on this committee contributed enormously to our work product. The ranking member, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), plunged into this subject matter, mastered the issues, and became a vigorous and constructive advocate of all of the principal features of the bill. The gentleman has been an extraordinary, constructive partner.

This bill, in the end, was a measure so loved that all who were interested came to it bearing gifts and adorned it like a tree. At the end, one by one, we took those ornaments off until there was only one remaining last night; and that one, too, has been put back in its box to await another vehicle, perhaps a future omnibus bill where that ornament will be plucked out and hung on another tree. For now we have a tree of solid oak for this century, an investment in transportation, highways and bridges and transit and safety, tripling the investment in safety that we had in TEA-21.

Most importantly, this bill will move us in the direction of reclaiming our productivity in the marketplace and in the world economy.

In 1987, logistics consumed 17 percent of our gross domestic product, that is, moving people and goods. Last year, logistics consumed 9 percent of our gross domestic product, and that is a $750 billion a year gain in productivity, meaning it is less costly to move people, less costly to move goods. Take the example of UPS for whom a 5-minute delay nationwide costs $40 million. We will make an assault upon our slipping productivity, keep momentum going, address the congestion points across America and move America forward.

This is a good bill for America. It is good for people, it is good for economic sectors, and we all ought to pass this bill this morning and move America forward. Vote for the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to congratulate the conferees on completing their work to fund our nation's transportation needs for the next 5 years. Mr. Young, Mr. Oberstar, Mr. Petri and Mr. DeFazio in particular deserve credit for clearing the final legislative hurdle to making SAFETEA-LU a reality. After 11 extensions of TEA-21 and two years of debate, I am glad to see this day come.

As a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee that approved a $375 billion highway authorization bill in 2003, I supported H.R. 3 when it passed the House despite feeling that more funding was needed. I was happy to see that the total funding package in the conference report totals $286.4 billion, a 30 percent increase over the total highway funding in the last authorization bill passed in 1998. I wish the Congress had followed the Department of Transportation's own needs assessment and funded the bill at $375 billion, but I accept this compromise as a way to get much needed money to states and localities that need it now.

New York City will see a 23 percent increase in overall funding under this bill, about $8.5 billion dollars overall. In highway funds the city will benefit from about $3 billion, a 19 percent increase; and in transit funds the city will see $5.5 billion, a 30 percent increase. The 19 percent increase in New York City and state highway funding is of the utmost importance: it grows the state's federal funding stream above the rate of inflation and will allow for planned development to proceed.

On the matter of the minimum guarantee, I am a firm believer that states like New York should not be punished for having efficient transportation systems that keep fuel consumption down. I advocated for a 90.5 percent minimum guarantee in the bill. Given that some of my colleagues had called for a 95 percent minimum guarantee to favor states like Texas, I accept the conference report's 90.5 percent minimum guarantee that balloons to 92 percent by 2008.

I would also like to commend the conferees for settling on Senate language related to grants under the Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure Program. The language in the conference report will allow for new contracts to be awarded as the program expands into new cities instead of making all new projects subject to the old sole- source contract. In each case the state transportation agency will be required to consent to any grant award made. This arrangement will promote competition among vendors and place all firms capable of installing and operating traffic data collection infrastructure on a level playing field.

Mr. Speaker, I have worked hard to ensure that this bill will make significant improvements to the lives of ordinary New Yorkers. Included in this bill are a number of projects that will enhance transportation throughout New York City and in my district in particular.

At my urging, the bill includes:

$15,000,000 for the New York City Department of Transportation to build the facilities and purchase the ferry boats necessary to establish high speed ferry service between the Rockaway Peninsula and Manhattan.

$500,000 to help the New York State Department of Transportation install two permanent variable message signs that will display amber alert messages on the Belt Parkway.

$250,000 for the New York City Department of Transportation to study and implement pedestrian safety enhancements in Gerritsen Beach, Brooklyn.

$1,000,000 for the New York City Department of Transportation to study and implement traffic improvements to the area surrounding

the Stillwell Avenue train station in Coney Island, New York.

$600,000 for each of the boroughs of New York City to make improvements to pedestrian safety, allocated within each borough according to feedback collected on my website from New York City residents.

$250,000 for the areas surrounding each of 10 schools in New York City. Those funds are to be spent on efforts to improve pedestrian safety surrounding those 10 schools. Students walking to IS Q114 in Belle Harbor, PS Q200 in Electchester, PS K124 in Park Slope, PS K277 in Gerritsen Beach, Prospect Park Yeshiva in Midwood, PS X81 in Riverdale, IS X194 in Parkchester, IS R72/PS R69 in New Springville, PS Q153 in Maspeth, and St. Roberts Bellarmine in Bayside will all be better protected by improvements installed with funding provided in