Surface Transportation Savings Act of 2010

Madam Speaker, pursuant to paragraph (c)(2)(C) of H. Res. 1493, Providing for Budget Enforcement for Fiscal Year 2011, I submit the following findings that identify changes in law that help achieve deficit reduction by reducing waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement, promoting efficiency and reform of government, and controlling spending within Government programs that the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure may authorize.

Introduction

The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure is

committed to improving efficiency in the Federal Government

and providing cost savings to accomplish the joint goals of

reducing expenditures and ensuring maximum value to the

taxpayer in Federal programs within the jurisdiction of the

Committee.

Beginning in the 110th Congress, the Committee has

aggressively reviewed program implementation to ensure that

Federal agencies, and their state and local partners, were

appropriately implementing laws consistent with statutory

intent and the best needs of the public. The commitment is

not to programs, but to the goals and objectives that best

serve the needs of the American people in an efficient,

fiscally responsible way. To that end, the Committee has

developed and will continue to develop multiple proposals to

improve the operation of government, including opportunities

to reduce expenditures and the deficit. Because many of the

programs within the Committee's jurisdiction are implemented

in partnership with state and local governments, the

Committee continues to pursue improvements at all levels of

government.

Today's report describes a list of activities and proposals

that include reductions in and elimination of mandatory

spending, reductions in and elimination of authorizations for

discretionary spending, investments that would be expected to

achieve quantifiable future savings, and revenues that more

equitably distribute the cost of government services among

the beneficiaries of those services and reduce demands on the

General Fund. These proposals will allow the Nation to

achieve its investment goals at less cost and allow Federal

investment to provide increased benefits.

These proposals reflect the Committee's efforts to date.

The Committee will continue its efforts to find creative and

efficient ways to make government more responsive to the

needs of the Nation.

Recent Highlights

The Committee's oversight efforts recently resulted in

exposing unwarranted cost overruns in Federal construction.

At the Committee's request, the Government Accountability

Office (GAO) analyzed courthouse construction since 2000 and

determined that expenditures have been unnecessarily

increased by nearly $900 million. The Committee is responding

through general legislation and authorizations for specific

Federal courthouse construction projects to ensure that such

unnecessary costs are not repeated.

Other positive results of the Committee's efforts have

resulted in improvements and corrections to the Coast Guard's

Integrated Deepwater Program, the Federal Aviation

Administration's regulatory responsibilities and air traffic

control modernization, mismanagement at the Federal Maritime

Commission, disaster response by the Federal Emergency

Management Agency, international water quality expenditures,

and the civil works program of the Corps of Engineers.

The Committee's efforts associated with the Coast Guard's

Integrated Deepwater Program (Deepwater) continue to provide

benefits. Deepwater is a series of procurements being

undertaken by the Coast Guard to replace or upgrade its major

surface and aviation assets. The procurements are expected to

cost $25 billion by the time they are complete in 2026.

The Committee conducted an investigation that probed deeply

into the contract management and decision-making processes

within the Coast Guard and its contract partner, Integrated

Coast Guard Systems (ICGS) (ICGS consisted of Lockheed Martin

Corporation and Northrop Grumman Corporation). The Committee

found that the Coast Guard was warned of flaws in the designs

for Coast Guard assets long before the designs were

finalized. The Committee also found that in some cases,

substandard information technology equipment was installed on

the patrol boats. Finally, records indicated that there were

irregularities in the process for testing and certifying the

ships for standards designed to prevent the release of

classified information.

The Committee's investigation resulted in the Coast Guard

removing ICGS as the lead systems integrator for Deepwater,

and a reimbursement claim by the Federal government of $96

million from ICGS.

The Committee continues to monitor the Deepwater Program,

guarding against waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement, and

ensuring that taxpayers receive the full value of their

investment.

While the Committee continues to conduct oversight of

agency programs in all areas of its jurisdiction, in this

Congress, the Committee is being particularly aggressive in

overseeing the implementation of the American Recovery and

Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) (P.L. 1115).

The Recovery Act provided $64.1 billion for programs within

the jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and

Infrastructure, including $38 billion for highway, transit,

and wastewater infrastructure formula programs. Since

enactment of the Recovery Act, the Committee has performed

vigorous oversight, to ensure that the funds provided are

invested quickly, efficiently, and in harmony with the job-

creating purposes of that Act.

Just 10 days following enactment of the Recovery Act, the

Committee requested monthly reports from States, major public

transit agencies, and metropolitan planning organizations on

the use of highway, transit, and wastewater infrastructure

formula funds provided under the Recovery Act. The Committee

continues to receive those reports.

The Committee's request goes beyond the transparency and

accountability requirements of the Recovery Act, expanding

the scope of programs covered by the reporting requirements,

and accelerating the deadline by which information is

reported. These reports include information on the number of

projects that have been put out to bid, are under contract

and underway, and have been completed. The information also

includes job hours created or saved and payroll figures. The

Committee receives monthly reports from Federal agencies

implementing Recovery Act programs under the Committee's

jurisdiction.

Since April 2009, the Committee has published a monthly

report reflecting this information. All released information

can be found at the Recovery Act section of the Committee's

website: http://transportation.house.gov. The Committee

requested that these recipients continue to submit monthly

reports directly to the Committee for the remainder of 2010.

Of the $38 billion available for highway, transit, and

wastewater infrastructure formula program projects under the

Recovery Act, as of June 30, 2010, $35 billion (92 percent)

has been put out to bid on 18,718 projects. Within this

total, 18,002 projects totaling $33.4 billion (88 percent)

are under contract. Across the Nation, work has begun on

17,024 projects totaling $32.7 billion (86 percent)--work

producing badly needed jobs today. Work has been completed on

6,920 projects totaling $5.3 billion. From these investments,

not only has the economy benefited from the jobs created, the

public benefits from the investment itself through improved

transportation and quality of the environment.

In addition to the monthly reporting, the Committee has

held 18 oversight hearings on the Recovery Act since its

enactment, with seven of these hearings occurring during

2010. This total includes nine Full Committee hearings and

nine subcommittee hearings. These 18 hearings included a

total of 123 witnesses and spanned 64 hours. The breadth of

witnesses included Ray LaHood, Secretary of the Department of

Transportation and Lisa Jackson, Administrator of the

Environmental Protection Agency, as well as other Federal,

State, and local government officials, private industry

leaders, and workers actively engaged in implementing the

Recovery Act.

The Committee held its most recent oversight hearing the

last week in July, and will continue to hold oversight

hearings on the Recovery Act throughout 2010.

In addition to overseeing implementation of the Recovery

Act, as of the date of this report, the Committee and its

subcommittees have conducted 23 separate hearings in 2010 to

review the budgets and programs of agencies within the

Committee's jurisdiction. Additional hearings are planned.

This report includes specific findings and recommendations

developed by the Committee related to Federal spending and

government operations. As the findings and recommendations

demonstrate, the Committee has made and continues to propose

many

positive changes to improve the efficiency 'of government and

deliver the best possible outcomes to our constituents.

Specific Findings and Recommendations

Reduce Excess Expenditures on New Courthouse Projects

This proposal achieves deficit reduction by promoting

efficiency and reform of government and reducing waste by

ensuring that the number of courtrooms in proposed new

courthouse projects constructed by the General Services

Administration (GSA) more accurately reflects needs and

budgetary realities by aligning the number of courtrooms to

reflect courtroom sharing by judges, and realistic

projections of additional, future judgeships. Where

practicable, the Committee seeks to ensure authorizations

directing that courthouses be redesigned to eliminate not

only excess courtrooms, but also the additional building

volume that would have accommodated those excess courtrooms.

In accordance with 40 U.S.C. 3307, appropriations for

specific GSA construction projects may only be made if

authorized by resolutions adopted by the Committee on

Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of

Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public

Works of the Senate.

The Government Accountability Office reported (GAO-10-417)

that courtroom overbuilding, as a consequence of both

inordinately high judgeship projections by the Judiciary and

the Judiciary's failure to share courtrooms in a fashion

supported by empiric courtroom usage data, resulted in

construction of 1.8 million square feet of unnecessary space

for 33 courthouses completed since 2000.

This excess construction translates into a one-time

construction cost waste of $422 million, and an annual waste

of $26 million in additional operation and maintenance costs

for the unneeded space.

The budgetary impact of downsizing proposed courthouses is

being realized today. Since June 2009, the Committee has

authorized five courthouses with curtailed numbers of

courtrooms. According to budget estimates provided by GSA, or

derived from information provided by GSA, the Committee has

saved more than $87 million to date by limiting the number of

courtrooms in new courthouses. The savings are a consequence

of lower initial capital costs to build, and less money spent

by GSA to lease space because the proposed courtroom space

can now be used by Federal agencies that do not need to be

located in leased facilities.

[In millions] San Diego, California Courthouse:.................................$50.8 Greenbelt, Maryland Courthouse Annex:..............................$5.2 Mobile, Alabama Courthouse:........................................$7.8 Savannah, Georgia Courthouse:......................................$7.8 San Antonio, Texas Courthouse:....................................$15.5

I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his leadership on this issue.

The gentleman from Virginia has been very diligent and vigilant on deficit reduction and on careful investment of the public resources, as has the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Schauer), and there is no one who can exceed those qualities other than the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan), a gentleman whose entire career has been one of public probity and clarity.

As the gentleman from Michigan said, where he comes from and where I come from in northern Minnesota, where the gentleman from Virginia comes from, $107 million is real money. We could build 100 lane miles of new road at $1 million a mile in my part of the country. But being very clear, this is contract authority that is not going to be used. It's very clear it's not going to be used. The agencies have said they're not going to use it.

But in the curious construct of our budget processes in both the executive branch and the legislative branch, on this side of the Hill and the other side of the Hill, that money can be used in an obscure fashion that it takes a very long time to explain to ordinary citizens. Say, in a passing comment in a Fourth of July parade, you can't plumb the depths of this curious budget process. Sure, there are no outlay savings, but that's why the Appropriations Committee year in and year out, under both Republican and Democratic leadership, have used the rescission process to claim savings on the one hand and spend money on the other hand, real general revenue dollars on the other hand for projects that they consider to be important.

The supplemental appropriation bill earlier this month rescinded $25 million of highway safety contract authority that will be rescinded by the bill before us.

The supplemental appropriation bill rescinds $2.2 billion of Federal- aid highway contract authority so they can use it as something else.

This is real. What we are doing here is saying this is done. These authorities that exist in law that will not be used, for which obligations will not be made, and for which projects will not be advanced is terminated, and the Appropriations Committee then can't use that gimmick for something else they want to do.

So what we do is real in this legislation. It takes $107 million off the table. It makes it unavailable for rescission and unavailable for gimmickry through the appropriation process in either this body or the other body. We take a real positive step, one that is within the authority of this committee. We are not the Budget Committee. We are not Ways and Means. We have jurisdictional issues, and we are identifying other savings of this nature that will be considered on the House floor in the coming week before the August recess.

So I applaud the deficit hawks of our committee on both sides of the aisle for their vigilance and for pursuing this matter.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5604, the ``Surface Transportation Savings Act of 2010''. I commend the work of the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Perriello) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Schauer) for introducing this legislation.

This bill rescinds $107 million in excess contract authority that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) cannot use in fiscal year (FY) 2010. In doing so, H.R. 5604 will take these funds off the table so that they cannot be used to increase spending in the future.

The largest rescission contained in this legislation will occur in NHTSA's safety belt performance grants program. This program received $124.5 million in FY 2010 to carry out an incentive grant program to encourage States to enact and enforce laws requiring the use of safety belts. This funding level is equal to the amount authorized for this program in FY 2009 under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: a Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (P.L. 109- 59).

According to NHTSA, only three States are expected to qualify to receive an incentive grant under this program this year, requiring no more than $28.5 million in FY 2010 to carry out the authorized activities of the program.

NHTSA does not have the authority to redistribute the unused program funds this fiscal year, and they will remain unallocated in 2010. H.R. 5604 rescinds $81.0 million in unusable contract authority from this program.

The Surface Transportation Savings Act also rescinds $8.5 million in contract authority from NHTSA's administrative expenses, the National Driver Register, and research and development programs.

This excess contract authority was made available under the extension of current surface transportation programs passed as part

of the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (HIRE Act).

Because the amounts of contract authority provided for these programs under the HIRE Act is greater than the funding levels provided by the FY 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act, NHTSA cannot use these funds this year.

H.R. 5604 also rescinds $17.4 million of contract authority from FTA's formula and bus grant programs. The HIRE Act provides $8.361 billion in FY 2010 to carry out FTA's formula and bus grant programs, $17.4 million more than the funding level provided in the FY 2010 Consolidated Appropriations Act. FTA does not have the ability to utilize these funds this year.

Although the $107 million that would be rescinded by H.R. 5604 cannot be used at the present time, there are two ways this $107 million could be used to increase spending in the future if it is not rescinded now. First, a future appropriations act could increase the obligation limitations that control spending for these highway safety and transit programs, thereby allowing this $107 million to be spent. Second, a future appropriations act could rescind this $107 million and use that rescission to offset increased spending on other programs.

There are skeptics who claim that this bill will not reduce spending. They are closing their eyes to the budgetary shell game played out in this body over the past decade. It has become somewhat routine for appropriations bills to rescind surface transportation contract authority in order to offset other spending that no appropriations committee proposes. In fact, H.R. 4899, the ``Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2010'', that passed the House earlier this month, rescinds $25 million of the highway safety contract authority that would be rescinded by the bill before us today. The Supplemental Appropriations bill also rescinds $2.2 billion of Federal-aid highway contract authority.

The Committee on Appropriations includes such rescissions in appropriations bills because they offset other spending that the committee supports. Even if a contract authority rescission is ``scored'' as only reducing budget authority, not outlays, a budget authority offset is often all that is needed to facilitate additional spending in an appropriations bill.

To the extent that this bill takes $107 million off the table and makes that amount unavailable for rescission, or use, by some future appropriations bill, it will indeed result in ``real'' savings.

H.R. 5604 is one step in a continuing effort to find savings within programs under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. While these savings may seem small relative to the size of our budget deficit, it is a start. Even the longest journey begins with a single step.

I want to again thank Mr. Perriello and Mr. Schauer for their hard work on behalf of the American taxpayers in introducing this legislation. This proposal is a common sense step toward improving the Nation's fiscal foundation and ensuring that the nation's Federal surface transportation funds are invested as efficiently as possible.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 5604.

Will the gentleman yield to me for just a moment?

I would like to make the observation, Madam Speaker, that the gentleman took the lead in our Public Buildings Subcommittee many years ago, during his first term in Congress, on courthouses. The gentleman has saved the taxpayers of this country tens of millions of dollars, perhaps now in the hundreds of millions, by requiring, through his persistent campaign, courtroom sharing.

Madam Speaker, I'll say to the gentleman from Tennessee that I don't know how CBO scores that, but I know that, in our committee, I score it as a net savings to the public. We have built better courthouses, more courthouses and more efficient service to the public in requiring this very simple step of sharing courtrooms. To his great credit, the gentleman from Tennessee led the effort on it; and it has resulted in real savings, just as this legislation is resulting in real savings.

I tip my hat to the gentleman from Tennessee for his persistence in looking at those very specific ways in which we can achieve our goals.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5730, the ``Surface Transportation Earmark Rescission, Savings, and Accountability Act,'' introduced by the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Markey).

The gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Markey) has scoured the books of the Federal Highway Administration to identify funds that can be rescinded. This bill rescinds $713.2

million of Federal-aid highway contract authority that is currently available for 309 Member-designated projects included in four prior surface transportation authorization bills. It takes this $713 million off the table so that it cannot be used to increase spending in the future. Any savings from this bill will be used to reduce the deficit.

Specifically, the bill:

Rescinds all remaining highway earmarks designated in the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (STURAA) (P.L. 100-17): $4.55 million for 2 projects;

Rescinds all remaining highway earmarks designated in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) (P.L. 102-240): $263.543 million for 154 projects;

Rescinds all highway projects designated in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA 21) (P.L. 105-178) that have not obligated at least 10 percent of the funds authorized for the project: $441.475 million for 152 projects; and

Rescinds all High Priority Project program funds authorized by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (P.L. 109-59) that were not designated for use on a specific project: $8.190 million for 1 project.

In addition, the bill establishes a process for tracking unspent project funds going forward, enabling Congress to identify projects that have inactive funds or that have been completed in the previous year.

Member-designated projects play an important role in the Federal-aid highway program. They provide constituents with a chance to weigh in directly with their elected officials on their community priorities, and allow Members an opportunity to support transportation safety and mobility improvements that may be overlooked by the State Department of Transportation.

Yet, it is also necessary to use a commonsense approach to dealing with projects that are complete or no longer viable. Many of the funds rescinded under this bill are from projects that are complete, but have excess remaining funds that cannot be used now that the project is finished. There is no reason for these remaining funds to stay on the books.

Other projects affected are those that show no likelihood of going forward, due to changing community priorities or other transportation needs. Rescinding funds from projects that are no longer viable is a practical approach to saving taxpayers' dollars.

Rescinding this $713 million now prevents it from being used to increase spending in the future.

It has, unfortunately, become somewhat routine for appropriations bills to rescind contract authority to offset other spending. Such rescissions are included in appropriations acts because they are useful in offsetting other spending. Even if a contract authority rescission is ``scored'' as only reducing budget authority, not outlays, a budget authority offset is often all that is needed to facilitate additional spending in an appropriations bill.

In fact, the Senate Appropriations Committee has proposed to use a portion of the funds rescinded in this bill to offset spending in its version of the FY 2011 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development appropriations bill.

To the extent that this bill takes $713 million off the table and makes that amount unavailable for rescission, or use, by some future appropriations bill, it will indeed result in ``real'' savings.

The gentlewoman's bill is in line with the High Priority Project reform principles issued by the bipartisan leadership of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure in April 2009, which established an unprecedented level of transparency, accountability, and reform for surface transportation projects going forward.

These principles called for the repeal of funds from older projects that have not spent out. The gentlewoman's bill is an effective and thoughtful means of achieving this policy objective and will save the government money by eliminating unnecessary project designations.

H.R. 5730 is one step in a continuing effort to find savings within programs under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Other steps are also being taken. Last week, the House passed H.R. 5604, the ``Surface Transportation Savings Act of 2010'', introduced by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Perriello), which rescinds $107 million in highway safety and transit contract authority.

I applaud the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Markey) for her initiative in bringing this measure forward and her commitment to sound fiscal policy.

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 5730.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5604) to rescind amounts authorized for certain surface transportation programs.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 5604.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the Surface Transportation Savings Act of 2010 and appreciate the work of Congressman Schauer and the chairman and many others in working for this.

In the long journey towards reducing this Nation's deficit, we also need to look at small steps as well as large ones. As we look at pay- as-you-go legislation and bipartisan budget commissions, we also must find in every place that we can look opportunities to save some money.

One of those places we should be able to start, if nothing else, is looking at areas where the agencies themselves have said we cannot use this money or we do not want this money. We have compiled within Transportation and Infrastructure's jurisdiction over $107 million that is left sitting on the table. But we know too often in this town, money left on the table disappears very quickly.

This bill will lead to real savings. It reduces the contract authority that is currently available for certain highway safety and transit programs by $107 million. In fiscal year 2010, it takes this $107 million off the table so that it cannot be used to increase spending in the future.

There are two ways that this money could be used to increase spending in the future if not rescinded now. First, the future appropriations act could increase the obligations limitations that control spending for these highway safety and transit programs, thereby allowing this $107 million to be spent instead of reducing the deficit.

Second, the future appropriations act could rescind this authority and use it as a rescission to offset increased spending on other programs. In fact, and unfortunately, we have already seen attempts to do this. They become somewhat routine for appropriations bills to rescind contract authority to offset other spending. In fact, H.R. 4899, the FY 2010 emergency supplemental, used about $2.2 billion in rescissions of highway contract authority.

What we see here is a commonsense attempt with ideas from both sides of the aisle to look at opportunities where the agencies have said these are resources we will not spend or cannot spend. To me, this is one step where we should be able to agree at least in such areas that that money and that contracting authority should be taken off the table so that it is not spent and put towards deficit reduction.

I rise today to support this savings act, to appreciate all those and thank all of those who have worked on it. While these savings may seem small relative to the size of a budget deficit, it is a start. As they say, even the longest journey can begin with a single step. I urge my colleagues to consider H.R. 5604 in this light and support this bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I appreciate the support of the gentleman from Tennessee and his concern about the deficit. We certainly need to continue to look at the big picture with pay-as-you-go legislation and budget commissions and other ways to get it to balance. In the meantime, there is nothing wrong with taking smaller steps in the right direction, whether that's looking at blocking congressional pay raises or anyplace that we can save. $107 million is nothing to sneeze at, even if it's not large by Washington standards.

Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Schauer).

I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the chairman.

Madam Speaker, again, I want to thank the gentleman from Tennessee and the others who have been a part of this.

If we can't at least agree to take the money that agencies say they don't even want or can't even use and put that to deficit reduction, how on Earth will we ever move forward in the simplest possible terms?

If this $107 million is left on the table, it will be spent on something. If we remove this contracting authority, it will not; and that will save the taxpayers money. That is the important thing. If we can't at least agree on these small steps, how are we going to take the big steps together?

So I appreciate the cooperation on this bill to find $107 million, to take that off the table and to make sure that it does not get spent wastefully.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5730) to rescind earmarks for certain surface transportation projects.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of my bill, H.R. 5730, the Surface Transportation Earmark Rescission, Savings, and Accountability Act. The bill will eliminate a total of $713 million in contract authority for 309 old transportation earmarks. In short, this bill will prevent our deficit from rising by another $713 million.

In today's fiscal climate, we must be judicious in our spending. And my legislation follows the commonsense principle of use it or lose it.

Before I came to Congress, I owned several small businesses. One of my businesses was a small coffee and ice cream shop called Huckleberry's. With a shop that sells food, the use it or lose it principle is intrinsic. We would not buy more perishable foods than we would sell; otherwise, we were at a loss.

Every small business owner knows that when you are working on a tight budget, you cannot afford wasteful spending. And that, Mr. Speaker, is exactly what these earmarks are. By targeting these earmarks, my legislation will deliver real savings.

H.R. 5730 is one step towards the ultimate goal of reducing our Nation's deficit. By rescinding unused earmark funds from over 20 years ago, we will be improving the way in which Federal funds are managed while proving our commitment to fiscal discipline.

In today's economy, it is essential that we manage taxpayer dollars well, especially with respect to transportation funding. We will never be able to adequately address the investment gap in transportation infrastructure if we do not curb unnecessary spending.

To promote responsible future funding, my bill also requires the Secretary of Transportation to submit an annual report that identifies each project authorized under TEA-21 in SAFTEA-LU that contains inactive funding or that has completed in the previous year. This provision will give Congress greater oversight, and with the identification of such projects, we may be able to implement more cost- saving measures in the future.

Mr. Speaker, many of these earmarks have been on the books since 1987, and it's high time we tell the States to use it or lose it.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 5730.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake), cosponsor of the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the Taxpayers For Common Sense Action that was written to Mr. Oberstar, chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Taxpayers for Common Sense,

July 27, 2010.

Chairman James Oberstar,

House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Rayburn

House Office Building, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Oberstar: Taxpayers for Common Sense, a non-

partisan budget watchdog, strongly supports a small but

important step to reduce the nation's yawning budget deficit:

the inclusion of a provision in the Federal Aviation

Administration authorization legislation that would rescind

transportation earmarks that remain unobligated ten or more

years after their authorization.

The Senate has already adopted an amendment to its version

of the bill, introduced by Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI), which

indicates that chamber's support for this idea. A bill

introduced by Rep. Betsy Markey (D-CO) (H.R.5730--Surface

Transportation Earmark Rescission, Savings, and

Accountability Act), builds upon the Senate provision and

saves even more taxpayer dollars. Rep. Markey's proposal

identifies more than $713 million worth of unused earmarks

that can be rescinded, most of which are more than ten years

old. There may be an opportunity to rescind additional

earmarks from previous appropriations bills, which would be

worth pursuing as well.

We urge you will take this opportunity to save taxpayers

hundreds of millions of dollars and wipe these liabilities

off the books. If you would like to discuss this issue

further please contact me or Erich Zimmermann.

Sincerely,

Ryan Alexander,

President.

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

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.