▶ 0:05:47So, it's when you push down on it, but when I talk, I don't really hear anything. So, I mean, we can get
▶ 0:05:56good. How are you?
▶ 0:05:59Yeah, these these spin these spin right
▶ 0:06:41Testing. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10. Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Room 2167.
▶ 0:34:24I call the committee on transportation and infrastructure to order. Uh pursuant to committee rule 6F and house rule 11 clause 2HF, the chairman may postpone further proceedings today on any question of approving any measure or matter adopting an amendment in which a recorded vote of the A's and NAS is ordered. I'd ask unanimous consent that the chairman be authorized to declare a recess at any time during today's meeting without objection. That is so ordered. A bill and amendment text have been distributed electronically and paper copies are also available here in the hearing room.
▶ 0:34:54As a reminder, the committee may use an electronic voting system for any requested recorded votes. Today, the committee is considering an amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870, the building uh unrivaled infrastructure and long-term development for America's 250th or the Build America 250 act. Finally, I'd ask unanimous consent for the committee to use an amendments roster for any items under consideration by the committee without objection. Um that is so ordered.
▶ 0:35:26All right. Our only item for consideration today is HR8870, the Build America 250 Act, and I ask unanimous consent to discharge the committee, the subcommittee on highways and transit in railroads and pipelines and hazardous materials from further consideration of 8870 without objection. That is so ordered. I now call up the bill for consideration. Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with. The bill is now considered as read and open for amendment at any point.
▶ 0:35:54And I now recognize myself to offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Cler, please designate
▶ 0:36:00an amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Chairman Graves.
▶ 0:36:05Without objection, the amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read and shall be considered as a base text for uh the purposes of further amendment. And I recognize myself for five minutes for my statement. Today we are marking up the most consequential piece of legislation this committee will work on um in this Congress, which is HR8870, the Building Unrivaled Infrastructure and Long-Term Development Act of America's 250th or the Build America 250 Act.
▶ 0:36:34One of my top priorities when I became chairman of this committee was to move a bipartisan surface transportation bill that provides multi-year certainty for states, local governments, and to address the needs of our roads, bridges, rail systems, transit systems, um, I'm proud that this committee worked together to find some common ground on this crucial bipartisan piece of legislation.
▶ 0:36:59This bill was developed with ranking member Larson, highway subcommittee chairman Rouser, highway subcommittee ranking member Norton, and rail subcommittee chairman Webster. I want to thank each of them for the tremendous uh uh leadership and work in providing and moving this package forward. This bill was written following the input and thousands of policy requests we received not only from members of this committee, but from the entire House of Representatives.
▶ 0:37:28This year is an inflection point in our nation's history as we take stock of the previous 250 years of American history. And more importantly, imagine what the next 250 years uh are going to have in store for us. Much like the America 250 celebration this year, the bill is about moving forward and not moving backwards. Americans rely every day on the investments made by the previous generations.
▶ 0:37:53Whether that's the rail system of the 19th century, the monumental bridges of the early 20th century, or the 70-year-old interstate highway system. Looking forward, it's clear that America must recommit itself to building and maintaining a foundational infrastructure that underpins our nation's surface transportation system. I believe that this is the most important surface transportation bill since President Eisenhower built the interstate system.
▶ 0:38:20That's because we have a duty to not just preserve and hand down President Eisenhower's infrastructure legacy, but to build the next generation of worldclass infrastructure for our children and our grandchildren. The Build America 250 Act is a bill that both honors that legacy and ensures that we can build upon it.
▶ 0:38:42And it makes smart and targeted reforms to our surface transportation programs to ensure they focus first and foremost on building out our core infrastructure systems for decades to come. It drives innovation across our highways, our transit and rail networks. It strengthens safety on our roads, gives states and local governments the flexibility they need to deliver for their communities. It cuts through federal red tape to get projects built faster, and it keeps America's commerce moving.
▶ 0:39:12Whether you're a Republican or a Democrat, this bill delivers for your district and for your constituents because it delivers for every single American. I'm most proud of the resources this bill devotes to bridge construction and repair. At more than 50 billion over the 5-year authorization period, the Build America 250 Act is going to provide the largest single bridge investment in America's history.
▶ 0:39:37and current at at current investment rates, a bridge built today will have to uh wait until America's birthday to be replaced. And that's unaccept unacceptable. The millions of Americans who drive every day over obsolete bridges in poor condition deserve better. And this bill will supercharge bridge investment to build and rehabilitate tens of thousands of bridges in reaching every single congressional district.
▶ 0:40:05The Build America 250 Act also recognizes we cannot wait any longer to begin addressing the fact that our highway uh trust fund isn't keeping up with its needs. The bill ensures that electric vehicle owners, just like all other users of the highways, begin paying their fair share into the highway trust fund with an annual registration fee, the first new revenue source for the trust fund in more than three decades.
▶ 0:40:30This bill also looks ahead to our future and provides the first ever federal framework for autonomous motor uh autonomous commercial motor vehicles in order to safely integrate them into our roadway system and provide regulatory certainty for their burgeoning industry.
▶ 0:40:46Finally, this bill makes an historic commitment to America's great cities and its small towns, ensuring that large public transit agencies are held accountable for improving passenger safety, security, and accessibility while delivering record investments in rural roads, small community transit, and the freight corridors that connect America's heartland and the global markets.
▶ 0:41:08HR8870 is a bill we can all be proud of, one that I believe will stand alongside uh other great infrastructure achievements of the last century and serve as a foundation for the next century. And I want to thank everyone for being here and for all your contributions and hard work that pulled this bill together. I especially want to thank Rick uh again for the continued partnership um that we have not only in this bill but obviously other pieces of legislation that that we've worked together on.
▶ 0:41:35and I look forward to a productive markup today and moving this leg leg legislation swiftly to the House floor. I now recognize uh Rick for his opening statement.
▶ 0:41:43Thank you, Chair Graves and for scheduling the markup. Thanks for your partnership on this bill. It has been a long uh long journey to to get to this point and uh appreciate where we are today. I can't think of a better way to celebrate infrastructure week than to mark up the surface transportation bill. But in fact, every day is infrastructure day in Washington state's second congressional district, which is why today is especially uh exciting for for me.
▶ 0:42:07I do want to go back in time a little bit uh because from the first roads that Paul River used to tell us the British are coming to the establishment of the post roads to the establishment of the Cumberland Road which became um I70 to the transportation communication revolution of the early 1800s just fast forwarding to 1956 um and and of course in the last 30 to 40 years um from IC tea and safety and um bil today to today Congress has been
▶ 0:42:37very aggressive about identifying the transportation infrastructure needs of this country and uh taking action in Congress uh to support those needs. So passing a strong reoff bill today on time brings certainty industry uh industry stability and jobs continuing economic growth in the United States. Just think back to the last surface bill that we passed as part of the BIL which supported uh more than 116,000 projects uh across the country in every congressional district.
▶ 0:43:07The BIL also created 700,000 new jobs in construction and engineering and transit and trucking and rail. These dollars means uh stronger, newer infrastructure and safer, more efficient travel options in the communities we represent. The Build America 250 Act is a product of months of negotiations and thousands of policy ideas from constituents, stakeholders, and members. Now, while the bar bill we're marking up today does not reflect everything I wanted or what some committee ranking member Norton wanted, there still is yet a lot to applaud.
▶ 0:43:38And I'll be supporting the bill uh barring anything too great here and opposing amendments that undermine the agreement. Uh reasons that we should support this provide strong funding levels. There's 375 billion in guaranteed highway trust fund dollars for highways compared to combined 350 in highway trust fund advance appropriations for highways in the BIL.
▶ 0:43:58There's 87.5 billion in guaranteed highway trust fund dollars for transit which was substantially higher than the highway trust fund amounts in the BIL and just nearly matches the 91 billion in total BIL transit funding. There's higher funding for tribes and territories and we worked with what we can control in the TNI committee and provide authorizing authorized funding levels for rail of 64 uh billion dollars comp comparable to the guaranteed funding level in BIL. We maintain key labor and by America protections.
▶ 0:44:28We preserve the disadvantaged business enterprise so that socially and economically disadvantaged small businesses will continue to benefit from federal infrastructure investments. We allow local communities to meet their unique needs by investing nearly $83 billion over five years in local communities, including 11 billion specifically for local bridges. Guarantees funding for competitive programs important to local governments like the safe streets and roads for all grants and the new surface transportation acceler accelerator grant.
▶ 0:44:59We sustain safe, reliable, and accessible transit through robust bus funding, support for ADA compliant transit stations, and permitting reforms to expand transit service. It supports clean transportation in the environment through $1 billion in charging and low emission fuel infrastructure, higher investments in the congestion mitigation and air quality program or CMAC program, and maintain eligibilities uh for some climate friendly investments. and we avoided a punitive EV fee.
▶ 0:45:28It creates the nation's first rule book for autonomous commercial motor vehicles. Its AV framework is important, ensuring that we put safety and drivers first and hold manufacturers accountable as we chart a path forward in this new technology as it applies to to uh commercial vehicle service. Improves rail service by allowing states to use a portion of their highway dollars for equipment and stations on state supported routes.
▶ 0:45:52It advances rail safety by accelerating the phase out of dangerous tank cars and mandating railroad participation in the confidential close call reporting system among other provisions. Now, we have more work to do, especially on rail safety, and I hope we can achieve that through today's amendment process. In addition, the bill also contains several provisions that are important to the folks I represent, including investment in culverts, $932 million in dedicated funding for the construction of fairies.
▶ 0:46:19It includes uh my bill to authorize $250 million for communities hosting international sporting events, including the World Cup, but with the LA Olympics coming soon, the potential of the 2031 World Cup, uh women's World Cup in the US, and the 2034 uh Utah Olympics. I apologize my friends from Utah if I got the year wrong. But we need to start making those investments now and makes funding available for projects improving veterans access to to uh VA facilities.
▶ 0:46:45So throughout this process, we fought to at least maintain current funding levels for surface transportation modes, save lives through accountable accountability measures and highway investments and strong rail safety reforms, and focus on people by protecting transportation jobs and defending worker safety gains. I'm pleased with the work we did to support these goals.
▶ 0:47:04Now, I I will note that Chair Graves and I have served in Congress together for more than two decades, and I have valued our partnership, and I'm pleased once again that uh we have managed to beat most the odds and deliver a bipartisan surface transportation bill. So, with that, thank you, and I yield back.
▶ 0:47:22Chairman Rouseer.
▶ 0:47:23Thank you, uh, Mr. Chairman. Uh, the Build America 250 Act makes critical investments in our nation's roads, bridges, and infrastructure that Americans rely on every day, strengthening the foundational programs of our surface transportation systems. This bill protects American taxpayer dollars, ensuring federal funds are deployed efficiently to address our most pressing infrastructure needs.
▶ 0:47:47Under this legislation, more than 90% of highway funding will be distributed through formula programs, providing states the certainty and flexibility they need to address their unique infrastructure priorities. The legislation also consolidates and eliminates more than a dozen duplicative programs, streamlines discretionary grant funding, reduces the bureaucracy, and improves accountability to improve project delivery.
▶ 0:48:15This bill expands departmentwide categorical exclusions and streamlines the coordination of environmental reviews across federal agencies among other reforms. Together, these changes will cut burdensome red tape and accelerate the permitting process, delivering projects more quickly and at lower cost.
▶ 0:48:36Notably, this bill provides the first new revenue stream for the highway trust fund in more than 30 years, focused on those vehicles that currently do not pay into the trust fund. Very modest registration fees for electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids will help ensure everyone who uses our roads contributes to maintaining them.
▶ 0:48:57This is a small yet significant first step towards addressing the structural deficit of the trust fund so we can continue to ensure America's infrastructure remains competitive, safe, and well-kept. The bill also makes historic investment in bridges across the country, including 10 billion dedicated exclusively to locallyowned bridges to support our rural communities.
▶ 0:49:19In my home state of North Carolina, with more than 19,000 bridges, these resources will help the state and local communities with essential construction and rehabilitation projects. North Carolina has seen rapid growth, and our infrastructure must keep pace with that growth. This bill designates two future interstates in North Carolina, helping ensure we have the capacity to better meet the increasing demand in North Carolina's fast growing population.
▶ 0:49:47The Build America 250 Act also enhances safety by making it a priority. The public deserves transportation systems and roads that are safe, requiring transit agencies to focus on passenger safety and leveraging innovative technology to make work zones safer. This bill affirms safety is a top priority when we consider policies regarding the movement of people and goods.
▶ 0:50:12So, I am quite proud to have helped develop this strong bipartisan bill alongside Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Larson, and Ranking Member Norton. And I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle as we advance this very critical legislation through the legislative process. And I want to thank the chairman and ranking member for their commitment to the bipartisan process uh that is going to lead to a very strong bipartisan bill that's great for this country.
▶ 0:50:41I urge my colleagues to support the bill and I yield back.
▶ 0:50:45Miss Holmes honor
▶ 0:50:50as ranking member of the subcommittee on highways and transit. I am pleased to support this bill. While this is not the bill Democrats would have written on our own and while as part of the big four agreement, I might need to vote against uh amendments I otherwise support.
▶ 0:51:17I applaud the chairs and ranking members for continuing this committee's longstanding commitment to bipartisanship. and I yield back.
▶ 0:51:33Uh, Chairman Webster,
▶ 0:51:39thank you, Chairman Graves. I'm pleased to join you and ranking member Larson, Highways and Subcommittee Chairman Rouser, and Highways and Subcommittee Ranking Member Miss Norton for uh this important bipartisan legislation. specifically like to highlight the importance of title 10 the bi the bill title addressing railroads and transportation and hazardous materials.
▶ 0:52:05Railroads are critical to the safe and efficient movement of freight and people. The United The United States freight rail network plays an vital role in an effective and efficient transportation of goods throughout our nation.
▶ 0:52:21Approximately 40% of all long-distance freight is moved by rail products and commodities including those shipped shipments uh support industries and millions of jobs across the economy uh particularly in manufacturing. In addition, the millions of Americans utilize passenger rail as an alternative means to highway or air travel.
▶ 0:52:43This bill makes important reforms that will improve both safety efficiency of the nation's freight and passenger systems. This legislation modernizes the Federal Railroad Administration's regulatory enabling new innovation and investment that will uh will safe enhance safety and efficiency.
▶ 0:53:09Bill also includes important reforms that improve the project delivering process. Millions wasted each year on red tape and other forms of needless bureaucracy are forms uh that are invested in buildings infrastructure, real infrastructure in creating real jobs. Both shoreline uh shoreline railroads and passenger rail provides a vital and to my uh home state, Florida.
▶ 0:53:37and the legislation before us today will continue to support these important industries. Further, the bill addresses the transportation hazards uh of materials and importantly we work to regulate parties to codify a registration fee that fixes an error made by ILJ and um that would result in burdensome registration fees.
▶ 0:54:03This legislation also consolidates hazardous materials safety grants and uh and simplifies the grant application process. It also includes important safeguards to ensure United States safety standards for hazardous materials are not undermined by foreign competitors seeking an unfair advantage over American producers and workers.
▶ 0:54:27In addition uh to the winds highlighted in title 10, overall the Build America 250 act is legislation that returns our nation's investments to core infrastructure projects, makes the largest investment into bridges and secures the first um new revenue in highway trust fund in over 30 years. For these reasons and many more, I urge my colleagues to support the bill. yield back my time.
▶ 0:54:59Representative Nadler.
▶ 0:55:01Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend you and ranking member Larson for the bipartisan spirit that helped shape this bill. While I appreciate the work that has gone into this legislation, however, there are some serious shortcomings that I hope this committee can address today.
▶ 0:55:19As the sole member of this committee representing New York City, I am deeply concerned that this bill fails to adequately prioritize rail and transit infrastructure systems that are essential not only to my district but to the economic strength of the nation. For example, the Amtrak Northeast Corridor carries more than 800,000 passenger trips each day and serves as a backbone of interstate travel and commerce.
▶ 0:55:45Yet, this bill falls short of the investment needed to modernize aging infrastructure, improve accessibility, address deferred maintenance, and ensure long-term reliability and resilience. At the same time, transit systems like the MTA continue to operate within a federal framework that disproportionately favors highways over public transportation.
▶ 0:56:08Despite serving millions of riders each day and anchoring one of the nation's most productive regional economies, the MTA, like other public transit systems, receives a far smaller share of federal support than highways. This legislation does little to address that imbalance or to provide the sustained investment needed to strengthen one of the nation's most heavily used transit systems.
▶ 0:56:33When New York's transit network falters, the consequences extend far beyond the region, affecting mobility, productivity, and economic performance nationwide. Yet, this bill continues to lean toward highway expansion at the expense of stronger investment in rail and transit, an approach that is shortsighted and out of step with our transportation and economic needs. Rail and transit must be treated not as secondary priorities, but as core national investments.
▶ 0:57:03Just as important, this bill must include strong guardrails to ensure transportation laws are implemented faithfully and as Congress intended. This legislation will mean little if the executive branch can delay, obstruct, or selectively undermine its execution.
▶ 0:57:20Over the fast over the past 16 months, this administration has stalled transit projects, withheld congressionally appropriated infrastructure funding, and injected politics into decisions that should be driven by public need and economic benefit, not political New Yorkers know this risk firsthand.
▶ 0:57:41The Trump administration has baselessly threatened funding for the Gateway program, one of the nation's most critical rail projects, attacked New York City's congestion pricing efforts, and shaped planning for revitalization of Penn Station through a closed door process that prioritizes private interests and the highest bidder over transparency, public oversight, and the transportation needs of New Yorkers.
▶ 0:58:06If we fail to establish stronger oversight and protections against politically motivated delays or selective enforcement, we risk authorizing investments that communities may never fully receive. I look forward to working with my colleagues to strengthen this bill and to better serve the transportation needs of New Yorkers and of all Americans. I yield back.
▶ 0:58:28Gentleman yields back. Mr. Stalber.
▶ 0:58:31Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in support of the Build America 250 Act, a bipartisan effort to strengthen America's transportation network, modernize critical infrastructure, improve safety, and ensure the federal investments are delivered efficiently and responsibly. This legislation recognizes a simple reality. America cannot maintain a strong economy, compet competitive workforce, and safe transportation system with outdated infrastructure and broken promises.
▶ 0:59:01The Build America 250 Act takes important steps to address those challenges while incorporating priorities that improve accountability, strengthen domestic manufacturing, protect workers, and enhance public safety. I especially appreciate the inclusion of priorities advanced by my office. First, this bill reflects the goals of my bill, the Break for Kids Act. Ill illegal passing of stopped school buses continue to put children at risk every single day across this nation.
▶ 0:59:31Recent National Highway Traffic Safety Administration survey data make clear that too many drivers either do not understand the law, are distracted, or simply don't care. The Break for Kids Act directs the Secretary of Transportation to implement a national public safety messaging campaign like the Click It or Ticket campaign to educate drivers about the dangers and consequences of illegal passing stop school buses.
▶ 0:59:57Public awareness and education are essential tools to help prevent tragedies before they happen. And I am pleased to see that the school bus safety and public education efforts are reflected in this bill. Second, the bill includes my parody in engineering act. Federal transportation projects should operate under clear and consistent standards nationwide.
▶ 1:00:18For for years, nearly every state has followed federal acquisition regulationbased guidance developed in coordination with ASHTO and the Federal Highway Administration except for Minnesota. Ensuring parody and consistency in engineering procurement protects transparency and creates a level playing field for firms competing to deliver infrastructure projects.
▶ 1:00:42Addressing broader aspects of the bill, I want to recognize that the bill maintains the consistent application of Davis Bake and prevailing wage standards. There's been long there has long been bipartisan recognition that federally supported infrastructure investment should support good paying jobs with skilled workers. And con as Congress invests in roads, bridges, transit, and rail systems, we must continue in ensuring that workers helping build those projects are treated fairly and compensated appropriately.
▶ 1:01:12I also strongly support the bill's commitment to buy American policies. Federal infrastructure dollars should support American workers, American manufacturers, and American supply chains whenever possible. Buy American requirements. help create jobs here at home, strengthen domestic industry, and reduce dependence on foreign sources for critical minerals and manufactured products. Finally, I want to highlight the critical issues this legislation addresses, permitting reform.
▶ 1:01:42For too long, worthy infrastructure projects have been held up by years of delay, litigation, and uncertainty. Communities across the country have seen projects funded but never completed because a permitting process has become too unpredictable and burdensome. This bill takes meaningful steps to improve project delivery by streamlining reviews, reducing unnecessary delays, and providing greater certainty in the permitting process.
▶ 1:02:08Reforms that establish clear timelines for judicial review, and focus environmental reviews on the direct impacts of a project can help ensure that infrastructure investments actually translate into completed projects that benefit the American people. At its core, the Build America 250 Act is about long-term investments in America's future.
▶ 1:02:29It strengthens infrastructure, improves safety, supports workers, promotes domestic manufacturing, and helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are spent effectively and efficiently. This legislation reflects serious bipartisan work and incorporates many common sense priorities that will benefit communities across the country. And I want to thank Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larson and the rest of my colleagues for all their hard work on this bill.
▶ 1:02:57I urge my colleagues to support the Build America 250 act. And Mr. Chair, I yield
▶ 1:03:03Gentleman yields back. Mr. Carson, you're recognized.
▶ 1:03:07Thank you, Chairman, and thank you, Ranking Member Larson, for both of your hard work along with the staff and thoughtful negotiations to bring us a good bill for markup. Although it doesn't have everything that each of us would like to see, it does preserve critical programs this committee has long supported and it continues newer programs we've established in the bipartisan infrastructure law which are so important for our communities.
▶ 1:03:30I am particularly pleased that my top priorities have been included for rail overall rail safety, addressing block railroad crossings, including an incident database, which I first called for in 2018, and more support to strengthen intercity passenger rail and Amtrak's national network for transit, dedicated transit funding, new transit services, and transit safety, including bus facilities and personnel for sustainability, clean transport, transportation,
▶ 1:04:01EV infrastructure and greener materials for infrastructure projects for workers, transportation workforce protection and development programs, plus other labor protections for safety active transportation programs like pedestrian and bike safety and reauthorizing the safe streets program for communities, increasing community participation in policy and implementation decisions and economic participation through continued DBE programs.
▶ 1:04:29I'm looking forward to working with my colleagues today on thoughtful amendments that can improve the base bill and hope we can work together to craft a final bill that we can all support. Thank you. I yield back.
▶ 1:04:44Mr. Babin.
▶ 1:04:47Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This year marks 70 years since President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 into law. For canons, that anniversary carries a special meaning. President Eisenhower, who hailed from Abalene, Kansas in my district, understood that a strong transportation network was essential to the safety, commerce, and unity of the United States. His vision helped connect a growing country and gave future generations a highway system that changed the way Americans live, work, and move.
▶ 1:05:1570 years later, Americans transportation needs have changed, but Congress's basic responsibilities remain the same. We have a duty to maintain a surface transportation system that allows people and goods to move across the country safely, efficiently, and reliably. Every district in America relies on roads, bridges, rail, airports, and freight movement. This is especially true in rural America. In the Big First, our district alone has more than 83,000 miles of road, 4,000 m of railroads, and the highest number of bridges of any district in the country.
▶ 1:05:47That infrastructure supports the farmers, ranchers, producers, manufacturers, small businesses, schools, hospitals, and families that keep our community strong. When a rural bridge is closed, a highway is unsafe, or a freight route is inefficient. The consequences in rural America are real, a farmer may have to take a longer route to get grain to market, a rancher may face higher costmoving livestock. A manufacturer may struggle to ship products on time. A first responder may lose valuable minutes reaching someone in need. Transportation policy in Washington has a direct effect on the daily lives of all Americans.
▶ 1:06:17And that's why it is critical that this reauthorization must get back to the basics. In recent years, Washington has created new programs, expanded existing ones, and spent money our country does not have. The Build America 250 Act gets us back on track, focusing our limited federal resources on the fundamental needs of our transportation system, roads, bridges, freight movement, safety, and the infrastructure that helps Americans get where they need to go.
▶ 1:06:40I'm thankful that the committee included several of my priorities in this legislation to benefit not only canons but also Americans across the country. This includes provisions to better target impaired driving, permanent exemptions for our livestock haulers to safely move animals across our transportation systems, innovative improvements to prevent traffic incidents and ensure motor carrier safety, modernization of seasonal agriculture CDLs, and permitting improvements to speed up construction for vital infrastructure. America is a nation that builds.
▶ 1:07:09That spirit helped President Eisenhower, a proud canon, leave a transportation legacy that still serves our country today. The Build America 250 Act honors that legacy by focusing on the basics, respecting states, spending taxpayer dollars wisely, and strengthening the roads, bridges, and freight networks that keep America moving. I strongly support this legislation, urge my colleagues to do the same, appreciate the chairman and ranking members work, and look forward to supporting this bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. Mr.
▶ 1:07:39Titus.
▶ 1:07:41Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you and the ranking member and your incredible staff for working with us to bring this bill forward. I especially want to thank Claire Shankin and my office, not only for helping move my priorities, but for helping coordinate all the different interests that were involved in the chapters that uh deal with railroads.
▶ 1:08:01You know, it feels like just yesterday that we enacted the most significant infrastructure investment in our nation's history when we passed the uh infrastructure investment and jobs act. That law has been transformative in my district and Las Vegas. We're building a high-speed zero emission train from Las Vegas to Los Angeles, Southern California.
▶ 1:08:23uh safe streets for all grants are improving our pedestrian infrastructure and saving lives in an area that had a high rate of accidents and deaths. The airport's seen major upgrades making the first and last impression on the 55 million passengers who fly through Las Vegas uh for tourists tourism and business every year. Protect grants are helping us become more resilient against uh the ravages of extreme heat.
▶ 1:08:52We've already hit 104 in Las Vegas. We've built bicycle stations and lanes to give people a safe, healthy way to get around, get out of their cars, and use other modes of transportation. Now, this committee is responsible for reauthorizing that watershed law because it expires in September. So, we have an important decision to make.
▶ 1:09:15Will we continue to build on this progress and move forward or will we slip backwards and lose that investment that we have made so effectively in infrastructure? I know many of my colleagues would agree with me that the bill before us today is not perfect, but it has some vital provisions that do build on that progress. And so I'm very happy to report that. Uh in the highway chapter, I'm pleased that there are several provisions that I authored.
▶ 1:09:44First, my thermal runaway reduction act um creates a $2 million per year grant program at FIMSA to test effective strategies to extinguish thermal runaway. It also requires the federal government to update regulations for the commercial transportation of lithium ion batteries, which is increasingly a problem. There are provisions based on my buffer act to increase the spare bus ratio cap.
▶ 1:10:13So RTC's around the country can uh help buses run on time during extreme heat. Make safety improvements as you've heard in school zones uh from the Protect Our Students Act. 300 people children have already been hit by buses in Clark County this year. And there are provisions based on the Move Act to help families make more informed decisions about ebikes and escooters keep children out of the emergency room.
▶ 1:10:40I've already seen in in at UMC in Las Vegas, a 400% increase in head injuries from riding these new transportation modes on our streets. And it also includes vital programs of champion like safe streets and roads for all. I love the wildlife crossing programs and the protect programs. And while not nearly enough, it does contain some funding for EV charging.
▶ 1:11:06Now, with that said, as the ranking member of the railroads, pipelines, and hazardous materials subcommittee, I also want to look at that part of the bill. From day one, I've made it very clear that if the bill didn't include comprehensive rail safety provisions, I wouldn't abide by the four count corners agreement. Every step of the way, I have fought to include safety provisions in the package to prevent another tragedy like East Palestine.
▶ 1:11:33There are some good provisions in there, but not nearly enough. So, today I'm making good on my promise. I didn't sign on to the bill upon introduction, and I fought to make sure that some of these provisions come up in the amendment process. I want to be sure we have a fair vote on the Railway Safety Act, and I thank Mr. Delusio and Mr. Nails for bringing that amendment.
▶ 1:11:56I've also offered some amendments to ensure that track inspections aren't undercut and safeguard labor protections for rail workers for projects that are funded by taxpayer dollars. As these amendments come forward, I hope my colleagues will vote their conscience today on these unresolved issues and we can come with an even better bill. The safety of our communities, our railroad workers, our travelers all depend on it. So, I thank you.
▶ 1:12:25I look forward to working through this process and I yield back.
▶ 1:12:31Now, Mr. Babin,
▶ 1:12:32thank you, Mr. Chairman. Appreciate it. Also want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and ranking member Larson for your leadership and for convening today's markup. As a former merchant seaman and as a former commercial licensed truck driver, I couldn't be happier with not everything in the bill, but most of it. Uh, I want to thank you, Chairman Grace, for your hard work on this bill and your deep commitment to strengthening our nation's surface transportation network. It's an honor to serve on this committee with you at the helm.
▶ 1:13:03I also want to thank the subcommittees and their staffs for their efforts in developing this bill and I know there was an enormous amount of work and I'm grateful for your dedication and your perseverance. The Build America 250 Act reauthorizes and strengthens investment in America's critical service transportation infrastructure for the next five years.
▶ 1:13:24This legislation refocuses proven programs, delivers the largest investment in bridges in our nation's history, streamlines permitting costs to cut costs and reduce delays, and supports innovation, including establishing the first framework for safe integration of autonomous commercial motor vehicles.
▶ 1:13:45The bill strengthens the highway trust fund by restoring the user pays principle and by creating the first new revenue stream in more than 30 years through user fees on electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids. It also supports America's truck drivers by investing in dedicated truck parking, providing hours of service flexibility for livestock haulers, and protecting drivers from abusive trucking arrangements.
▶ 1:14:13Additionally, this bill enhances motor carrier and highway safety, prioritizes support for law enforcement, promotes accountability at Amtrak, and strengthens secure transportation for hazardous materials. And for Texas, my home state, this bill delivers critical formula funding for highways, roads, and provides resources to address our state's unique infrastructure needs.
▶ 1:14:38As one of the nation's largest freight and logistics hubs, Texas plays a very critical role in moving goods through our ports, our highways, and our rail networks to supply our communities all across America. In my own home district, uh Houston Ship Channel is one of the busiest trade gateways in America, moving energy, agriculture, manufactured goods, and products that supply communities across our great country.
▶ 1:15:06This legislation will help keep people and commerce moving efficiently across our rapidly growing economy. This is a strong bipartisan bill that prioritizes core infrastructure, reduces regulatory burdens, and improves safety and reliability. I appreciate the hard work that has gone into crafting this bill and I look forward to supporting its advancement today. Mr. Chairman, thank you so much and I yield back.
▶ 1:15:32Uh Mr. Carveral. Thank you, uh, Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larson for your leadership in bringing this bill forward to reauthorize our surface transportation programs. While not perfect, it's a good bill. Your commitment to govern and deliver results for the American people is why I joined this committee. I also want to recognize the committee staff who put in countless hours in drafting this legislation.
▶ 1:16:01I want to express my support for the Build America 250 Act and the investments it makes in our nation's transportation future. Having served on the Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors and as a member of this committee during the drafting of what became the bipartisan infrastructure law, I know firsthand the importance of craft crafting transportation policy that not only addresses today's infrastructure challenges, but prepares our country for the future.
▶ 1:16:29This legislation reflects many of those priorities that I have consistently pushed for on behalf of my constituents and communities on the central coast of California, including it increases funding for the surface transportation block grant program, preserves the safe streets for all and protect grant programs, expands investments in the bridge formula program, including a dedicated set aside for locallyowned bridges, and maintain contains the
▶ 1:17:00Davis Bacon provisions. These are real victories for local governments that are on the front lines of maintaining roads, transit systems, and critical infrastructure that improve mobility for our constituents. I am especially proud that this legislation continues to support the wildlife crossings program, an effort originally included in the bipartisan infrastructure law, otherwise known as the bill.
▶ 1:17:25When we drafted the bill, we recognized that investing in wildlife crossings was not only an environmental priority, but a public safety imperative in California and across the country. Wildlife crossings save lives, reduce costly vehicle collisions, and protect The overwhelming demand for this program over the past several years has proven how valuable these investments are for states and local governments alike.
▶ 1:17:54And I am proud to see this legislation continue that commitment for communities like the ones I represent. This bill also helps ensure local leaders have greater flexibility to prioritize projects that reflect local needs. I con it continues support for critical rail programs like the Chrissy and Corridor ID which are essential to maintaining and expanding passenger rail service like the Pacific Surfliner and throughout California.
▶ 1:18:25I also appreciate that this legislation takes a forward-looking approach toward emerging transportation technologies. The inclusion of an autonomous vehicle safety title recognizes that innovation is already reshaping our transportation system. Importantly, the bill does not ignore the workforce implications of these technologies.
▶ 1:18:46As automation and autonomous commercial vehicles continue to develop, Congress has a responsibility to ensure labor has a seat at the table, that safety remains paramount and that workers are not left behind as new technologies come online. While I am supportive of this bill, I do have concerns with several provisions that were left out or changed in ways that could negatively impact communities working to transition to cleaner transportation systems.
▶ 1:19:15I am disappointed by the elimination of the low or no emissions bus program. This program has helped transit agencies modernize fleets, reduce emissions, and deploy cleaner buses in communities across the country. I am also concerned that the EV structure included in the bill does not appear to fairly account for income disparities or affordability challenges.
▶ 1:19:38As we work towards long-term solveny of the highway trust fund, we must ensure the transition to cleaner vehicles does not disproportionately burden middle and lower income families who are trying to make more sustainable transportation choices. And I would like I would be remiss if I did not express my disappointment that the legislation does not include authorization for a medium-sized transit intensive cities or IMTIC program.
▶ 1:20:07Transit agencies and medium-sized communities provide robust services every day, often with few resources and without the recognition afforded to larger larger urban systems. While I was disappointed this bill did not include an infrastructure bank, I remain optimistic that I can continue to work with Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larson to establish an infrastructure bank. I hope we can continue working together to address some of the shortfalls as this bill moves forward.
▶ 1:20:34Overall, this legislation represents a bipartisan investment in America's infrastructure. I urge my colleagues to support the bill. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
▶ 1:20:44Mr. Westman. Thank you, Chairman Graves. and thank you for your leadership on bringing this bill to the uh to the committee for a markup today. If my math is right, I believe there are five other committee chairman that sit on this committee. And I think we all have an appreciation for what it takes to work hard on a bill like this.
▶ 1:21:05appreciation for you and your staff and ranking member Larson and his staff and you know and on a subject that's important to all Americans that this is this is this hearing is probably not going to remark it's probably not going to be covered live on cable TV because it's not spicy enough but it's very important and I really commend you for a job well done.
▶ 1:21:29It shows that we still can govern when it comes to important issues that involve every American. And the the good things in this bill have been highlighted. I would be remorse if I didn't talk about the focus on infrastructure like highways and bridges, which I think most Americans see that as what transportation and infrastructure is about.
▶ 1:21:50the fact that 90% of highway funding will be uh through formula funding to the states which will give states more flexibility in prioritizing uh projects. Um the expanded funding for bridges which is is very important and also uh truck parking is a big issue that is affecting uh truckers all across our country. the the Chrissy funding grant program.
▶ 1:22:19I'm appreciative of that and many other things in the bill. I'll also say that uh it's good to see this order coming back to the committee. Many of us remember being here back in uh 2020 and 2021 when we tried to do a highway uh service transportation reauthorization.
▶ 1:22:41Chairman DeFazio was working uh very hard to make that happen and these the hearings that we had that was during COVID that's almost like a nightmare thinking back about it with many people coming in on this the big screen a lot of us traveling here having late night markups and a lot of work was going in to create a bill that traditionally is bipartisan and the committee puts a lot of work into And at the
▶ 1:23:11last minute, the uh the IIGJA got dropped on us from the the Senate. The committee kind of got kicked to the curb and we supposedly had a bipartisan infrastructure bill that really didn't go through regular order or have the uh the oversight and the input that this bill had. So again, thank you for your your work on that.
▶ 1:23:34Also thinking back to that last process, I remember there was a big debate on it doesn't really matter how much money you approve in a in a highway bill. If you can't build the projects, it doesn't make a lot of difference. And this bill does address some of those permitting issues. Uh we are obviously working on a larger permitting bill that has passed the House. The Senate's working on that.
▶ 1:24:01Hopefully we can get these permitting reforms that are in this bill uh passed, but I'm h hopeful that we can also get a big permitting bill passed. The numbers are staggering when you look at the cost of permitting and delays.
▶ 1:24:17Not just increased cost to build projects, the problems with mobilization and demobilization, the increased inflationary cost, but it's also the the lost opportunity cost because we're not building the infrastructure in a timely way so that we can all benefit from that. We also know that there's a safety cost when we can't build infrastructure.
▶ 1:24:41I think the bill that we have before us today is like everybody said, it's not perfect, but it's a huge step forward. It's getting us back on the right track. I look forward to the the markup, and I yield back,
▶ 1:24:58Mr. Papis. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, uh, for your leadership and to the ranking member as well for getting us to this moment here today. and I'm pleased to add my support for the Build America 250 act, the committee's reauthorization of surface transportation programs. This bill is going to provide needed increases in funding for New Hampshire for roads, highways, bridges, safety programs, and more. Build America 250 will deliver more than $1.2 billion in highway formula funding for my state, as well as over $150 million in transit funding.
▶ 1:25:29I'm pleased that important programs were protected like the safe streets and roads for all grants, the transportation alternatives program, CMAC and accessibility for our transit stations. I strongly support the increase in funding for the bridge formula program which is going to deliver $390 million to New Hampshire's bridges over the next 5 years. That's a 73% increase in over funding levels from the bipartisan infrastructure law, which was already a historic increase.
▶ 1:25:55New Hampshire has nearly 200 bridges that are in poor condition and more are being added every year with that distinction. So those need immediate attention. In total, these federal funds will continue investments in good paying jobs in our infrastructure, promote safety, improve quality of life, uh modernize needed uh infrastructure priorities. And the bill delivers for our communities over the long term, ensuring that guaranteed funding is there for our transportation sector and making sure states and communities can plan for and invest in the infrastructure needs of the future.
▶ 1:26:26There are always steps that we can take to make a good bill even better. And I'm going to continue pushing support for rail, for railway safety, active transportation investment, and addressing the problem of impaired driving. But the bipartisan work done by this committee over the last year is proof that working together and working across the aisle can lead to solutions that will make a real difference for our communities and move our nation forward. I yield back.
▶ 1:26:50Mr. Perry, thanks Mr. Chairman and begin by thanking you for your work, ranking member, and of course the hard work of staff. None of this comes together easily. It's a long and arduous process and we all appreciate it. Like all the bills this size, there's some good and some not so good. Unfortunately, we continue to spend spend money that we simply don't have at a rate far above which we can afford. The top line to this bill is 580 billion.
▶ 1:27:18And while that is a little lower than IA levels levels, we have to remember that IA levels were so blown out that nearly every Republican in this committee voted against it at the time. The bill does roll back some of the most egregious IA Green New Deal programs, but it does not go far enough in rolling back the wasteful spending. Further, it fails to address the very significant and very real problem of highway trust fund money being diverted to non-highway projects.
▶ 1:27:48Nearly 30% of highway trust fund money is diverted and this number continues to grow. I've offered a number of amendments to address those concerns and I hope they are given real consideration as we are running out of time to fix this issue. The expiration of this bill aligns with the insolveny of Social Security and Medicare, meaning general fund transfer to the HTF are going to be weighed against much more significant levels of spending.
▶ 1:28:15It is vital that we address this issue now and create a solvent trust fund to avoid having to cut off infra infrastructure spending in the future. Finally, I recognize that this is not TNI's jurisdiction, but we must address the NHTSA's kill switch issue when it gets to the floor. Simply cannot allow for the kill switch to go into effect and violate the privacy of every and the sovereignty of every citizen and American. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance.
▶ 1:28:48Miss Strickland.
▶ 1:28:53Thank you, Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larson. I support advancing this bipartisan transportation bill that improves safety, delivers jobs, grows local economies, and meets the transportation and infrastructure needs of communities in Washington State, the 10th Congressional District, and across the country. This bill will maintain funding levels set in the bipartisan infrastructure law for highways and transit.
▶ 1:29:17It safeguards critical programs that communities and cities of all sizes and regional economies that rely on delivering transportation projects. And it preserves a disadvantaged business enterprise program. Democrats only one-third of the committee staff to support this work. Yet, we secured well over a third of the wins in the bill. So, thank you to Ranking Member Larson and Chairman Graves for always working in a bipartisan manner. This is a testament to your strong leadership, your resolve, and your effectiveness.
▶ 1:29:47I'm proud to have authored provisions on the bill to reduce congestion and wear and tear on roads while enabling greater transportation choice and affordability. Many communities cannot afford all the road capacity and improvement projects that they need. And even if we pass this bill, we know that the needs of all of our communities will still not be fully met. Construction, materials, and fuel costs are only increasing.
▶ 1:30:10This bill enables communities to use federal dollars for transportation demand management solutions through the rural and urban surface transportation accelerator grant, the STAG program. This will help communities find cost savings, focus on resources on projects that necessitate new construction, and expedite transportation network improvements.
▶ 1:30:31I'm also pleased to have secured provisions to support metropolitan planning organizations, which are essential partners to help local communities develop and deliver federal aid transportation projects. These provisions will provide greater flexibility and support for administrative and planning activities to carry out that work more efficiently and more effectively.
▶ 1:30:52I also secured provisions from the Build More Housing Near Transit Act, which I co-led in the last Congress to solve supplyside housing challenges and encourage the development of transit served walkable communities. Coupled with the 21st century housing bill that we passed yesterday, this is essential. And for Washington State, this bill delivers continued investments in the fleet expansion and modernization of the Washington State Ferry system and the jobs that support them.
▶ 1:31:20the development of Cascadia highspeed rail, $1 billion dollar for courtmandated culvert replacement and rehabilitation, and a 25% set aside in the bridge formula program to help repair locallyowned bridges. At a time when tariffs are and skyrocketing fuel costs are driving up the cost of building infrastructure, we must continue to give our communities certainty, job security, and the support they need to sustain and grow their economies.
▶ 1:31:48Investing in infrastructure has a high return on investment. It is money well spent. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this bill. Mr. Chair, I yield back.
▶ 1:32:00Mr. Johnson.
▶ 1:32:03Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A major factor uh powering American excellence for a long time has been our national commitment to infrastructure. uh rather than have a bunch of disconnected regions, we just decided a long time ago we're going to have one interconnected nation. And and man alive does it pay a lot of dividends for a lot of us. Uh look at I90 through South Dakota, major interstate. It's not a state asset. It's a national asset.
▶ 1:32:30In fact, more than 70% of all of the traffic on Interstate 90 neither originates nor terminates in South Dakota. And so I think it's important that we take a uh we have a national lens that we're looking through uh when we're talking about this surface transportation bill. And Mr. Chairman, that's exactly what you exactly what we together uh have done. Uh and this does right by America and it does right by South Dakota. You look at bridges, we know that we have a bridge crisis in America.
▶ 1:33:00Uh probably in a more pronounced way in rural America, but everywhere. Uh this bill almost doubles the amount of bridge funding that will come to South Dakota. It is a substantial increase as well in the funding uh for highways and other and other surface transportation priorities. That is going to make our country stronger. It's going to reduce inefficiencies. It's going to make supply chains more resilient. It is going to be an excellent investment in this country.
▶ 1:33:31There are a number of policy wins in this bill as well. I'll call out u my bill, the securing infrastructure from adversaries act. Thank you for its inclusion. Lidar is hardly a household name. And yet this exquisite technology uh really does power a tremendous amount of uh future gains and efficiencies and effectiveness uh in the transportation space because it provides millime millimeter level data about what's going on in these interconnected systems.
▶ 1:34:02And our country has unfortunately grown too reliant on China and Chinese companies when it comes to lidar. This bill makes it clear that our department of transportation is not going to be using federal funds to procure technology that would give that millimeter level data uh on our country's critical infrastructure to companies that are affiliated with the Chinese Communist Party.
▶ 1:34:25And so here we are with a bill that does right by investing uh in in tribal infrastructure, does right by investing in rural infrastructure, does right by investing in our nation's infrastructure assets, and it's also got some pretty good wins for America. And uh Mr. Chairman, I am so looking forward to passing this bill out of committee on a bipartisan basis. And with that, I would yield back.
▶ 1:34:52Miss Sykes. Good morning everyone and thank you to the chair and ranking member for holding today's markup. For many Americans, their primary interaction with their government is through the roads we drive and the trains we ride on, the bridges and railroad tracks that we cross. And every day when people ride to work, they notice the potholes and the crumbling roads, and they let us know about that, too.
▶ 1:35:19And after work they face traffic that keeps them from their families and their loved ones and their blood pressure high. Transportation and infrastructure is a key part of governance. It is about providing a baseline of safety and protection for everyone on our roads and it advances innovation on our trains, planes, and automobiles. It connects us home to work to school to our communities.
▶ 1:35:42While I'm excited to have the opportunity to work on these programs for our constituents, and I am thrilled to see bipartisan legislation that will address our nation's crumbling infrastructure, I am reminded that many of the provisions in this bill are way past due. On February 3rd, 2023, a North Folk Southern freight train derailed in East Palestine, Ohio, causing 20 cars to spill hazardous chemicals that ignited fires, which burned for over two days.
▶ 1:36:08These dangerous chemicals spread through the air, seeped through the ground, and found their way to the water supply. It has been over three years since this tragic train derailment, and Congress is only just now taking up legislation to address concerns stemming from this derailment. I consider this to be a disservice to all the people in East Palestine, Ohio, who are still dealing with the fallout of this tragedy, in addition to all of the communities bisected by railroads that could be the face of the next derailment disaster.
▶ 1:36:36And the overarching theme that I heard from those impacted in East Palestine was that they wanted to make sure that there was legislation in place so that this did not happen to another community. They did not want their suffering to be in vain. After the tragic plane crash over Washington DC, the House passed the Alert Act within a year. Clearly, Congress can act in a timely manner and it is disappointing it has taken this long to address the concerns. But I am glad that we are finally here today.
▶ 1:37:06That's why after years of requesting hearings and calling for votes to address this issue, I made it a priority to include more rail safety measurements in this year's rail authorization. And this package does this just that by including the railroad safety advisory committee and would accelerate the removal of dangerous tank cars from circulation.
▶ 1:37:25Additionally, it would ensure that placards designating a train car has hazardous materials cannot melt in a fire as it did in East Palestine, making it exceptionally hard for its first responders to respond And this package would also create a training program for first responders on how to best respond to a situation involving hazardous chemicals.
▶ 1:37:49These and other investments in transportation research, development, and demonstration in this legislation are necessary to support a safe, resilient, equitable, and sustainable transportation future. Before I continue, I would like to recognize and thank my colleagues from Ohio who very quickly after the train derail in East Palestine came together to introduce the rail act.
▶ 1:38:13Led by myself and former Congressman Bill Johnson who represented the area at the time 11 of the 15 members of our delegation stood together in solidarity to say we do not want to see this happen again. So, for that reason, I want to make a special shout out and thank you to the Ohio delegation for uplifting the concerns and the cares of people of East Palestine, Ohio, and jumping to the opportunity to come together.
▶ 1:38:39At the time, we were told and I was told by many people on and off the hill that they had not seen such a bipartisan act of unity and solidarity amongst our delegation. And I am so glad to be part of that and to have led that act to make sure that we were working on behalf of the people that we represent in the great state, the greatest state in the nation, Ohio.
▶ 1:39:00As a member of both the science, space, and technology committee and the transportation infrastructure committee, I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues on both committees to advance the priorities outlined in this bill and for continued transportation innovation. Finally, I just like to thank all of the individuals on our staffs individually, collectively, and from the committee for working together.
▶ 1:39:22I can't imagine how many late nights and early mornings that you had, but your work is not going to go unseen, and we appreciate it for every call that we will not receive about a pothole or a crumbling bridge. We will think of you and thank you for the hard work that you have done. Again, I am going to support this legislation on behalf of not only the people in Ohio's 13th Congressional District, but the entire state of Ohio and our nation who relies upon transportation for our well-being, for our connectivity, and for our economy.
▶ 1:39:52Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield back.
▶ 1:39:55Mr. Brnan, thank you, Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Larson, and to all of my colleagues on this committee who put in a lot of work to get us here today. It's fitting that we're finally doing this markup during infrastructure week, but in northeastern Pennsylvania, every day my constituents are driving on one of the five major highways that run through my district or over one of the thousands of local bridges. Unfortunately, these roads and bridges are in serious need of work.
▶ 1:40:24We're seeing freight trucks, commuters, and first responders adding time to their routes because bridges have been out for years. Road projects are stuck in permitting for 5 years when they should take two. This bill targets those issues and that's why I'm proud to support it here today. Pennsylvania has one of the highest numbers of structurally deficient bridges in the country. You've all heard me say this by now, but 25% of the bridges in my district fall under that category. That ends today.
▶ 1:40:50The Build America 250 Act is the largest investment in bridges in American history. The Commonwealth is set to receive over 350 million a year to rehabilitate and reconstruct our bridges. The bill dedicates a significant portion of those investments to locally owned bridges, a concept taken right from the bipartisan basics act, which I was proud to lead with rec uh Representative uh McDonald rever to return infrastructure investment back to our local communities.
▶ 1:41:16This is a critical crucial component for many small towns that see one or more of those bridges sit on a wait list for years before being prioritized. The people who know what their communities need are the ones who live and drive every single day. This bill finally invests in them and our local bridges finally get their turn. As a former highway contractor, I've seen firsthand how infrastructure investments can create well-paying jobs that support working families. At the same time, I've also seen the real dangers workers face in active work zones.
▶ 1:41:45Between 2014 and 192 lives were lost in Pennsylvania work zones, underscoring the urgent need for stronger safety measures. I know people who have been injured on the job. I know families who have lost loved ones. We don't talk nearly enough about keeping those workers safe once they're out getting that job done. That's why I'm proud this bill includes preventing roadside and work zone deaths act, which I worked with Representative Carter to make sure that work zone safety is a priority at the Department of Transportation.
▶ 1:42:14Finally, all these investments mean nothing unless shovels are actually put into the ground. If it takes a decade to cut through red tape before a project starts, that's a failure. This bill includes meaningful permitting reforms to streamline the process and get projects moving. In northeastern Pennsylvania, our infrastructure does not have time to wait. This is a good bill for the people of northeastern Pennsylvania. It delivers for our bridges, big and small, for our construction workers, and for every community that has been waiting far too long for Washington to get it done. I urge my colleagues to support it and I yield back.
▶ 1:42:47Miss Scton,
▶ 1:42:49thank you so much uh Chair Graves, Rouser, Webster, and ranking members Larson, Holmes, Norton, and Titus. Uh, as well as the incredible TNI staff that have worked so tirelessly on this bill. Uh, I want to give a huge shout out to my TNI staffer, Leila, as well. Uh, many of you know her. uh and my entire legislative team that has been working so hard on this.
▶ 1:43:14Um I talk a lot about being from Michigan uh and I am really proud of it. Uh we put the world on wheels and Woodward Avenue uh has been described as the world's first concrete highway. This is a big deal. Bragging rights aside, it's incredible how much progress our nation and transportation system has made since 1909 when Michigan made history in paving the first road.
▶ 1:43:40I know this bill will build on that legacy and help us keep pace with the progress made through the bipartisan infrastructure law, and I'm pleased to support it. These investments aren't just theoretical. This is not an academic exercise. The work done in this committee will create jobs that help parents support their families. It'll allow kids to bike safely to school. It'll connect communities as folks head to church.
▶ 1:44:07It'll provide options as people try to squeeze in doctor's appointments. The Build America Act will preserve guaranteed funding for highways and transit. It's it's going to make sure that moving forward uh local governments can make infrastructure investments important to their communities, bolster safety for workers, drivers, and pedestrians, create good paying jobs, support American innovation, and safeguard small businesses through the disadvantaged business enterprise program.
▶ 1:44:38I am so proud of this bipartisan deal, and I'm thrilled that key priorities for West Michigan are included in the text. This bill includes language from my bipartisan Paving the Way for the American Industry Act to ensure that American tax dollars stay in the United States of America in our domestic chemical industry, investing in our domestic chemical industry, and safeguarding good union jobs.
▶ 1:45:05I also championed the unlocking affordable housing act to help developers access TIFIA and uh RR if loans to build more housing where transit already exists. This bill will boost housing supply and lower costs for I'm so proud uh that my Safe Transit Act was additionally included in the bipartisan deal to streamline transit projects and get federal dollars out the door into a community into communities.
▶ 1:45:33The Build America Act also includes my roadway resiliency act which establishes a common sense inter agency working group to provide communities with roadway safety best practices in inclement weather, something we know a lot about in Michigan. Thank you again to the committee leadership and their staff and my staff in particular for their work to put together this bipartisan measure. I'm eager to support the Build America 250 Act to invest in America's transportation system and I yield back. Mr.
▶ 1:46:03Taylor.
▶ 1:46:05Thank you, Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larson for holding this markup today. I'm proud to speak in favor of the Build America 250 Act, otherwise known as the Surface Transportation Bill. After 5 years of the Democrats disastrous infrastructure bill, the IIGJA, we are now considering a bill that funds vital infrastructure projects rather than Green New Deal PET projects.
▶ 1:46:25Through a new bridge formula, Ohio will receive billions of dollars to repair and build bridges across the state, making this legislation one of the largest investments ever in our nation's Additionally, this bill makes common sense permitting reforms by removing unnecessary review steps and expanding categorical exclusions, which will streamline project delivery and lower costs.
▶ 1:46:46The Build America 250 Act also supports our rail and trucking industries by dedicating funding towards truck parking, Chrissy grants, and the rail crossing elimination program to ensure our nation supply chains are sound and protected.
▶ 1:47:00As founder and chair of the Congressional Trucking Caucus, I was also thrilled that language was included directing the secretary to remove CDL mills from the training provider registry and to ensure CDLs are awarded exclusively to eligible citizens by giving states the flexibility to determine their infrastructure needs and removing burdensome federal requirements. Districts like mine in southern Ohio will see widespread infrastructure growth.
▶ 1:47:24I want to thank Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Larson, Chairman Rouseer, and Ranking Member Holmes Norton for their hard work on this bill, as well as all the amazing staffers who made it possible. I'm proud to have worked on this product that could transform rural America, and I'm looking forward to this rule becoming law. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
▶ 1:47:43Miss Pope.
▶ 1:47:47Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, first let me begin by saying thank you to the chairman and to the ranking member and also our very very hardworking committee staff for helping craft this bipartisan reauthorization bill.
▶ 1:48:02I am proud that among the provisions of this package is my bipartisan bill um the Safe Track Act, a bill to strengthen highway rail c uh grade crossing safety regulations and help prevent suicides. I recognize that this bill does not do everything for every member here had requested. So let me be clear, more work needs to be done.
▶ 1:48:31But before us is a strong bipartisan investment in our safety and improvement to our highways, rails, and transit systems. New Jersey and my district will receive significant wins including Amtrak rail safety planning block grants and congestion uh mitigation.
▶ 1:48:56The safe street and roads for all as well as the vent for burn research and testing programs continue in this measure. We also established new programs including transit ambassadors, a program to provide transit passengers and staff with with essential support that is based on legislation that I co-sponsored with representative uh Simon and
▶ 1:49:26I am also very pleased that this bill will will rename North Penn Station for the late Congressman Donald Payne Jr. a valued member of this committee. Congressman Payne was a longtime public servant who cared deeply about his community. I am grateful that we will we will be able to honor him in a in such a fitting way.
▶ 1:49:52From highway investment to roads to our buses and light rail, New Jerseyy's transportation will see significant improvements. While this bill, as I said earlier, may not be perfect, it is absolutely a good first step in the right direction.
▶ 1:50:13I look forward to working with my colleagues and again a very special thank you to the committee for helping prioritize numerous New Jersey priorities. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
▶ 1:50:29Miss Gillan.
▶ 1:50:34Thank you so much, Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larson. Um, it really is a pleasure to serve on this committee where we do the work that the American people sent us here to do, which is to work in a bipartisan fashion where we disagree, we hammer out deals if we can, and we deliver for the American people. So, I thank you both for your leadership. Uh, I thank the staff of the committee. I thank u my legislative staff and my transportation staffer, John Older, who's right here.
▶ 1:51:02Um, so I rise today in strong support of the underlying surface transportation package. This legislation builds on the historic progress made through the bipartisan infrastructure law and continues our bipartisan commitment to creating a transportation system that is safer, stronger, and better prepared for our future. This bill bill bill makes critical investments in both our transportation infrastructure and equally important in our transportation safety.
▶ 1:51:32It will support projects that my community on Long Island and others across our country rely on every day. It will strengthen and create programs aimed at reducing crashes and improving our roadway safety. And it will protect and honor our transportation workforce, the hardworking men and women who maintain our highways, operate our transit systems, and keep us moving safely and efficiently across our country.
▶ 1:51:57I am especially grateful that this package includes several bipartisan pieces of legislation that I have authored focused on traffic safety and saving lives. One provision will help educate parents about the importance of properly installed and compliant car seats. Non-compliant and counterfeit car seats put babies and children's lives at risk due to improper testing, inadequate safety features, and poor construction.
▶ 1:52:23This leaves our children vulnerable in the mo matter in the moments that matter most. My bipartisan bill, the Car Seat Act, which I introduced proudly with Republican co-sponsors Delegate King Hines and Congressman McKenzie, will ensure that parents have the education and resources that they need to identify and avoid these dangerous products and give states the tools they need to keep every child safe on the road.
▶ 1:52:48The surface bill also includes two provisions from my bipartisan drunk driving prevention and enforcement act which I introduced with Congressman Lawler and Congresswoman Dingle to address drunk driving and drug involved driving on our roads. The first would create a new traffic safety enforcement center of excellence to provide states with evidence-based evidencebacked insights into the most effective forms of traffic enforcement.
▶ 1:53:14And the second would help improve our data collection on drug involved crashes by investing more than a hundred million in a new national drug involved crash data collection system grant program, giving states more support than ever before to report accurate standardized crash data. When I got to Congress and was appointed to this committee, I promised Long Islanders that I would fight to improve Nassau County's infrastructure, repair our heavily traveled roads and bridges, and prioritize safety.
▶ 1:53:43I'm pleased that this Build America 250 bill moves our nation in the right direction to accomplish these very important goals. I urge my colleagues to support the bill and continue investing in a safer, more reliable transportation for the American people. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
▶ 1:54:01Mr. Figures.
▶ 1:54:05Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I am pleased to offer my uh presumptive support here for the Build America 250 Act. I'm grateful to have had the opportunity to work in a bipartisan way on a number of priorities. When I ran for Congress, this was this was where I wanted to be. I almost feel like a a kid here that grew up to play in the NFL and is playing in the Super Bowl today. Uh because this is this is what it was about for me.
▶ 1:54:32uh being here on transportation and infrastructure committee particularly with the uh infrastructure um challenges that we and needs in my district. Um you know I represent a district now where we're in the midst of uh building a new international airport. Uh we have a big new bridge that we have to build across the Mobile uh bay and you know we are now home to the deepest port uh in the entire Gulf.
▶ 1:54:57And so being here today uh is very important to the future capacity of my region, of my hometown, of of the port of Mobile to be able to capitalize on on that new found um resource that we have in being uh the deepest and and soon to hopefully be one of, if not the busiest port uh in the Gulf. But it starts with our ability to be able to move goods and resources uh off of those containers ships and get them into the the the the flow of the economy regionally and across the country.
▶ 1:55:26and the work that we do here today is going to help that significantly. Uh I am very pleased uh in the way that this process has been handled, Mr. Chair, and and Mr. Ranking member. Uh it has felt uh to be totally honest with you, the most inclusive process that I've been a part of since I've been a member of Congress here in my first year. And so I gratefully appreciate that and apprec appreciate the uh the broader uh collegiality and and cooperate uh cooperation that we have across party lines in this committee.
▶ 1:55:53Uh this bill is uh will ultimately include several amendments that I have worked on to propose uh amendments that deal with uh bridge funding, amendments that will help drive more resources uh across u my state of Alabama and certainly across the region in the district that I represent. I'm very proud of the fact that the state of Alabama will now see over a hundred million more dollars uh annually uh under the new bridge investment formula than we currently have.
▶ 1:56:22And that is something that is significant especially given uh the challenges that we have had in funding uh the bridge that we need down across Mobile Bay. And so I am looking forward to getting this across the finish line and hopefully getting it across uh the floor of the house as well so that we can uh continue to move forward uh economically in my region uh as well as bringing more jobs and more investments to the future of the state of Alabama.
▶ 1:56:46I uh I am disappointed I must say that you know that this does not include specific project funding but I understand the reason uh the reason that the majority has taken that position but nevertheless I I still believe that members particularly members on this committee um we are the best sources of being able to direct the project needs given our connectivity that we have to local and state leadership in terms of where money and resources are needed uh to fund specific types of infrastructure projects.
▶ 1:57:13But nevertheless, this bill certainly opens up more doors uh for that type of funding to flow through different programs and ultimately hopefully get to the places where that money is needed the most. So, Mr. Chairman, I'm looking forward to the process and thank you very much. I yield
▶ 1:57:26Mr. Frost.
▶ 1:57:28Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Uh one of my goals in Congress is to work for faster, safer, and more accessible transportation for my constituents in Central Florida. Um, and so I'm very excited to be participating in today's markup of the surface transportation reauthorization bill. I'm also very proud that my bill, the safer rail crossings act, is included in the text of this reauthorization. I introduced this bill with my colleague from Florida, Representative Mast.
▶ 1:57:54While rail moves goods and people safely, efficiently, and with low environmental impact, grade crossings, where the rail meets the road, still pose a danger. Representative Mass and I know this to be especially true in our state and in our districts. In 2023, there were almost 2,000 pedestrian accidents at grade crossings in the United States. Florida ranks third in the entire nation for the number of pedestrians injured in train accidents, showing the need for stronger safety measures. Luckily, we have a way to deal with this issue.
▶ 1:58:23The uh the Federal Highway Administration's railway railway highway crossing program or the RHCP provides funds to make public railway crossings safer. Since 2019, there's been a reduction in of accidents of 82% in crossings where an RHCP project was completed. These life-saving results are being achieved even as traffic on both uh both roads and railways has increased over the few years.
▶ 1:58:52This really shows the program's effectiveness in improving safety. But the program can be better and we found that state and local governments using this program reported needing better guidance, technical assistance, and examples um of when it comes to these projects. And this problem has made it harder for communities to f fully utilize funds for pedestrian focused improvements.
▶ 1:59:13The Safer Rail Crossing Act would address this need by instructing the Federal Highway Administration to issue clear guidance on the types of pedestrian safety projects eligible under this program. Including this bill in the Build America 250 Act will help create an environment where both pedestrians and commuters can move freely without fear. It will ensure rail remains a safe and vital part of Florida's and the nation's infrastructure and economy. And I'm proud that it's included in the bill.
▶ 1:59:42I'm also proud to be a co-lead of Representative Breznahan's amendment to ensure the fair distribution of funding for local bridges. I want to stress why this import this amendment is so important. Our local elected officials and metro planning organizations are the decision makers closest to their constituents. Nobody knows the transportation and infrastructure needs of a community better than the people who take the local bus, who drive our local roads and bridges, or have to navigate their neighborhoods by foot or bike. Especially relevant to our amendment.
▶ 2:00:11My constituents know that their local roads cross a lot of bodies of water. Local needs must not be ignored at the state level. I know that less connected or underserved communities are often left out of the state level decision-making. This makes for geographic distribution of projects an important consideration. My district contains Orlando's urban core, surrounding suburbs, and continues out to rule East Orange County.
▶ 2:00:37And so I know the need to ensure fair distribution of projects amongst both urban and rural communities. This amendment speaks to another important priority to make sure that transportation funding does not just go to new projects. It must also fund existing infrastructure because so much of that infrastructure is in desperate need of repairs and improvement. I want to thank my colleague representative uh Breahan for filing this important amendment. and I'm proud to co-lead it with him and the work that he's done to ensure that its inclusion in the manager's amendment. I yield back.
▶ 2:01:10Miss King Hines,
▶ 2:01:12Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Larson, and members of the committee. Thank you for bringing forward HR8870, the Build America 250 Act. I also want to give a special shout out and express my deep appreciation to the committee staff on both sides of the aisle for their hard work throughout this process. Mr. Mr. Chairman, for most of America, transportation infrastructure is about convenience. For the Commonwealth of the Northern Marana Islands, transportation is survival.
▶ 2:01:40When roads fail in the territories, communities can become isolated. When ports fail, supply chains break down. When airports struggle, our economy suffers almost immediately. And for island communities thousands of miles from the continental United States, there is no backup route.
▶ 2:01:59That reality became even more clear following super typhoon Sin Laku in our transportation systems became critical not just for economic activity but for emergency response recovery recovery operations movement of supplies and restoring basic connectivity for our people and that is why I'm especially grateful this legislation increasing increases funding for the territorial highway program and expands ferry funding opportunities for the These investments matter for
▶ 2:02:29the CNMI. Transportation infrastructure is directly tied to public safety, tourism, commerce, disaster resilience, and long-term economic sustainability. And for small island economies like ours, sustainability is national security. The territories sit at the front lines of America's strategic interest in the Pacific. But too often, federal policies treat us as an afterthought when it comes to infrastructure investment and economic planning. This bill moves us in a better direction.
▶ 2:02:57It recognizes that America's transportation network does not end at the mainland shoreline and that Americans living in the territories deserve infrastructure systems that are modern, resilient, and capable of supporting economic growth. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
▶ 2:03:15Last but not least, Mr. Garmendy.
▶ 2:03:20Uh, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Larson and your committee staff, you've done yman work here. Thank you for doing that. Uh the for this nation is absolutely critical for our economic growth, for individuals, for society, and the rest. Uh, no bill is perfect and there's going to be, I don't know, several dozen amendments that are going to be offered to improve the bill along the way.
▶ 2:03:50Some of which will be mine. But my mind's on a different thing. Perhaps because I started this morning looking at the $1 trillion billion defense budget for one year. And I began to compare it to the $580 billion to be spent over five years, which is about $116 billion a year.
▶ 2:04:16And I'm going, what are our priorities Can this nation actually grow and if our money is spent on the military? 1 trillion 500 billion for one year. 580 billion for five years, 116 billion a year.
▶ 2:04:39The infrastructure in this bill is absolutely critical for our economy to grow, for our citizens to prosper, and for social justice to occur. But there's a larger question that this Congress has to consider, and that is our priority.
▶ 2:05:02Is our priority to build our domestic economy and provide opportunity for every citizen or is it elsewhere? The dollars that are being authorized by this Congress is a clear indication of the priorities and the priorities is not to build the foundation for economic growth in this case transportation.
▶ 2:05:31Yes, this money will be spent in America. The by America provisions are in this bill thankfully and there are other provisions in this bill and other reforms all of which are critically important. But there's a larger question for this Congress. How are we going to allocate the financial resources of this nation on growing our domestic economy?
▶ 2:06:00or building bombs and rockets to deliver nuclear weapons around the world. We need to think about this larger question and as we move this bill as we should and as I will ultimately vote for it and I'll have amendments that I think will improve it.
▶ 2:06:20We need to think beyond the scope of this committee and we need to think about our larger requirement as a representative of the American people as to where our priorities are. More nuclear weapons, more sentinel missiles, more delivery systems, hypersonic nuclear weapons. Or maybe it's just to patch a pothole in our community.
▶ 2:06:50and to build a bridge or rebuild a bridge that's going to be safe. I want us all to think about the larger priorities of this Congress. billion $1 trillion for the military for one year and $116 billion for transportation
▶ 2:07:23I yield back. We're now concerning the bill uh for amendments. I recognize myself for the purpose of offering a manager's amendment. Please designate A manager's amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by chairman Graves.
▶ 2:07:41Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read and I recognize myself for a quick statement. The manager's amendment makes various uh technical corrections and conforming changes to the uh amendment of the nature of a substitute. It also incorporates more than 60 amendments that were filed by members that were agreed to um through collaboration between uh Representative Larson and myself. And I want to thank Rick for working with me on this package.
▶ 2:08:05Um, and I would also like to thank all the members whose amendments were for helping us with uh with this manager's amendment. With that, I yield back. Rick.
▶ 2:08:15Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I support the manager's amendment. There's a lot of good stuff in it. You're all welcome. Vote for it. I yield back.
▶ 2:08:23Um, Mr. Taylor.
▶ 2:08:28Thank you, Chairman Graves. I'm proud to speak in favor of the manager's amendment which contains three of my amendments expressing congressional support for the I73 corridor ensuring truck drivers can operate safely and ensuring the secretary can provide oversight to protect our roads from chameleon car carriers.
▶ 2:08:44Since President Eisenhower signed the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 into law, the United States Interstate Highway System has been pivotal in connecting rural communities, minimizing congestion, and promoting economic development. Currently, the Ohio Department of Transportation is conducting a feasibility study on the potential development of an I73 corridor extending from Toledo to Chesapeake, Ohio. This project is part of a larger plan to have an interstate running from Michigan to South Carolina.
▶ 2:09:11Once completed, this proposed I73 interstate corridor would alleviate transportation bottlenecks, expand healthc care access in rural communities across Ohio, and improve freight mobility, bringing de development to the poorest parts of Ohio. Southern Ohio has been forgotten about for too long, and this project, which would go right through the heart of Appalachia, could be a transformational investment in our future. With the United States growing, it is critical that we support infrastructure projects that connect communities and grow our economy.
▶ 2:09:40I'm also proud that this manager's amendment addresses the challenges towing and recovery workers continue to face because of inconsistent interpretation and application of existing laws. These changes will limit the time tow truck drivers and first responders are on the side of the road and prevent dangerous side of the road situations we see today.
▶ 2:10:01Lastly, I would like to highlight the work this manager's amendment does to address chameleon characters carriers plugging our roads by removing an outdated provision from 2005. My provision within the manager's amendment will provide FMCSA with enforcement mechanisms to keep our roads safe. Thank you, Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larson for working with me on these important items and I yield back.
▶ 2:10:24Uh, the chair unwisely left me in charge so I can call on people. So, I will call on Andre Carson.
▶ 2:10:31Good man. Thank you, sir. Um, I'm pleased to support the manager's amendment. I'd like to thank u chairman and ranking member Larson for including my amendment uh into this package. This amendment provides motorcycle safety and was offered by my friend Mr. Papus of New Hampshire.
▶ 2:10:48Section 4011 of the underlying bill has a very good provision prohibiting federal safety checkpoint funding to any local or state program that discriminates against motorcyclists by pro profiling them for traffic stops based on the type of vehicle they use. But after conversations with who's your bikers and other motorcyclists, I realized the base bill doesn't go far enough.
▶ 2:11:14So, my amendment adds appearance or attire. Too often, motorcyclists are profiled for traffic stops based on how they look while riding or what they're wearing. Whether it's protective road gear like lots of leather or bike club attire or even long hair or beards, it's a form of bias profiling and that's just not fair.
▶ 2:11:42As a former law enforcement officer, I've worked hard to promote best practices and end bias profiling. Whether it's driving while black or riding a motorcycle, bias profiling is simply wrong. This amendment is endorsed by the National Motorcycle Writers Foundation Bate of Indiana and the New Hampshire Motorcyclists Rights Organization, just to name a few. And I thank them for working with us on this long overdue correction.
▶ 2:12:10Colleagues, as we approach Memorial Day weekend and the Rolling Thunder Memorial Ride to honor PSWs, MIAs, and other veterans, approving this amendment is a good way to show our respect and appreciation for their service. I urge support and yield back the balance of my time.
▶ 2:12:28Mr. Burlson,
▶ 2:12:31thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I also too want to say thank you to Representative Carson for um his his his amendment on the um making sure that we do not profile the appearance of motorcyclist. Had you not sponsored that, I would have sponsored it myself and I appreciate your work. Um m Mr. Chairman, I want to say thank you for allowing my language recognizing Route 66 and its 100th birthday um this year.
▶ 2:13:00For a century, Route 66 has stood stood as more than just a road on a map. It's the symbol of the American spirit, a road built on freedom and hard work. It connects small t cities and grow and growing cities. Um, and nowhere is that history more deeply rooted than in Springfield, Missouri.
▶ 2:13:20Springfield is widely recognized as the birthplace of Route 66 because it was there in 1926 where officials first proposed to name it Route 66. And so as we celebrate this centennial anniversary, we are not simply honoring a highway, but generations of Americans who built communities along that road while defending freedom and the while traveling on it.
▶ 2:13:46And uh for Missouri and especially for Springfield, this anniversary is an enormous source of pride and I'm proud to support this recognition of Route 66 100th anniversary in the manager's amendment. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing this. Miss Sykes,
▶ 2:14:04thank you, Mr. Chair, for recognizing me today. I know in my backyard of Northeast Ohio, trucks are constantly coming through our communities driven by hardworking Americans who are away from their families just to put food on their tables. However, trucking is not an easy job and it certainly is not the safest one either. And that's why it's important that our truck stops and rest areas have resources available for truckers to promote to promote their safety and the safety of everyone on our highway system.
▶ 2:14:31My amendment would require certain facilities in including trucks truck stops and parking areas that receive federal funding for construction, reopening or improvement to post placards that include information on important issues truckers unfortunately face on the road every day. This includes combating human trafficking. Tragically, Ohio ranks among the top 10 states for the number of calls made to the National Human Trafficking Hotline.
▶ 2:14:54And because traffickers rely on frequently relocating their victims to avoid detection, truckers are an indispensable in the fight against human trafficking and are often the first line of defense. Given that information, truck drivers can recognize the signs of human trafficking, report them, and help victims escape. That's why this amendment would require that certain facilities receiving federal funding, including truck stops and parking areas, post information that includes resources to prevent and report human trafficking.
▶ 2:15:22While truckers play a vital role in protecting the safety of others, we owe it to them to look out for them as well. That's why this amendment will also require these truck stops and parking areas to post information on suicide prevention, including the 988 suicide hotline. 988 has served as a lifeline for millions of Americans, making over 14 million contacts with folks in need since it was created.
▶ 2:15:44People are able to call into the 988 hotline and receive guidance and consultation from counselors with studies finding that callers feel less suicidal, depressed, and overwhelmed after connecting. Like I said, trucking is not an easy job and drivers often work long hours away from their home and away from their families. And this also means that workers in the transport industry has been found to be at higher risk of suicide.
▶ 2:16:08And it is important that those who find themselves in need or in crisis know that there are a resources available to them. This amendment would not is not unusual or new to this committee as they were both offered in and accepted in a previous piece of legislation last Congress. And so I'm hopeful that everyone in this Congress and in this committee will also see fit to uh add this into the underlying bill. Again, a program is only as good as if people know that it exists.
▶ 2:16:37And this amendment aims to increase awareness of critical programs and resources to combat human trafficking and to reduce suicide and mental health issues amongst truckers. I'm proud this amendment was included in the manager's amendment and I urge my colleagues to support its passage and I yield back.
▶ 2:16:54Mr. Vandrew,
▶ 2:16:59is that me?
▶ 2:17:01Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise today in strong support of the manager's amendment and to highlight the inclusion of three critical amendments that will strengthen our bridges, improve our transparency, and enhance our regional airports. First, I want to thank Chairman Graves and the committee staff for working with us to include these provisions in the manager's amendments in the wake of catastrophic ridge incidents we've seen across the nation.
▶ 2:17:29My first amendment co-led by my friend Rep. Titus establishes interdisciplinary bridge safety team within the department of transportation. It will bring together the Federal Highway Administration, the Coast Guard, the Army Corps, and other relevant agencies to coordinate bridge vulnerability assessments and vessel collision risk reduction efforts. These agencies operate in silos very often.
▶ 2:17:58So this will ensure that expertise is shared as it should be and vulnerabilities are identified as they should be. The bill has the highest level investment in this bill. Our bill today has the highest level of investment in bridges in American history. So we must do everything we can to protect our investments, our infrastructure, and the safety of the traveling public.
▶ 2:18:21The second provision included is co-led by my friend Nelly Poe is about transparency and fairness for the bus operators. These operators are often left in the dark about what price they are praying at tolls compared to other drivers.
▶ 2:18:38The provisions here addresses this by requiring the Federal Highway Administration to publish a public database containing toll rates, terms, and conditions to improve transparency for motor coach operators so they can better plan their their routes and they can also keep cost downs for them and their passengers.
▶ 2:19:01Last, but certainly not least, I am proud to have worked with Reps Brezahan and Delusio on a provision that is very meaningful to me in my district in South Jersey, the motor coach employment pilot program. Under this pilot program, passengers who board an air carrier operated motor coach at one airport for transport to another airports and continue their flight journey will now count toward airport passenger boarding totals.
▶ 2:19:30That's a big deal for airports like the Atlantic City International Airport. Passenger boarding numbers are critical because they affect eligibility for federal airport funding and infrastructure support. Nowhere is this more important right now than South Jersey. Atlantic City International Airport has been hit hard by the closure and service reductions that you've all read about associated with Spirit Airlines.
▶ 2:19:58The airport is facing real economic pressure and the surrounding region depends on that airport for tourism, jobs and connectivity. South Jersey can't afford to lose this critical asset and America can't afford to lose it and this pilot program help ensure that we won't lose it. I want to thank you again to my partners on these provisions. I want to thank Chairman Graves again.
▶ 2:20:24I want to thank ranking member Larson again, all of them for their support and I urge my colleagues to support the underlying bill and I yield back.
▶ 2:20:36Gentlemen yields back. Miss Poe.
▶ 2:20:40Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to extend my gratitude to our committee leadership for their work on this bipartisan amendment and working with members to include important policies within this text. Included in the text are three of my amendments.
▶ 2:20:59First, uh, amendment number 36, which directs the Government Accountability Office to review the Department of Protect Program and to identify strategies and recommendations for preventing flooding, enhancing safety, and improving infrastructure uh, Second, it includes my bipartisan amendment number 40 which mandates do consult with labor groups
▶ 2:21:29and also that labors labor have has a seat on the advisory panel created by this bill. And third, it includes my amendment number 43, which creates new eligibility under DO's MAGA uh mega uh discretionary grant program for projects at facilities designated as a national highway system intermobile connector.
▶ 2:22:00This includes projects like the Midtown bus terminal replacement used by so many New Jersey commuters. These amendments are common sense provision that in improves our transportation hubs utilize the expertise of labor entities and help communities like mine develop effective projects with res resiliency against flooding.
▶ 2:22:27I want to extend a particular thank you um to my colleagues uh representative bre uh reset resident han and representative Johnson for collaborating on the labor amendment. This manager's amendment reflects how this committee and Congress works best with lawmakers coming together to solve problems with constituents that that constituents want addressed.
▶ 2:22:57Uh thank you to the chairman and thank you to our ranking member. I am truly proud to support this amendment and I yield back.
▶ 2:23:08The gentle lady yields yields back. Uh, Representative Kylie, you recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 2:23:14Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair, and I want to thank the committee and the chair for uh, working on some AV uh, bus testing issues that we were uh, talking with them on uh, in the manager's amendment. Um, I want to take a moment just to say a few words about why I'll be supporting uh, this legislation today. You know, there are so many ways in which Congress is not working as it should. Uh, where the gridlock has just gotten uh, out of control and paralyzing.
▶ 2:23:40uh but this legislation and the work of this committee is a much is much closer to the way Congress really uh should work and I say that for a few reasons. Number one uh is that this uh legislation is is bipartisan as we've heard from uh various people who have remarked already uh and I believe it will have bipart broad bipartisan support on in this committee uh and on the floor. Uh secondly, it's really about taking care of the basics.
▶ 2:24:07I think a lot of people look at government and think, "Wow, government's doing a lot of things that really ought not to be doing while meanwhile it's neglecting uh the basics that we need and expect uh from government." This is taking care of roads, bridges, uh and railways. And what's more, it's doing so in a way that makes sense, returning to a formulabased uh funding system for over 90% of the funds, which makes it much more practical uh for transportation agencies to be able to plan useful uh projects.
▶ 2:24:35It also places a uh priority on performance. Gets away from the paradigm where just spending money is sort of the accomplishment. It's making sure the money is able to be spent uh in a way that benefits people. And it does that through uh permitting reform uh other reforms, categorical exclusions that are designed to actually get projects off the ground and finished.
▶ 2:24:57It also moves away from uh prescriptive uh mandates coming from Washington DC and seeks to provide maximum flexibility to states and localities uh for the projects that will best serve uh their communities. Uh and finally uh this is a bill that also looks to the future. Too often in legislating we kind of legislate uh from the perspective of the past or uh get into the mentality that the way things are now is the way they're always going to be.
▶ 2:25:26Uh this is a bill that also looks to the future uh by incorporating new frameworks for emerging technologies that I think are going to become uh much more salient in our daily lives and in so doing it can help to uh to shape the future uh as well. So I want to thank uh the chairman and the ranking member uh for uh their collaboration uh in making this bill possible and I look forward to supporting it today. I yield back.
▶ 2:25:52Gentleman yields back. Uh, Miss Hillary, you are recognized for five minutes.
▶ 2:26:01Thank you so much, uh, Mr. Chair. I am so pleased to support the manager's amendment and thrilled that it includes two of my common sense amendments. West Michigan, uh, is home to miles of beautiful Lake Michigan shoreline, so it is no surprise that water transit is absolutely critical. My amendment, which is sponsored by my good friend, Congressman Eel, uh is an important first step to ensure that America continues to innovate to maximize the performance and capacity of these transit systems.
▶ 2:26:29This language will will task the transportation research board to evaluate innovative hole designs as well as how to use the alternative materials and construction technologies uh that can boost operational fleet performance and payload capacities of waterborne transit systems. I'm grateful that this bipartisan amendment was included to keep our coastal communities and transit systems competitive. Additionally, this manager's amendment includes my amendment to streamline process and get federal funding out the door.
▶ 2:26:58We know how necessary this is uh at a time when uh we are all demanding permitting reform. Under the National Historic Preservation Act, federal agencies must consider the impact a given project might have on historic properties as well as provide state historic preservation offices with the opportunity to weigh in on the project.
▶ 2:27:17I fully support thoughtful conversations between federal and state governments, but this builds on that collaboration by encouraging project sponsors to engage with state historic preservation offices directly before the formal review process even begins, thereby making it go faster. This will improve outcomes for project sponsors who understand the context of their community and respect the established relationship they maintain with their state partners rather than relying on federal agencies to mediate that communication.
▶ 2:27:46Again, thank you to uh committee leadership for this manager's amendment and supporting my common sense proposals to support American innovation and cut red tape. Thank you and I yield back.
▶ 2:27:57Gentlewoman yields back. Uh, Rep. Representative Raznan, you are repres you are recognized for five minutes.
▶ 2:28:04Thank you. I rise in support of this manager's amendment, which includes two of my bipartisan common sense amendments. The local bridge fund in this bill are major wins, and I want to make sure every corner of Pennsylvania benefits from them. My amendment ensures those dollars are distributed fairly across the Commonwealth, not just to big cities, not just to small towns. Every community that has a bridge in need deserves their fair share. and this amendment makes sure they get just that.
▶ 2:28:30Secondly, the Preventing Roadside and Work Zone Deaths Act is critical legislation and my amendment makes sure every word of it makes it into this bill. It expands protections to include the occupants of disabled vehicles involved in a crash alongside roadway workers and pedestrians. These are both bipartisan amendments and I urge my colleagues to support. I yield.
▶ 2:28:52Gentleman yields back. Representative Hank Johnson, you recognize for five
▶ 2:28:57Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you and the ranking member for your work on this manager's amendment and for including the bridge inspection uh uh workforce training provision. I truly appreciate the cooperation that made this possible across the country. Our bridges depend on skilled inspectors, men and women who climb the beams, crawl the decks, and put their eyes on places most people never see.
▶ 2:29:24They are the first line of defense against tragedy. But too many states are facing shortages of trained and certified inspectors, particularly in the specialized skills that modern bridge maintenance demands. This provision helps close that gap. It gives states the flexibility to use the resources they already have to train and certify the workforce that keeps our bridges standing strong.
▶ 2:29:53No new bureaucracy, just practical support for the people doing this essential work. When we strengthen the inspection workforce, we strengthen safety, we strengthen public trust, we strengthen the very infrastructure that millions of Americans rely on every single day. That is not a small thing. It is the difference between catching a problem early and dealing with a disaster later.
▶ 2:30:21So, I'm grateful for the bipartisan effort that brought this bill to fruition and brought my amendment into this manager's amendment. And I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and you, Mr. Ranking member, for your leadership and for working with us to make this legislation stronger and safer for the American people. And with that, I yield
▶ 2:30:45The gentleman yields back. Miss Lauren Gillan, you are recognized for five minutes. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Last March, I stood with leaders of the village of Hemstead, just steps away from one of the most dangerous intersections on Long Island. In less than nine years, there were over 200 traffic accidents at that one intersection alone, some involving fatalities, others very serious injuries.
▶ 2:31:11There is a serious car crash every seven minutes on Long Island. As a member of this committee, I am proud to advocate on behalf of Nassau County residents and the American people to make our roads safer by investing in infrastructure that prioritizes safety over speed. Roundabouts are one of 28 proven safety counter measures endorsed by the Federal Highway Administration to reduce traffic collisions and vehicular fatalities.
▶ 2:31:40According to the Department of Transportation, compared to intersections, installing roundabouts leads to an 82% reduction in fatal and injurious crash crashes by minimizing conflict points and lowering speeds. I'm glad that the manager's amendment includes my bipartisan common sense amendment to codify the eligibility of roundabout construction for the surface transportation block grant program.
▶ 2:32:06I was proud to work with Congressman Breznahan on this amendment and on our bipartisan bill, the Traffic Safety Enhancement Act. Mr. Chairman, this is a common sense solution to a very serious problem. I thank Congressman Breznahan for his partnership and working with me on this important issue and I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment. And with that, I yield back.
▶ 2:32:29Thank you to the lady. Are there any further speakers on this amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. It's my understanding that the chair and the ranking member urge an I vote. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 2:32:46All those opposed, nay. The eyes have it and the amendment is agreed to. One moment, please. as we prepare for further amendment
▶ 2:33:09Uh, Mr. Nadler, it's my understanding that you seek recognition.
▶ 2:33:12I do indeed.
▶ 2:33:13Very good. The clerk will designate the
▶ 2:33:16An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Nadler of New York number
▶ 2:33:24Very good. Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Nadler, you are recognized for five minutes to speak on your amendment.
▶ 2:33:32Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the bipartisan decision to maintain section 5337, state of good repair formula funding, and avoid cuts to one of the most important federal transit programs. That is meaningful progress, and I thank the committee for recognizing the importance of keeping our transit systems safe and reliable. But maintaining current funding levels alone is not enough to meet the scale of need facing transit systems across the country.
▶ 2:34:03The nationwide state of good repair backlog now exceeds 150 billion dollars. And nowhere is that challenge more urgent or more economically significant than in New York City. The amendment I am offering would robustly increase section 5337 funding and build upon the successful advanced appropriations provided under the infrastructure investment and jobs act. Transit systems simply cannot afford to fall further behind on basic infrastructure renewal.
▶ 2:34:32In New York City, the MTA operates the largest transit network in North America and serves millions of riders every day. Yet much of this infrastructure riders depend on is decades old. Subway signals in some areas date back nearly a century. While critical tunnels, tracks, substations, and power systems require ongoing rehabilitation and modernization. And when aging infrastructure falls in New York City, the impacts extend far beyond the five burrows.
▶ 2:34:59Delays and breakdowns disrupt interstate commerce, regional mobility, tourism, and the productivity of one of the nation's largest economic engines. This additional funding would help transit agency like the MTA. So, we're not talking only about New York, but transit agencies like the MTA and in addition to the MTA replace warn tracks, aging signals, rail cars, power systems, and other critical infrastructure before failures become more severe and more costly.
▶ 2:35:28Public transportation is fundamental national infrastructure. It moves millions of Americans to jobs, schools, and businesses every day while reducing highway congestion and supporting economic activity across the country. If we are serious about safety, reliability, economic competitiveness, and matching the infrastructure that powers our economy, then we must invest at a level that matches the challenge. I urge my colleagues to work to ensure that America's transit systems remain in a true state of good repair.
▶ 2:36:00I yield back.
▶ 2:36:02Thank you, Mr. Nadler. I recognize myself to speak on the amendment. Uh I oppose the amendment. The a memo would increase the topline funding levels for transit in the bill. The bill already provides robust funding for highways and transit projects. And unfortunately, we cannot accommodate additional spending within the bill's topline funding level. For these reasons, Chair Graves must oppose the amendment. And with that, I yield back. Are there further speakers on this amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment?
▶ 2:36:33Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. Again, uh, Chair Graves urges a nay vote. Mr.
▶ 2:36:39Chair, yes,
▶ 2:36:41I withdraw the amendment.
▶ 2:36:42Very good. Uh, the amendment is withdrawn without objection. And, uh, with that, we u will move to, uh, Mr. Webster's amendment if you seek recognition, sir.
▶ 2:36:54Yes, I do.
▶ 2:36:55Very good. We will designate Will the clerk designate the amendment?
▶ 2:36:59An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Webster of Florida number
▶ 2:37:08Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Webster, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 2:37:14Thank you, chairman. This amendment strengthens the underlying bill by ensuring that pulsating stop light lamp systems are evaluated and authorized based on clear safety standards, practical data, and real world performance.
▶ 2:37:31Importantly, the amendment prevents premature or inconsistent enforcement actions while the rulemaking process is underway, giving stakeholders clarity and preventing unnecessary burdens on operators who already comply with established safety criteria. I urge my colleagues to support this common sense amendment and yield back my time.
▶ 2:37:58Thank you, Mr. Webster. Does anyone else wish to be recognized on the amendment?
▶ 2:38:02Ranking member. Yes, sir. You are
▶ 2:38:05Thank you, chair. Chair, I oppose Webster Amendment 38. This amendment would weaken the standard for transportation rulemaking committee uh to determine if pulsating light systems are safe. Uh it's not the job of Congress to determine what complies with federal motor vehicle safety standards. Uh these determinations are made by neutral experts at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. And so I would uh encourage folks to oppose this amendment without a yield back.
▶ 2:38:30Thank you, sir. Are there any further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question before the committee is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. All those opposed, nay.
▶ 2:38:45The nays have it and the amendment is not agreed to. With that, we will move to uh Mr. Garmendy. Do you wish to be recognized?
▶ 2:38:56Uh, proceed, sir. You are recognized.
▶ 2:38:59I was hoping that Mr. Graves would be in the seat, but u uh
▶ 2:39:02my apologies, Mr. Garmendy. You seek recognition. We need to have the clerk designate. One moment, sir.
▶ 2:39:08An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870, offered by Mr. Garmendy of California, number 078.
▶ 2:39:16Uh, without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Now, Mr. Garmendy, the floor is yours.
▶ 2:39:21Thank you, Mr. Chairman. temporary chairman. I was hoping Mr. Graves might be in the seat because he's been one to really reform of the permitting system. However, my interaction with you over the years indicates to me that you're just as interested in permitting reform as is the chairman. So, the committee is also, I'm sure, California is often discussed as being the state that is out of line.
▶ 2:39:51Well, the line that it's in is a very significant uh environmental reform, environmental review process, and it actually is stronger than the federal NEPA program. Uh the California has had a um pilot program available to it for several years in which they would be able to have just one of the two reviews, the SQUA, the California Environmental
▶ 2:40:22uh which is stronger than NEPA and thereby not having to do both. Uh it's working. It works well and this amendment would make that pilot program permanent so that California and other states who have their own environmental review programs that are equal to or stronger than NEPA would only need to do their own state environmental review program and not have to do the duplicate and unnecessary NEPA
▶ 2:40:52review. uh and it also extends the underlying uh program from just highways to airports and ports. That's what it is. It's a effort to try to reduce the burden of environmental reviews for California and for I think there's two or maybe four other states that have their own environmental programs that are equal to or greater than NEPA and they would be able to take advantage of this as California has been able to do.
▶ 2:41:21very simple, a little bit of uh permitting reform uh eliminating a duplicate and unnecessary expense. With that, I would ask for an I vote.
▶ 2:41:32Thank you, Mr. Garmendy. I recognize myself. Uh Chair Graves has requested that I uh offer his opposition to the amendment. While he supports the intent of the amendment, the underlying bill has significant streamlining wins for all projects, not just those in California. And given the concerns raised by some other members of the committee relating to this provision, the chairman must oppose the amendment. And with that, I yield back. Are there further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment?
▶ 2:42:03Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 2:42:09All those opposed.
▶ 2:42:11The nays have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 2:42:14Ask for a recorded vote.
▶ 2:42:16Very good. Uh, the gentleman requests a vote on the amendment. As previously announced, pursuant to committee rule 6F, further proceedings on the question are postponed. With that, Mr. Period. You seek recognition.
▶ 2:42:28I do, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 2:42:30Very good. The clerk will designate
▶ 2:42:32an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Perry of Pennsylvania number 224.
▶ 2:42:40Without objection, the amendment is considered as read. Mr. Perry, you are
▶ 2:42:45Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment repeals 23 USC 104 bolegs F1 and 49 USC Bolegs I, which allows for the transfer of highway funds to transit projects. This amendment is simple. The money the federal government provides for highways should be spent on highway projects. Current law allows for the transfer of highway funds to transit projects.
▶ 2:43:12This transfer mechanism is used to divert approximately 5 billion from the highways to transit in FY21 to 23. Again, no good deed goes unpunished. We wanted, I think, this committee and the federal government to allow governors the flexibility, states the flexibility to flex their But again in Pennsylvania anyhow in November of 2024, Governor Shapiro flexed $153 million from future highway projects,
▶ 2:43:42including in central Pennsylvania, York County in particular, to bail out SEPTA yet again. That money wasn't intended for SEPTA. That money was intended for highways and it just continues to happen. So continued diversion of highway funding has left our highway system in a state of disrepair, drained the highway trust fund, and greatly contributed to the American people's distrust of anything labeled as highway user fee because they're paying the fees, but they're not going to the highway.
▶ 2:44:12They're going to whatever political project the governor at the time has on his mind. This amendment would end the diversion of funding intended for highways to transit projects. Let's spend the money where we intend it to go and uh and end this political game and make sure our highways are actually funded. With that, I yield the balance urge adoption.
▶ 2:44:33I thank the gentleman. Mr. Larson, ranking member is recognized.
▶ 2:44:37Thank you. Uh Mr. Chair, I oppose the period amendment uh 224. This flexibility has been in the law since Disco ended and we haven't changed it since and we shouldn't change it now. Uh, it would repeal the ability for states to flex highway dollars to transit. Flexing highway dollars is not a requirement. It's an option for states that choose to exercise it, an option I support because transit is one of the safest, most affordable, and cleanest ways of getting around.
▶ 2:45:04And I urge members to oppose this amendment as I would suggest they oppose disco. I yield
▶ 2:45:11A disco reference allowed me to fill out a spot on my bingo card for the day. Sir, thank you. Uh do others wish to be recognized on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, uh the question before the committee is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 2:45:30All those opposed, nay.
▶ 2:45:32The nays have it and the amendment is not agreed to. A uh a recorded vote is requested by the gentleman. As previously announced, pursuant to committee rules, further proceedings on the question are postponed. Mr. Johnson, do you seek recognition?
▶ 2:45:48I do.
▶ 2:45:49Very good. Uh, the clerk will designate
▶ 2:45:52an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Johnson of Georgia number 062.
▶ 2:45:59Without objection, the amendment is considered as read. Mr. Johnson, you are
▶ 2:46:04Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This bill is packed with provisions. It adds new programs, new requirements, new responsibilities, page after page of changes for the people who plan and manage our transportation system. But in the middle of all of that, there's a provision that doesn't quite line up with the work we already require.
▶ 2:46:25Section 1107 reduces the local match for a very narrow slice of planning activities, but it does not extend that same flexibility to the full range of planning work that metropolitan planning organizations and state departments of transportation are already required to do under federal law.
▶ 2:46:45And that's where the confusion comes in because the most important planning work, the long range plans, the tips, the equity analysis, the multimodal coordination is still charged at the higher match. So now we have a bill that essentially says we'll help you with this tiny piece of planning, but not the rest of the planning we already require you to do. That creates an uneven structure.
▶ 2:47:14It puts heavier burdens on local governments for the very planning work we expect them to complete. This amendment is a technical fix that says if federal law requires the planning, then the reduced match should apply to all of it, not just a sliver carved out in section 1107. Planning is the backbone of every transportation decision we make. And that backbone shouldn't be weakened by unclear and or uneven rules.
▶ 2:47:44This amendment brings the bill back in line with the real work planners do and makes sure the support matches the responsibilities we already place on our managers. I urge my colleagues to support and I yield back.
▶ 2:48:00Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Uh with that, I recognize myself for five minutes to relay the chair's opposition to the amendment. This bill provides an increased federal share of 90% specifically for metropolitan planning program activities. Uh the chairman supports retaining the federal share and is thus uh opposes the amendment and he urges his colleagues to vote no. With that, I yield back. Are there further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment?
▶ 2:48:29Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 2:48:34All those opposed, nay. The nays have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 2:48:39Mr. Chairman, I'd ask for a recorded
▶ 2:48:41The gentleman has requested a vote on the amendment. As previously announced, further proceedings uh will be postponed. Uh one moment, please.
▶ 2:48:55Mr. Fong, do you seek to be recognized?
▶ 2:49:00Uh very good. Uh for the purposes of offering amendment, I assume, sir.
▶ 2:49:03Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment.
▶ 2:49:05Very good. The clerk will designate
▶ 2:49:12uh for the clerk it is boss boss 27 being offered by Mr. Fong.
▶ 2:49:20An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 8870 offered by Mr. Fong of California on behalf of Mr. Boss number 027.
▶ 2:49:31Very good. Without objection, the amendment will be read. Mr. Fong, you are recognized.
▶ 2:49:35Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. My amendment would add language from HR979, the AM radio for every vehicle act into the base text. This important bipartisan provision would ensure that vehicles manufactured and sold in the United States come equipped with AM radio. When cell service, broadband, internet, or cable fail during a storm or some other emergency, AM radio continues to broadcast. It is a consistent form of communication and one that over 82 million Americans depend on for emergency alerts at times when it matters most.
▶ 2:50:04I'm proud to support this initiative and I am pleased to hear that the House Energy and Commerce Committee has chosen to include this language in the base text of their portion of the Build America 250 Act. For that reason, I will withdraw this amendment. I encourage my colleagues to support this this provision to keep AM radios in all vehicles and pass the Build America 250 Act when our sections are combined for a vote on the House floor. With that, I yield back.
▶ 2:50:26Mr. Chairman.
▶ 2:50:28Yes. Mr. Natler, it's already been
▶ 2:50:30I'd like to speak on it anyway.
▶ 2:50:35Mr. Matt Nadler, do you insist, sir? It's been withdrawn.
▶ 2:50:37Yes, I do.
▶ 2:50:39Uh, one moment while I confer with
▶ 2:50:44The amendment has been withdrawn. There's no amendment before the committee. And as a result, we will move to see if uh, Miss Titus, would you do you seek to be recognized?
▶ 2:50:53Uh, yes. I have an amendment at the
▶ 2:50:56Uh the clerk will designate
▶ 2:50:59an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Titus of Nevada number
▶ 2:51:07Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Titus, you are
▶ 2:51:12Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, as I said earlier in my opening statement, safety has been and always will be my top priority as the ranking member of the railroads, pipelines, and hazardous materials subcommittee. This is personal also for my constituents in Southern Nevada. Trains carrying hazardous materials run right through the heart of my district, right through downtown Las Vegas. And that's the case in many of our districts.
▶ 2:51:38uh they run past businesses, homes, schools, churches, neighborhoods. So, this impacts all of us. Just one example, in September 2021, an Amtrak Empire builder train derailed on BNSF owned and maintained track in Joplain, Montana. That was caused by bad track conditions. That derailment killed three passengers and injured 49 other passenger and crew members.
▶ 2:52:06In its final report, the NTSB stated that while automated track inspections provide detailed information on specific track parameters, they do not they do not capture the diverse array of unique track hazards detectable to human inspectors. My amendment, which is based on my legislation, the Secure Tracks Act, would protect visual track inspections while also supporting ATI technology.
▶ 2:52:34I'd like to thank Representative Van Drew for joining me in offering this amendment. It would ensure that any track defects that threaten public safety are identified and addressed right away, protecting rail workers and our communities from the health and environmental risk associated with derailments. Now, be clear, this amendment is not anti-technology or anti-inovation.
▶ 2:52:58On the contrary, it requires railroads to use automated track inspection, ATI technology, at regular intervals, which would supplement the visual track inspections. I always hear from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle about the need to balance technology with visual inspections, and this proposal would do just that with the right amount of balance.
▶ 2:53:20So, I urge my colleagues to vote yes, and I yield Do any other members wish to be Seeing none, uh I recognize myself for five minutes to relay the chairman's opposition to the amendment. Um he urges uh his colleagues to oppose this amendment which is nearly identical to rulemaking attempted at the end of the previous administration. It does undermine innovation in rail technology under the false guise of promoting rail safety technology.
▶ 2:53:51To be clear, the use of automated track inspection technologies, which have the capability to identify hundreds of defects compared to visual inspections, make it possible for railroads to prioritize track maintenance and to deploy their maintenance and repair personnel more efficiently, often resulting in more maintenance job and work for employees and most importantly uh more safety. And it allows safety to be proactive rather than reactive.
▶ 2:54:18Uh for these reasons uh the chairman must oppose the amendment and with that I yield back. Are there further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor state I. All those opposed, nay. The naysay have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 2:54:41The lady has the gentle lady requests a vote on the amendment and as pre previously stated pursuant to committee rules further question uh on the amendment are postponed.
▶ 2:54:53With that uh Mr. Mast, do you seek
▶ 2:54:56I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 2:54:58Very good. The clerk will designate
▶ 2:55:00154. I believe
▶ 2:55:01an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Mast of Florida. number 154, revision one.
▶ 2:55:11Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Mast is recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 2:55:17Thank you, Chairman. Uh, this amendment is all about know your customer and know your client. Uh, as we're talking about grants that are doled out from the taxpayer through the federal government to uh nonprofits, forprofits, uh, municipalities, states, you name it. Uh if you go out there and you ask a bank for a loan uh whether it's to buy a home, to start a business, to send a kid to college, you have to prove your income. You have to prove your employment history, your debt to income ratio.
▶ 2:55:47In other words, your assets and your liabilities. That's what responsible lending does so that somebody doesn't get stuck with a bill that somebody can't pay for. Uh the bank has to make sure that you can hold up your end of the deal. But when a private entity stands to benefit from federal taxpayer dollars in the form of grants, the government will write a check for millions or hundreds of millions of dollars with little to no underwriting at all. And so that raises some very real questions.
▶ 2:56:16What happens if the operator folds? What then? Uh are taxpayers made whole or are they left with infrastructure that they can no longer use? And why is the federal government cutting checks of those sizes that we know they are without looking at the financial the the finances of the entities that they're dealing with? The same pattern repeats uh everywhere. A private operator uh partners with a public applicant to uh reach federal funds as so often happens.
▶ 2:56:42a company that could maybe not pass a bank's loan application can get a check from the US taxpayer just because the application carries the name of a city or a port authority or a navigation district or a trans a transit agency. The public entity gets a project, the private operator gets the contract and the community uh they will go out there and they will get the risk. The taxpayer will get the risk.
▶ 2:57:08So, a federal grant cannot be a lifeline for a failing private entity at the taxpayers's expense. My amendment requires that the Department of Transportation adopt new grant applications that asks every applicant, every business owner guarantee controlling manager or third-party operator behind them for the same information that any lender would expect to see.
▶ 2:57:34tax returns, financial statements, annual revenue and profit, outstanding debts, monthly payments, ownership stakes, full names of people who are involved. It's important to note that many of these questions come straight from the applications that bank customers fill out. I didn't just pull this stuff out of my backside. This amendment is also divided into three separate parts depending on whether a grant applicant is a government entity, a for-profit business, or a nonprofit.
▶ 2:58:04and the questions are designed to speak to their financial situations. It then says that when the department of transportation receives the application, this committee, the committee of transportation infrastructure needs to be CCD on that. That matters how how often uh are we as members of Congress asked to issue letters of support for these type of applications. You know, they we have companies that want us to go out there or municipalities that want us to go out there and support uh a grant application.
▶ 2:58:33But again, we don't have the capability to do the underwriting. We don't have the underwriting information, but we're asked to go out there and support on it. That is a real problem. And uh so as representatives, we should know more about uh the those that are asking for these grants. The principle here is very simple. The federal government should not be handing out hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on terms looser than what a community bank would accept.
▶ 2:58:58The federal government should know our customers, know our clients, know those that they are that are requesting grants. I would urge my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment and I thank you and I yield back.
▶ 2:59:09Do other members seek recognition? Sure.
▶ 2:59:12Ranking member.
▶ 2:59:13Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I oppose Mass amendment 154. The federal government does not just hand out money. We have our own oversight. We have agency oversight. We have the GAO. We have the inspector general. We have plenty of oversight. and we have to be aggressive about that. But this amendment would supersede all grant application forms for individual programs or modes and replace them with one standardized form.
▶ 2:59:37While it may sound good in theory, there can be valid reasons for differences depending upon the program requirements or agency needs particularly to assist evaluations among qualified applicants in surface transportation grant programs which are almost always overs subscribed.
▶ 2:59:52Further, many of these requirements as the proponent has said in this amendment are appropriate for a private business and much more appropriate for a private business like a annual net revenue or sales when most of the agencies applying for these grants are state DOS, transit agencies, cities or counties. So given all that, I would oppose this amendment and urge uh others to oppose that yield
▶ 3:00:15Very good. Do other members seek recognition? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question before the committee is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 3:00:27All those opposed. Nay.
▶ 3:00:29The naysay have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 3:00:32Recorded vote requested.
▶ 3:00:33The gentleman requests a vote on the amendment and proceedings are postponed. With that, Miss Brownley. No, I'm sorry. Mr. Huffman, you are uh for what purpose do you seek recognition?
▶ 3:00:44Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. The clerk will designate
▶ 3:00:48an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Huffman of California number 075 previously circulated as Huffman word one.
▶ 3:01:01Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read and the gentleman is
▶ 3:01:04Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also want to thank Congress members Fushi Brownley and Frost for offering this amendment with me. Our amendment would strike section 1129 of the bill, which imposes a punitive and unworkable new federal tax on electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids. And we all know the highway trust fund needs a long-term solution. But this provision is not a serious solution.
▶ 3:01:30It's a regressive tax that unfairly targets drivers who choose cleaner and more efficient vehicles while creating major implementation problems and raising very little meaningful revenue. At the end of the day, at a time when Americans are dealing with both an affordability crisis and a climate crisis, Congress should not be penalizing people for choosing cleaner vehicles. For most families, transportation is already the second largest household expense right after housing.
▶ 3:02:01And now we're proposing a new federal tax on people who are trying to save money at the pump. As this tax discourages Americans from adopting cleaner, more affordable transportation alternatives. locks consumers into higher gasoline costs and protects the market share and profits of major oil companies at the expense of innovation and competition and consumer choice. What makes this even harder to justify is that the numbers don't add up fairly.
▶ 3:02:28The $150 flat tax on EVs and $50 tax on plug-in hybrids does not take into account how much someone drives. That means a senior citizen who rarely drives or a working family trying to cut commuting costs could end up paying more than drivers who use the road far more heavily. That makes no sense. And all of this is a project is projected to raise only a billion dollars annually against a highway trust fund shortfall exceeding $30 billion a year.
▶ 3:02:58This provision also creates a massive administrative headache for states without meaningfully addressing the problem. States would have to pass new laws, overhaul registration systems, and create entirely new collection mechanisms in just two years, or face steep federal penalties. California alone could face penalties exceeding $300 million annually. So, this is not a workable partnership between states. It's Congress setting up states to fail.
▶ 3:03:27We also need to stop repeating the claim that EV drivers are somehow getting a free ride. In many states, EV owners already pay substantial taxes and fees, in some cases more overall, than drivers of conventional vehicles. This provision is not about fixing the highway trust fund. It's about singling out one category of vehicle and punishing people for driving it. So, Mr.
▶ 3:03:52Chairman, um I do feel strongly about this, but because our friends in the Senate have made it very very clear that this EV tax is a non-starter, it is not going to become law. Uh I will withdraw this amendment. I nevertheless thank my colleagues for joining me in presenting it and for standing strong in uh opposition to this punitive and unworkable tax on EVs. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn and uh we will proceed.
▶ 3:04:22Oh, Miss Brownley, do you seek uh for what? I'm sorry. We've got um we're going to go Well, Miss Brownley is
▶ 3:04:31Okay. Burchett. All right. Mr. Burchett, uh for what purpose do you seek
▶ 3:04:37Thank you.
▶ 3:04:38Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe my amendment's on the desk.
▶ 3:04:41Yes, sir. It is. The clerk will
▶ 3:04:43an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Burchett of Tennessee number 148.
▶ 3:04:53Without objection, um the amendment will be considered as read and the gentleman from Tennessee is recognized.
▶ 3:04:59Thank you, Chairman Johnson. Uh my amendment would is very simple. would excludes weight would exclude weight scales from being considered as bridges under the Federal Railroad Administration's regulatory guidelines. Removing the scales from the list clears up unnecessary regulation and red tape and is one step towards a more efficient government. It is clear to me that scales are not as the same as bridges and I hope it's just as clear to my colleagues.
▶ 3:05:25In the interest of efficiency, I will end my remarks now and we have a lot of minutes to get through that I with that I yield back.
▶ 3:05:34The gentleman is to be commended for his efficiency. Do other members seek
▶ 3:05:39Mr. Chair,
▶ 3:05:40ranking member, you are recognized.
▶ 3:05:42Um, thank you. I I thank the gentleman for his efficiency and opposes amendment as well. This amendment exempt track scales from the FRA's rail bridge safety and reporting requirements. A track scale is used to determine how much a freight railroad charges to move cargo. The FRA considers track scales as bridges for purposes of maintaining bridge safety standards. I do not support reducing the FRA's safety oversight of this rail infrastructure.
▶ 3:06:08So, I'd urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment and yield back the balance of my time.
▶ 3:06:14Do other members seek recognition? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question before the committee is on the amendment. All those uh in favor state I. All those um opposed say nay.
▶ 3:06:29The naysay have it. And the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 3:06:33Nays have it.
▶ 3:06:34I was louder than
▶ 3:06:37with that.
▶ 3:06:40Very good. A recorded vote uh having been requested. Activity on that amend on that uh that action will be postponed. Miss Brownley, for what purpose do you seek recognition?
▶ 3:06:50Uh Mr. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 3:06:53Very good, ma'am. Uh, the clerk will
▶ 3:06:56an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Brownley of California number
▶ 3:07:03Mr. Chairman, I want wanted to ask unanimous consent to consider amendments uh 62 and 71 and 64 on block. So, I can do all three together.
▶ 3:07:18What? 6271 and what
▶ 3:07:25Yeah, without objection. thank you uh Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larson for your work uh on this legislation. And the bill before us today provides critical funding for infrastructure priorities in California and in my district uh including for our roads, bridges, transit systems, and rail network.
▶ 3:07:49The bill also incorporates many of the key policy pro uh key policy priorities that I work to advance through the committee process. I also appreciate that the managers amendment adopted earlier today incorporated five of my amendments. Two of the amendments that I am offering in this onb block package are intended to address a problem with the Federal Highway Administration's interpretation of federal law as it relates to the project selection process.
▶ 3:08:20For over three decades, California successfully operated under a locally driven framework through which the state suballocated program funds to county transportation commissions based on population. This approach empowered local transportation planning agencies to plan and deliver transportation projects.
▶ 3:08:42Unfortunately, in 2021, the Federal Highway Administration upended this longstanding planning process and prohibited metropolitan planning organizations from delegating project selection to the counties, effectively centralizing control of project selection at the regional level.
▶ 3:09:03In the Southern California Association of of Government's region, which is home to over 18.8 8 million people across six counties and nearly 200 cities. This shift has disrupted the traditional project selection process. Earlier this year, a bipartisan group of members from the Southern California region asked the committee to include language to restore direct formula allocation to county transportation agencies.
▶ 3:09:33Since our request was not included in the base text, I offered these amendments today to address these local control issues. The language in my amendment is supported by both Democrats and Republicans who represented the region. The third amendment that I am offering in this onblock was intended to direct more resources from the surface transportation block grant program to local communities nationwide.
▶ 3:10:00The STBG suballocation is the best and most direct way that our committee can ensure resources get to our congressional districts. I understand the committee has concerns about these amendments. I hope we can continue to work together as the legislative process advances to address these important issues. Um, at this time I will respectfully withdraw the amendments on block 062, 062, 071, and 064.
▶ 3:10:30Uh, thank you, Miss Brownley. I appreciate that. And yes, be happy to continue to
▶ 3:10:35Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 3:11:11go ahead. We'll wait on Dusty will be back in just a minute. We'll go to uh
▶ 3:11:20Thank you. Are we doing
▶ 3:11:23Great. Uh Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. Please designate
▶ 3:11:27an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Carbajal of California number
▶ 3:11:37Without objection, the amendment will be considered as red. You're recognized by
▶ 3:11:41Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My amendment would establish a new medium transit intensive cities or IMIC set aside within the section 5307 urbanized area formula grant program. This builds on the proven success of small transit intensive cities stick formula by creating a parallel program for medium-sized urbanized areas, UZAs, those with populations between 200,000 and under a million.
▶ 3:12:11These communities are often doing the same kind of work as the largest transit systems in our country. They run frequent service, move significant numbers of riders, and serve as critical links between suburban urban mobility and urban mobility. But under the current formula, they're treated the same as the largest metropolitan systems. They are competing against cities with far greater scale and That is not a fair comparison, and it doesn't reflect performance.
▶ 3:12:41My amendment fixes that by setting aside a small portion of section 5307 funding to recognize and reward medium-sized transit systems that meet or exceed performance benchmarks comparable to large urbanized areas. In short, if a transit agency is delivering highquality, highfrequency service, it should be recognized for it. This can be a win-win for everyone. For communities like mine in Santa Barbara, this means a more level playing field.
▶ 3:13:10Strong transit systems such as Santa Barbara MTD that move people efficiently every day would be recognized and provided the federal resources to continue delivering vital mobility services for our communities. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and help us build a formula that works for every community, not just large ones. While I understand the limitations of the big four agreement, I hope I can continue to get commitment from you, Mr. Chairman, that we can continue to work on this issue.
▶ 3:13:41And with that, I would like to withdraw my
▶ 3:13:44Thank you. And absolutely, my good friend, we will continue.
▶ 3:13:48Thank you. Which one do Hold on.
▶ 3:14:18What's doing? Troy's ready. Troy, are you ready?
▶ 3:14:40I do.
▶ 3:14:41Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 3:14:43What? Okay. Designate
▶ 3:14:45an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Nails of Texas number 094, revision two.
▶ 3:14:53Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Nails, you're recognized for speaking on your amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Our committee has an opportunity today to deliver on President Trump's call for stronger rail safety protections and to ensure that the tragedy we've witnessed in East Palestine, Ohio, never happens again. Can't have it. February 3rd, 2023, a Nor Southern train carrying hazardous materials derailed in East Palestine. Tank cars exploded into flames. Families were forced from their homes.
▶ 3:15:24Toxic smoke filled the sky. You could all see it. and dangerous chemicals contaminated nearby land and That disaster did not happen in a vacuum. It exposed serious weaknesses and the freight rails industry safety practices, particularly when it comes to transporting hazardous materials through our communities. Just two months ago, a derailment occurred in my own congressional district in Texas.
▶ 3:15:49The derailed equipment included two empty rail cars, four rail cars carrying non-hazardous materials, 18 tank cars carrying hazardous materials. 10 of the derailed rank cars released materials, including seven breached, punctured or torn cars that collectively released about 120,000 gallons of ethanol, which is a hazardous material. Now, luckily, no injuries. Luckily, there are no injuries and this derailment had no uh immediate harm to the public. Still a derailment.
▶ 3:16:19However, since 2024, the NTSB has been on the scene of 53 rail accidents and incidents that resulted in 17 fatalities and 10 injuries. 27 investigations are worker related. In fact, listen, the NTSB has increased its number of rail investigations each year by 33% in 2025 over that of 2024.
▶ 3:16:46In 2025 alone, this is a big number, folks. 2025 alone, there was a total of real accidents and incidents, of which there were 969 fatalities and two 6,291 injuries. Now, that's a big number. You think about it. This committee, what did we do when you had the crash over the PTOAC took 67 lives? Everybody's concerned about safety.
▶ 3:17:16This committee immediately put $ 122.5 billion dollars to address it with ATC modernization. 12.5 billion and there looks like we're going to get another 20 billion to make sure our skies are safe. But yet we have 969 fatalities, 6,000 and we've done nothing. We've done nothing since East Palestine. The NTSB standards, they're acceptable number zero. We'd love to have it.
▶ 3:17:41As the NTSB chairwoman Hamdy said in her letter to urges committee dated two days ago, May 20th, she reinstated the urgent need for a comprehensive approach to addresses critical rail safety issues which are included in my bipartisan rail safety amendment before us today.
▶ 3:17:57According to the NDSB, quote, "Congress's discussion today aligns with many of our recommendations, including those on high hazardous flammable train links and consists, DOT 111 tank car regulations, wayside defect detectors, and other urgent concerns." My bipartisan amendment, it just does that. It takes practical common sense steps to address those failures.
▶ 3:18:20First, it strengthens safety procedures for trains carrying hazardous materials by improving emergency response planning and ensuring states receive advanced notification when dangerous substances move through their jurisdictions. Second, it helps prevent wheelbearing failures, one of the key issues identified in East Palestine derailment by requiring the largest freight railroads to deploy better detention technology and install additional sensors near populated areas.
▶ 3:18:46Third, it improves rail safety inspections by prohibiting arbitrary time limits on inspection and ensuring qualified inspectors have the ability to do their jobs thoroughly and correctly. Safety inspections, they should never ever ever be rough be rushed. My amendment, it's bipartisan, is supported by President Trump and his administration as well as shippers, unions, other key stakeholders across the freight nail network.
▶ 3:19:11Two days ago, president said, "I am strongly urging Congress to include the rail safety act, which I strongly endorse in 2023 and the Surface Transportation Reauthorization Bill. I'm asking Republicans to vote yes when this bill comes up as an amendment in the Transportation Committee this week. We must not delay any further on this important issue.
▶ 3:19:31And folks, let me remind you, while the large railroads are attempting to find any avenue they can to skew the message on my amendment, two p twoerson crews are already the standard across all major railroads in America. There is zero dollar impact to their expenses and zero dollar impact to their bottom line. I'll also note my amendment doesn't strike any of the underlying provisions in the base text.
▶ 3:19:54Rather, it adds critical safety measures while also adhering to the bipartisan negotiated provisions for civil penalties, DOT 111 tank car phase out schedule, hazardous materials, registration fees. Sir, this is the right thing to do. The people living along these rail corridors deserve confidence and every reasonable precaution is taken to protect their families, their properties, and their communities. I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment. Let's do the right thing because it's the right thing to do. And with that, I
▶ 3:20:25Mr. Larson.
▶ 3:20:26Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, um I support this amendment from Mr. Nells and urge members to vote for it. Since the Norfk southern derailment in East Palestine, Ohio in 2023, nearly three and a half years ago, this committee has not considered rail safety legislation until today. I'm very thankful for the work that has been done by Representative Nells Sykes, Delusio, Brezahan, and ranking member Titus and Van Drew and others to ensure this issue is not forgotten. Because of their hard work, we have a bipartisan rail safety amendment.
▶ 3:20:55The railway safety act protects rail workers in communities that railroads travel through, requires the placement of wayside defect uh detectors, strengthens penalties on railroads for safety violations, and removes older dangerous tank cars from service service sooner.
▶ 3:21:10This amendment would make significant updates to freight uh rail safety, including requiring tube crew members on all freight trains, updating the definition of high hazard trains, requiring a rulemaking to address train length, prohibiting railroads from limiting the amount of time available to inspect rail cars before a train departs a railard, and updating hazardous materials grants to help first responders purchase personal protective equipment for hazardous material leaks.
▶ 3:21:35Having this vote today is a culmination of years of work from members from both parties, the women and men of rail labor, countless advocates, and of course communities and people in them like uh the folks from East Palestine. So I urge all my colleagues to support this amendment that I yield back.
▶ 3:21:53Mr. Kn.
▶ 3:21:56Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I I certainly appreciate the spirit of this bill um or this amendment rather and the goals that were articulated by my colleagues, but I do have a question and and I would be happy to pose it to either Mr. Nells or Mr. Larson or whoever would like to to uh engage.
▶ 3:22:13I do upon reading the bill and the language that was presented lately um fairly recently, do you believe that there's a risk to initiating a federalism issue of some kind? I'm thinking about states like Texas, like Mr. Niels, you might want to talk um like North Carolina, Utah that are more of a without taking a position on the merits of this right to work states.
▶ 3:22:39It seems like this particular bill would override state legislaturator's um laws, regulations as it relates to the labor issue that seem to be more of a top- down metric as opposed to respecting the state's rights. So, is there a federalism issue with this amendment? I'm happy to yield to anyone who wants to answer that. Correct answer.
▶ 3:23:10Are you confident in that?
▶ 3:23:12Does this does does this does this amendment override
▶ 3:23:16uh railway policy in North Carolina? Because from where from from from my interpretation of it, there's a risk that it does. From a regulatory standpoint, from a personnel standpoint, staffing standpoints, um you know, safety inspections is a top- down issue and that interplay could get very um questionable, I would say.
▶ 3:23:37So is it your position that a state's legislature if they have a different standard, a different policy that that will govern over the the rules that are coming out of this committee?
▶ 3:23:51Can I respond to that?
▶ 3:23:52Sure. Sure.
▶ 3:23:53This is what I this is what I do know and that this administration supports this legislation like everybody else. So many other people support it. Strongly supports nails amendment 94 to include the real safety act of 2026 and HR8870. the building unrivaled infrastructure bill, American Act 20, the bipartisan five-year surface transportation reauthorization bill. The administration commends Representative Nails for his sustained commitment to rail safety. That's what this is about. It's about rail safety because we've done nothing.
▶ 3:24:22We've done nothing in the wake of February 3rd, 2023 training in East Palestine. The president has pledged to the people of East Palestine that they will not be forgotten. And this amendment represents meaningful legislative action to fulfill that promise and to prevent toxic train derailments in the future. The administration working with Congress and gets us important action into law and that's what we're doing today.
▶ 3:24:46I'm for all of that respectfully, but you know, we heard from the industry um and one section requires that there be a change to the inspection regulation so that two different crews represented by two different unions get to do the same visual inspection of the same train. Again, if North Carolina has a different regulation, the interplay between the state law versus this particular amendment is just puzzling to me. Mr. That was bad.
▶ 3:25:16I'm sorry.
▶ 3:25:17I'll yield to you.
▶ 3:25:19Just for
▶ 3:25:20this amendment applies to class,
▶ 3:25:21Mr. Kn's time.
▶ 3:25:23Well, I I would be happy to yield to anybody um who who just again, I'm not taking position on the on the the merits of the labor policy. I'm just using that as an example of state legislators,
▶ 3:25:35having their own standards. And are we imposing in this amendment standards that could override prickly issues at the state level? Yes, it's it's it's a good question. This amendment applies to class one railroads. Those are interstate railroads. So, if there are small short lines, tourist lines, or things like that that operate within a state like yours that have different regulations, um then this would not does the federal government have jurisdiction over interstate railroads exclusively
▶ 3:26:04Yes, we do.
▶ 3:26:05Even as it relates to labor policy, it's my understanding that that's not the case as it relates to labor policy with private companies. No, it it would class one railroads are regulated by the federal government because they they they have interstate com commerce. Class one railroads are only the largest railroads in the country.
▶ 3:26:22I'm aware of that. I'm aware of that. Um Mr. Chairman, if you'd like to comment, I welcome it. I that was just one of the main questions I had as it related to this particular amendment. And with that, I can yield back.
▶ 3:26:36Mr. Deluzio.
▶ 3:26:38Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I I really want to thank Mr. Mr. Nells for his leadership here on this amendment. I want to thank Mr. Van Drew, Mr. Breahan on the Republican side, Miss Sykes, Titus, Mr. Carson, Molton, Papus here on our side. Um, this is a great coalition that also includes everyone from workers in this to the White House, folks in both sides of the aisle here, and it tells you this is a bill we should pass. You know, it's been more than 3 years since this derailment. I've got constituents who are in the evacuation zone.
▶ 3:27:05Uh, we've got neighbors in Ohio who are all clamoring for the same thing, for something to come out of this Congress to make rail safer. People I represent, our neighbors in Ohio, do not want to be treated like collateral damage in the way of railroads profits. And I think one of the most important things we can do in this committee is to pass our railway safety act. So, I'm excited to see that movement today. You heard Mr. Nells talk about the bill. It's straightforward. It responds to problems around staffing, around wayside defect detectors, and more. These are common sense provisions.
▶ 3:27:35It is the right thing for us to do, not just for the people of East Palestine and Beaver County, but for people who live along the tracks all over this country, so many of whom we all represent. So, Mr. Nells, thank you for introducing the amendment. I'm proud to support it. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank Mr. Nells, too. And let me be clear, um, this is class one railways. It is interstate.
▶ 3:28:02It is regulated by the federal government for that reason and I understand the concept of federalism and I agree with you to some extent but here is a case where you have to have minimum standards for safety and there are cases look at air traffic control and what we do at our airports it's the same thing um safety has to dominate here it's still adhering to the policies and the prescription of the constitution I believe that this does do both of those because of the reason they're interstate I
▶ 3:28:32yield I yield back.
▶ 3:28:35Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm proud to lead this uh co-lead this amendment with Representatives Nails and Duzio. Today is been three years in the making. This committee hadn't taken a vote on a comprehensive rail safety bill since the train carrying hazardous materials tragically derailed in East Palestine in February 2023. When I became the ranking member of the rail subcommittee at the start of this Congress, I said we would take action to help prevent further instances like that one.
▶ 3:29:05And I'm glad to see that we're doing that today. I'm sorry it wasn't in the Rail Safety Act base text. Uh but I'm glad we're going to have a fair vote on it now as an amendment. That way everybody can weigh in. I'm confident that when people look at the details of this and think about the safety of their constituents on both sides of the aisle, they'll do what's right and vote yes. The amendment implements recommendations that resulted from the NTSB's independent investigation into the causes of the derailment.
▶ 3:29:36For example, it would phase out the use of DOT 111 tank cars, the type of car that was punctured and caused the fire after the derailment. It strengthens the standards for wayside detectors, which could have prevented the derailment. And of course, I'd like to mention it codifies the common sense twoperson crew rule, which I've longed advocated for. Each year, nearly 250 million tons of hazardous materials are shipped by rail.
▶ 3:30:05So many communities from all our districts are along these routes. As I noted, it goes right through the heart of downtown Las Vegas. We have to protect these communities and the rail workers. The in excuse me, the NTSB has endorsed the amendment. The White House has endorsed the amendment. The rail labor coalition has endorsed the amendment. The support is just overwhelming. So, I think a vote for the amendment is a vote for safety.
▶ 3:30:36I yield back.
▶ 3:30:39Does anyone else wish to be heard? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment originated with a piece of legislation that Congressman Nells and I worked on for months, months, and months and months to improve rail safety. But too often we hear people talk about this issue as if the railroads are fundamentally dangerous.
▶ 3:31:04We hear the statistics about how many tons of hazardous materials they carry, how many miles it progresses, the communities they go through, and we leave out some basic statistics like the fact that in there were 22,543 hazardous material incidents on highways and only 297 hazmat incidents on railways.
▶ 3:31:30From 2012 to 20uh 23, there have been zero railway deaths with hazardous materials while there have been 82 fatalities on the highway highways with hazmat. The point is that we have an opportunity to strengthen the reputation of the to encourage more people to ship hazardous materials by rail and give confidence to America.
▶ 3:32:00The railways are in fact as safe as the statistics proclaim. This is not an anti-commerce, anti-industry, anti- railway amendment. It strengthens protections that we have. It modernizes protections. It makes things keep up with the progress of technology.
▶ 3:32:21And we've worked very closely with all the different industry groups, interest groups, and whatnot, especially labor to make sure that this happens. So, enough with the Rail is by far the safest way to transport hazmat in the United States of America. We should reinforce that fact.
▶ 3:32:44We should reinforce that reputation and ensure that more shippers choose to ship by rail with the confidence that this amendment will bring to our railways, to our transportation system. That Congress is not asleep on the job. that we are working with industry and labor and our communities to ensure that rail maintains its incredible safety record and only gets better over time. It's pretty amazing to go back to those numbers.
▶ 3:33:15In just one year, 22,543 hazardous material incidents on highways and only 297 freight rail hazmat incidents. But let's get that 297 down to zero. then there will be no debate we should be shipping more by rail especially hazardous materials because it makes it safer for our communities across the country. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
▶ 3:33:41Does anyone else wish to be heard? Seeing no one, I'm going to recognize myself. Um, which I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, this amendment, and much of the underlying bill that it's based on. It isn't about railroad safety. It's natural to want to find solutions to accidents in order to prevent them from ever happening again.
▶ 3:34:08And my colleagues know well that I always insist on waiting uh for the facts to come out before legislating uh after any accident. And the accident in East Palestine uh is no different. The National Transportation Safety Board's investigations are essential to understanding just what went wrong and how we could prevent future accidents from occurring.
▶ 3:34:28After the NTSB released its report on June 25th, 2024, it was clear that many pieces of the amendment that we are considering today would have had absolutely no impact on that accident. For example, a key piece of this amendment is the twoman crew mandate.
▶ 3:34:47I find it absolutely that in a world where we have autonomous vehicles, no driver, autonomous trucks with no driver, we have aircraft with no pilot, and here it is, we have the only mode of transportation operating on a rail, and we say we got to have two individuals in the cab to uh to prevent The fact is there were three people in the cab in East Palestine.
▶ 3:35:17What's more, we don't need anybody in the cab. With today's technology and positive train control, these trains can be run from the dispatch center. That's a fact. We don't need anybody else in the cab. You know, this amendment asserts that twoman cruise is essential key for safety, but the facts just directly uh contradict that.
▶ 3:35:44It is so important to acknowledge also the costs of this amendment and what impact that's going to have on all Americans. Billions of dollars within in 10 years. It's going to ripple across the entire supply chain resulting in slower, less fluid service, higher costs, and more frequent delays for shippers. Our farmers, our and more rely on an efficient rail system to get products to consumers.
▶ 3:36:13This mandate included uh in this amendment is going to ultimately raise costs for all Americans. So when the price of your energy goes up, this is why. When the price of your food goes up, this is why. When the price of your lumber goes up, this is why everything is going to go up. And I'm sure many of this members in the committee, many of the members in the committee would agree that we should not compromise safety due to cost rec concerns. However, here's a fact.
▶ 3:36:44The freight rail industry just had its safest safety record this year or last year in 2025, setting safety records for derailments, for equipment caused accidents, track related accidents, and employee injury rate. The best record is ever had. The reason for those safety records is clear. The emergence of new technology has made the industry safer.
▶ 3:37:08The broader use of autonomous or automated track inspection to catch issues on the tracks that are invisible to the naked eye has directly led to the lowest rate of track-caused accidents on record. Additionally, we've seen the lowest rate of equipment caused accidents on record due to technology advancements. Unfortunately, despite these safety achievements, adopting this amendment is going to move us backward. And it's for these reasons and many many more that I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment.
▶ 3:37:38And with that, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 3:37:47All oppose signify by saying nay.
▶ 3:37:50In the opinion of the eyes or opinion of the chair, the uh nays have it.
▶ 3:37:56Yeah, I request a record of both boss. Thank you, sir. The gentleman in question recorded vote on the amendment is previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the question are
▶ 3:38:13Mr. Stanton chairman amendment at the desk.
▶ 3:38:21Please designate
▶ 3:38:22an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Stanton of Arizona number 087. Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Stanton, you're recognized uh for five minutes.
▶ 3:38:35Thank you very much. Um Mr. Chairman, uh this bipartisan amendment adds to the bipartisan heat act co-led by Congressman Lawler of New York. To the underlying text, extreme heat is no longer a regional concern. It's an urgent growing threat to human health, our environment, and increasingly to our critical infrastructure across our country. When a heat wave hits, extreme temperatures accelerate the aging of our critical infrastructure.
▶ 3:39:01Roadway cracking and warping that would normally take years can happen in much shorter period of time. Steel joints on aging bridges freeze up. The structural integrity of concrete and asphalt can degrade faster than they can be maintained. I'm from Arizona. We're no strangers to heat. But this challenge is actually more acute across the Northeast where bridges are older, more numerous, and often more vulnerable.
▶ 3:39:24Unplanned closures driven by heat stress disrupt freight movement, break supply chains, strand commuters, imposing significant costs on local economies, and reducing national productivity. Our emergency relief programs resign with floods, earthquakes, and hurricanes in mind. Extreme heat should be in the same category. The heat does not do the heat act does two straightforward things.
▶ 3:39:48It explicitly adds extreme heat as a recognized natural disaster for purposes of deploying federal emergency transportation resources and it directs the Department of Transportation to assess the impacts of heat on our transportation networks and develop best practices for mitigation. It's a common sense straightforward-looking policy. The infrastructure we're funding this bill would will be around for decades. We should build it to withstand the conditions that will actually face uh to to keep faith with the four corner agreement from the committee.
▶ 3:40:16I'm offering and withdrawing this amendment today, but I look forward to continuing to work with the chair and ranking member Larson to find a path forward for this important provision. Thank you. I yield back.
▶ 3:40:26Without objection. Thank you.
▶ 3:40:36Mr. Davids,
▶ 3:40:45please designate
▶ 3:40:47an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Davids of Kansas number 067.
▶ 3:40:54Without objection, amendment would be considered as read. Sharice, you're
▶ 3:41:03Thank you. Oh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. uh with your uh actually I might be entering something into the record later on related to this. I don't I don't have it with me right now. Uh Mr. Chairman, I'd like um to offer an amendment that allows for increased flexibility for our local transit agencies.
▶ 3:41:23While federal law does allow transit authorities in cities with less than 200,000 residents to use federal formula funds for transit operations, transit systems in regions with more than 200,000, like Kansas City, are not permitted to do so. As transit agencies continue to make tough decisions about how to manage their budgets, having more flexibility to use their section 5307 dollars may help them bridge the gap to keep bus routes and operations sustained.
▶ 3:41:50This is certainly the case in Kansas City where the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority is struggling to keep all their bus routes running while dealing with local budget challenges all at the same time at that they are preparing for Kansas City to be one of the host cities for the World Cup in just a few weeks. Especially in a time when gas prices have climbed and more folks are trying to keep costs down, we need to be doing all that we can to allow our transit agencies the flexibility to serve our constituents. Mr.
▶ 3:42:20Chairman, I yield back.
▶ 3:42:23Someone else wish to be heard on the See no one, I recognize myself. Uh, real quick for a statement, which I very much um what you're trying to do. Um but I do oppose the amendment um because it grants uh federal operating assistance to large city transit agencies that have not meaningfully addressed um the crime uh on their systems.
▶ 3:42:51While some limited federal dollars can be used for operations, it's important that the that the systems are able to maintain operations themselves and use federal funds for their capital needs. Um, and for those reasons, I do oppose the amendment. And with that, I' I'd yield back.
▶ 3:43:11Mr. Chairman, I first I'd like to thank my colleague, uh, Laura Freriedman for co-sponsoring this amendment with me.
▶ 3:43:18um, hopefully we can work on this together while we still have you here.
▶ 3:43:24And, um, I'll I'll go ahead and withdraw the amendment.
▶ 3:43:28Thank you. Thank you, Sharice. And yes, absolutely. Mr. Collins.
▶ 3:43:40Yes, sir. I've got an amendment at the
▶ 3:43:44an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Collins of Georgia number 023.
▶ 3:43:52Without objection, the amendment be considered as red. Mr. Collins, five
▶ 3:43:56All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, today I'm proud to offer an amendment. the fresh act that would empower states to let some of the heaviest trucks on the road take the safest roads, our interstates. The uh federal bridge formula, which governs weight limits on interstates, was adopted in 1975, more than 50 years ago, and it has not been updated since then.
▶ 3:44:19While the federal government is stuck in 1975, many states have updated the weight limits for their state roads, leading to a situation where many of the heaviest trucks travel on state roads because modern weight limits allow them to maximize payload and reduce total trips. Our truckers are already on a time crunch every time they deliver the goods you and I use every day. Goods that keep the US economy moving.
▶ 3:44:45When they're forced to take neighborhood streets, their delivery times are extended and the threat of crashes increases. Interstates are the safest roads in America. Three and four fatal large truck crashes occur off the interstate system on local roads and state highways. This amendment would move some of the heaviest trucks off these congested roads where crashes are most likely and onto the interstates where they were designed for heavy freight.
▶ 3:45:14Some people may be concerned about the impacts on the roads, but this has been tested. The MIT concrete sustainability hub used fully loaded readymixed concrete trucks to model the impacts of heavier vehicles. They found that across a 50-year pavement life, there were no negative impacts on pavement or increased maintenance cost. We're seeing many states with higher weight limits and a positive track record.
▶ 3:45:39Florida, Michigan, Maine, Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, and others have authorized higher truck weights on state roads, and payments have not failed, and crash rates have not spiked. The Fresh Act is a common sense bill. It will not raise federal truck weight limits. It will not change the federal bridge formula. It will not force any state to participate.
▶ 3:46:05This amendment will not apply across state lines or to over the road freight, and it won't allow heavier trucks than the trucks rated capacity on the state's own rules. But it will fix overly complicated federal truck weight standards, improve safety, cut emissions, and reduce traffic.
▶ 3:46:26In my district, the same trucks that haul our crops, our timber, our poultry, and the concrete that pours the foundations of our schools and hospitals are pushed off the safest roads in the country and onto the local routes that run by those same schools and hospitals. The Fresh Act lets each state fix that on its own terms, for its own roads, and for its own people. It deserves a place in this reauthorization. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back.
▶ 3:46:56Mr. Larson.
▶ 3:46:57Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is one of several amendments um throughout the day that are on truck weights. And this on this point in particular, I just will note I I'll oppose the amendment. This amendment would allow any state to wave federal interstate weight limits for commercial motor vehicles and replace them with a patchwork of state weight limits.
▶ 3:47:17Further, this amendment exempts a laundry list of commodities that are allowed to be transported at higher weights, including allowing any governor to decide which categories of products are exempt from those limits. This fundamentally breaks the purpose of our interstate system with uniform rules. Instead of consistent rules, we'd have a level of chaos. A truck carrying overweight cargo in one state could violate another state's weight laws.
▶ 3:47:42Uh this amendment would make truck safety enforcement extremely difficult and cause confusion and risk when we need to focus on saving lives on our roads. So I'd urge all members to oppose this amendment. I yield back.
▶ 3:47:56Does anyone else wish to be heard on the amendment? By the way, congratulations Mr. Collins last night on making it to the runoff in your state. So, moving forward, um, are there any amendments to the Seeing none. We'll vote. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 3:48:26All oppose, signify by saying nay.
▶ 3:48:30appear the naysay have it.
▶ 3:48:32Mr. Chair, I request a recorded vote. Gentleman requests a vote on the amendments previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6 further proceedings on the question are postponed. Mr. Garcia Mr. Chairman I have an amendment at the desk designate
▶ 3:48:50an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Garcia of Illinois number 042.
▶ 3:48:57Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Garcia, you're
▶ 3:49:01Uh thank you uh Mr. Chair. Let me start by saying that I intend to withdraw this amendment, but my amendment would create a new grant program to provide federal assistance for the maintenance, replacement, and rehabilitation needs of commuter rail systems old bridges. In the late 19th century, Chicago a Chicago ordinance required that all railroad tracks be elevated in the city.
▶ 3:49:28This resulted in the construction of hundreds of bridges in a short time frame. Many of these same bridges continue to be in service and are deteriorating at the same rate. In Chicagoland, Metro is the commuter rail system tasked with providing rail service spanning six counties and 500 route miles.
▶ 3:49:48They also own hundreds of bridges that while currently operating in sa in a safe working condition are in dire need of capacity improvements to meet modernday standards. My amendment would ensure that metro and other commuter rail systems around the country have access to a dedicated funding stream to cover the cost to maintain their old bridges. It's important that we support the safe and efficient movement of people traveling via commuter rail and this amendment does just that.
▶ 3:50:17Uh I I realize this bill uh is on its uh way uh to passage, but this issue I wanted to lift up because it will remain relevant for the next and for future Congresses. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And now I withdraw my amendment.
▶ 3:50:34Thank you, Mr. Garcia.
▶ 3:50:40Mr. Kylie.
▶ 3:50:42Uh Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the Mr. Chair,
▶ 3:50:48an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Kylie of California number 045.
▶ 3:50:55That objection amendment be considered as read. Mr. Kylie, you're recognized.
▶ 3:50:58Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, federal transportation dollars build the roads and infrastructure necessary to move people and goods, but aging water and sewer infrastructure in the corridors around those facilities too often prevents the development that would make those investments pay off. This amendment that I'm offering today gives regions a practical tool to fix that. It does it does a couple things. Number one, it makes public infrastructure uh eligible under the surface transportation block grant.
▶ 3:51:26So up to 20% of each region's suballocated uh funds under the block grant program can be used for projects that directly serve a federally assisted transportation facility. And then number two, it adds public infrastructure as an eligible project type under the surface transportation accelerator grant program, giving regions a competitive pathway to federal dollars for these larger investments.
▶ 3:51:50Together, these changes gives regions the tools to pair public infrastructure investment with transportation facilities to unlock private development, increase ridership, and maximize the return on federal transportation dollars already spent. I yield back. Mr. Larson.
▶ 3:52:10Thanks. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I oppose the Kylie amendment. Um, and it's not because it's a a terrible amendment necessarily, but this amendment adds new eligibilities to the surface transation block grant and accelerate accelerator grant programs for public infrastructure such as water and sewer. And broadening the scope of these programs so dramatically undermines the user pays user benefits principle and jeopardizes the investment in the surface transportation competitive grant programs which are already highly overs subscribed.
▶ 3:52:40The other point uh certainly want to make is that we have the state revolving funds clean water state revolving fund drinking water state revolving fund. We have USDA programs uh that can be used in rural areas as well for uh sewer and water infrastructure. So there are other um there are other grant programs available to address these other public infrastructure needs as well. So with the limited do as as great as this bill is at $580 billion as limited those dollars are over the next five years.
▶ 3:53:09We have other work to do on water resources development act on state revolving fund where we can address some of these issues. So I would just uh urge members to oppose this amendment but certainly want to figure out a way to move forward on these other elements so that we can continue to fund the state revolving funds that states use for water and sewer with that yield back.
▶ 3:53:28Does anyone else wish to be heard on the Seeing no one are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none the questions on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. All oppose signify by saying nay. Nay. Opinion of the chair. The naysay have The ns do have it.
▶ 3:53:56All right. Mr. Miss Strickland.
▶ 3:54:00Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 3:54:03Doesn't it? An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Strickland of Washington number 079.
▶ 3:54:11Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Strickland, you're
▶ 3:54:15Mr. Chairman, my amendment makes a technical correction by def by defining transportation demand management, otherwise known as TDM, which this bill already authorizes as an eligibility under the rural and urban surface transportation accelerator grant program. Transportation demand management or TDM is the use of demandside strategies to enhance the efficiency of existing road infrastructure.
▶ 3:54:41I've secured language in this bill that will allow states, localities, and tribes to use federal dollars for transportation demand management solutions that will maximize efficiencies within their transportation systems. We all know that local communities know their own transportation needs best. However, because of the lack of clarity around what TDM is, regional federal highway administration offices have adopted their own interpretation.
▶ 3:55:09This has resulted in inconsistencies in which projects receive federal funding, inefficiencies in how funds are administered and delivered and missed opportunities for communities to address congestion in transportation affordability through the use of TDM. Defining TDM will ensure that all communities, regardless of region, have fair access to federal dollars for TDM projects and can deliver those projects more efficiently.
▶ 3:55:34I urge my colleagues to support this technical correction that will allow communities to access the funds that this bill has already authorized. I yield back, Mr. Chair.
▶ 3:55:46Does anyone else wish to be heard on the Seeing none, I recognize myself. I do oppose the amendment. Um the bill already requires the secretary to complete a study on travel demand. Um the study in the underlying bill is going to advise states uh and NPOS's on best practices to use when forecasting travel demand. With that, I would urge I would urge opposition.
▶ 3:56:16Are there any amendments to the Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 3:56:26All oppose signify by saying nay. Opinion of the chair. The naysay have
▶ 3:56:33Mr. Chairman, I would like to request a recorded vote. Please.
▶ 3:56:35Gentle lady requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee will six. Further proceedings on the question are Mr. Fong. Uh,
▶ 3:56:52Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. Desate
▶ 3:56:55an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Fong of California, number 041, revision one.
▶ 3:57:04Without objection, amendment be considered as read. Mr. Fong, you're recognized. Uh,
▶ 3:57:08thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise today in support of my bipartisan amendment that helps bring affordability back to everyday Americans. I want to thank Representative Gillan for her partnership in this matter. In California, we've seen firsthand how broken insurance and litigation systems drive costs directly onto consumers. When insurance costs rise, everyday people foot the bill. Millions of Americans rely on ride share to get to work, get home safely, attend medical appointments, pick up groceries, or support their families every single day.
▶ 3:57:37Yet, these companies are being increasingly targeted by lawsuits seeking massive payouts even when the company itself is not alleged to have done anything wrong. And this is happening despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of trips are completed without any reported safety incident and every trip already carries at least $1 million in liability insurance coverage. The problem is that even meritless lawsuits are extraordinarily expensive to defend across the system. These costs add up to hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
▶ 3:58:06costs that are ultimately passed on to the consumers through higher fairs and reduced transportation access. We have seen the impact directly in California. Roughly onethird of a ride share fair in my home state has been going toward government governmentmandated insurance costs. Last year in Los Angeles, that number climbed to nearly half a fair. Imagine that. Half of your trip fair just to cover insurance costs. The results are predictable. Higher costs create lower demand.
▶ 3:58:34The people who rely on ride shares for their everyday lives are priced out and locked out due to the impacts of these frivolous lawsuits. It's not just California. In states across the country, we know that costs have gotten out of hand, particularly with commercial auto insurance. My amendment addresses this problem with a balanced common sense federal standard. It does it does not eliminate accountability. Companies would still be fully liable for their own ne for their own negligence, misconduct, safety features, or violations of law.
▶ 3:59:01Transportation network companies would still be required to maintain robust insurance coverage, conduct driver screenings, and comply with all applicable safety regulations. What this amendment does is stop the abusive litigation where the company itself is not at fault. And Congress has already recognized this principle before, thanks to the persistent efforts of the chairman who now holds the Gavl today. The Graves Amendment, which was added to the 2005 surface transportation bill, established a federal standard protecting rental car companies from unlimited vicarious liability while preserving liability for a company's own wrongdoing.
▶ 3:59:31The same logic applies here. Companies should be liable for their own actions, not exposed to limitless litigation simply because they operate an app and are viewed as deep pocket defendants. We know reform works. Florida and Texas have already implemented this model and seen positive results. Georgia and Nevada have followed suit and expect to see similar benefits. This amendment seeks to replicate those cost savings on a national basis. Lower litigation costs mean lower insurance costs. Lower insurance costs mean lower fairs.
▶ 4:00:00And lower fairs mean better access to affordable transportation and more opportunities for drivers. At a time when Americans are already stretched thin, we should not allow abusive litigation to function as a hidden tax on consumers. This amendment is about fairness, affordability, accountability, and protecting access to modern transportation for the millions of Americans who depend on it every single day. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you for your work and leadership in this issue.
▶ 4:00:25I would like to thank my colleague, Congressman Ael, for his leadership on this issue as well uh as and as as well thank representatives Crawford, Gillan, Herd, and Owens for co-sponsoring this effort. And I urge all my colleagues to support this amendment. With that, I yield back.
▶ 4:00:39Mr. Larson.
▶ 4:00:41Thank you, uh, Mr. Chair. Um, today I've opposed the Fong Amendment 41. The amendment establishes vicarious liability shield for transportation network companies. This preeemption would limit the liability of rid share companies from actions of drivers who carry out the transportation services for these companies. The stated intent of the amendment is to address rising insurance costs due to crashes involving um rid share drivers, which increases the cost of rides for consumers.
▶ 4:01:09By limiting liability, we remove accountability from the ride share companies, leaving victims without appropriate proper recourse or access to fair compensation for any negligence or wrongdoing in a crash. This broadly worded amendment would further shield ride share companies from pending lawsuits that relate to uh sexual assault and harassment of riders utilizing services. Transportation network companies are fundamentally different than traditional rental car companies and have a different relationship with their drivers.
▶ 4:01:37And so because of that, I would urge opposition to this amendment. I yield back.
▶ 4:01:43Does anyone else wish to be heard?
▶ 4:01:48Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in support of this amendment, which I have co-sponsored, and I thank Congressman Fong for his partnership on this issue. Long Islanders are getting crushed by rising auto insurance costs. New Yorkers pay more than $4,000 annually for car insurance insurance and nearly $1,500 above the national average and statewide rates have continued to climb year after year.
▶ 4:02:14At the same time, litigation costs tied to the ride share industry have exploded, especially as incidents of staged accident fraud have risen. Last year, insurance carriers reported more than 40,000 incidents of suspected motor vehicle insurance fraud, driving up expenses that ultimately get passed on to consumers. The top issue I hear about when I'm back home on Long Island is the cost of living.
▶ 4:02:41Providing reasonable liability protections would help reduce excessive legal costs, stabilize the insurance market, and ease pressure on premiums while still ensuring bad actors are held accountable. I'm proud to support this common sense reform to help make life more affordable for working families across New York and across our nation. Thank you, and I yield back.
▶ 4:03:05I yield myself five minutes. Um, I do support um this common sense uh amendment. Americans are already facing various affordability challenges and this amendment helps to make sure that the threat of frivolous lawsuits doesn't needlessly contribute to higher transportation costs.
▶ 4:03:24The fun amendment, it builds on a very similar vicarious liability provision that I led in 2005 uh in the surface reauthorization bill back then, which we called safety loo. Um, this amendment is going to hold ride share companies appropriately accountable in their instances of their own wrongdoing, but it's going to prevent um opportunities for endless litigation that is going to end in simply driving up costs for American use Americans using our uh transportation
▶ 4:03:55networks. With that, um, I yield back.
▶ 4:03:57Will the chairman yield?
▶ 4:04:00Uh, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to pose a question to to Mr. Fong just to be sure we're clear. This is not in any way preempting the tort system or precluding recovery if there is a negligent actor. And I want to make sure that that is on the record and and just fleshed out uh for the viewers and for the the members of this committee. We're not we're not precluding recovery. We're just not doing a federal uh program. Is that correct, Mr. Fong?
▶ 4:04:23It it doesn't Yeah. It doesn't eliminate accountability. Companies would still be fully liable for their own negligence, misconduct, safety fe safety failures, or violations of the law as as said before. Um it it's just to prevent the um the going after the deep pockets of you know by by frivolous lawsuits.
▶ 4:04:40Okay. Thank you. I yield back.
▶ 4:04:43Are there any further speakers?
▶ 4:04:46Seeing none. Are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 4:04:57All opposed signify by saying nay.
▶ 4:04:59The opinion of the chair. The eyes have
▶ 4:05:01Sure. Ask for record vote.
▶ 4:05:03The gentleman request a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6f. Further proceedings on the question are Sorry. Um uh Mr.
▶ 4:05:33Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 4:05:37an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Hoy of Oregon number
▶ 4:05:44Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Hy, you're
▶ 4:05:48Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My amendment would give additional consideration under the bus and bus facilities program to applications that support transit workforce training. The bus and bus facilities program is one of the main tools transit agencies use to buy buses, replace aging vehicles, and build or modernize the facilities needed to keep the service running. Those needs are important, and this amendment does not change that.
▶ 4:06:15But as transit agencies buy new buses and update their fleets, they also need a skilled workforce to operate, maintain, and repair those investments. A new bus does not help riders if the agency cannot train enough operators to drive it or enough mechanics to keep it on the road. There are over 160,000 public transit bus drivers in the United States. Our bus drivers sometimes spend up to 160 hours to get certified.
▶ 4:06:44Training often costs agencies $12,000 per driver. We need cutting edge tools and facilities to train the very best, but they can be prohibitively expensive. Oregon transit agencies are already doing this work with limited federal resources. Lane Transit District launched Oregon's first bus operator registered apprenticeship program.
▶ 4:07:05It is the first registered apprenticeship class adding uh their first registered apprenticeship class added eight new operators and helped bring Lane Transit District to 200 total bus operators. This is exactly the kind of work we should support and my amendment will keep this program flexible while making sure our workers have the tools and investments they need to succeed. I urge adoption of the amendment and I yield back. Thank you, Miss Hoy.
▶ 4:07:33I yield myself uh just a minute or two. This amendment significantly broadens the eligible activities for the underlying um grant program. The underlying bill provides some robust assistance for workforce training and associated equipment. For that reason, I do have to uh to oppose the amendment. Does anyone else wish to be heard on the Seeing no one, are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none. Questions on the amendment.
▶ 4:08:03All those in favor signify by saying I. All oppose signify by saying nay. And if opinion of the chair, the naysay have it. The nays do have it. Thank you very much, Miss H.
▶ 4:08:20Mr. Barrett.
▶ 4:08:22Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 4:08:24Designate an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Barrett of Michigan number 061.
▶ 4:08:33Without objection, uh the amendment will be considered uh as read. Real quick, I would like to recognize one of the former chairman of the committee who's standing over here in the corner, uh Mr. Micah. Thanks for stopping by and visit
▶ 4:08:51With that, Mr. Barrett, you're recognized for five minutes.
▶ 4:08:54All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Appreciate the um opportunity to speak about my amendment, amendment 61, the Loboy Auto Hauler Fairness Act, uh which I would love to get into the Build America 250 bill that we're considering today. would create a nationwide standard length limit for auto hauling trailer trucks carrying medium-siz vehicles.
▶ 4:09:142015, the FAST Act included language creating a federal standard and length limit for Stinger steered auto haulers, which may be familiar to many people, which are the most common type of autohauling truck on America's highways. They are 80 ft long with a 4-ft overhang over the front of the cab and a six-foot overhang off the rear of the trailer, allowing autohaulers to safely accommodate the largest number of vehicles possible in a single load.
▶ 4:09:40The current standard, which ensures companies don't have to comply with varying standards in each state differently, does not apply to lowboy trailers. This problem uh presents itself for certain types of vehicles like medium-sized trucks that are best hauled by other tractor trailer combinations. In the case of the medium-siz trucks, the best trailer to haul them is a lowboy trailer, which has a depressed section between the the hitch and the first axle.
▶ 4:10:07Due to the narrow language of the FAST act, auto haulers that use lowboy trailers as opposed to stinger steered tractor trailer combinations are not covered by the 80 foot federal standard, which means they're sub subject to a patchwork of unique regulations in each state that they are traveling through. My amendment would include a lowboy tractor trailer provision uh when they are hauling vehicles into the fast acts 80 foot length standard for auto haulers. Now, I want to be clear.
▶ 4:10:35This amendment has nothing to do with any increase in truck weights. That would remain the same, and it doesn't create a novel length standard for trucks of this type. It only adds lowboy auto haulers to the current federal length standard utilized by Stinger steered auto haulers. The bottom line is that we're trying to bring consistency to the marketplace and allow for vehicles to get delivered.
▶ 4:10:56Obviously, in a state like Michigan, we manufacture a lot of vehicles and we have to get them to market in areas where people are going to use them in this amendment and is important provision to do that. I understand that we have some more work to do with some of the um with some of the uh terms in the in the amendment. So, Mr. Chairman, as a sign of good faith, I'm willing to withdraw this amendment today in hopes of getting it considered down the road and appreciate your consideration in that effort.
▶ 4:11:23Absolutely, Tom. Thank you.
▶ 4:11:24Thank you. Um, Miss Mr. McDow.
▶ 4:11:30Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. Designate an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. McDow of North Carolina number 045, revision one, formerly circulated as McDow 043.
▶ 4:11:47Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. McDow, you're
▶ 4:11:51Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was pleased to see that this historic bill restores accountability to Amtrak performance standards and I think that we can go further to ensure that Amtrak delivers a quality service while reducing reliance on taxpayer dollars. My amendment would update the railroad rehabilitation and improvement financing program to give Amtrak the ability to modernize major inner city passenger rail stations by capturing value from nearby development.
▶ 4:12:20This amendment authorizes Amtrak to enter into partnerships, joint development, and similar arrangements for station area projects. By using a similar system to the PILT, Amtrak can receive contractual payments from developers. This allows Amtrak to retain the revenues created from the increased value of the developed property and then pour that money back into capital improvements, maintenance, and related passenger facilities. This amendment does not raise federal taxes.
▶ 4:12:48It does not require new mandatory spending and it does not provide special treatment to a a single developer. These changes are fiscally responsible. They leverage private dollars and existing federal credit tools to modernize nationally significant passenger rail stations all without asking for new appropriations. Right now, federal funding and fairbox revenue alone cannot cover the cost of upgrades at inner city rail stations. This financing mechanism for rail stations also has the added benefit of supporting American jobs.
▶ 4:13:18I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield back.
▶ 4:13:22Jerry, Mr. Chairman, this amendment would not simply modernize station development. It would hand Amtrak and the Trump Duffy DOT expanded authority over station area real estate financing, taxation, zoning, and private development. at the exact moment they are already running Penn Station in New York through a rushed and closed door RFP process. This amendment is very bad for for Penn Station and for New York City.
▶ 4:13:53Penn Station is the busiest rail hub in the country and its future should be shaped by writers, New York City, New York State and the public interest. But this amendment moves in the opposite direction. It would make it easier for Amtrak to structure private development deals, fasttrack favored projects for federal financing, preempt state and local taxes, and override local zoning and building requirements.
▶ 4:14:17Given how President Trump and Secretary Duffy have handled Penn Station so far, Congress should be especially wary when billions of dollars in public assets, prime Manhattan real estate, and federal financing are being pushed through an opaque process. We should not create more opportunities for favoritism, insider dealing, or politically connected interests to benefit at the public's expense. Penn Station absolutely needs modernization.
▶ 4:14:45But it must be a transportation project first, not a Trump vanity project, not a private developer giveaway, and not a backdoor effort to bypass accountability. This amendment would take a flawed process and make it more dangerous for the future of Penn Station and every ride who depends on it. We should reject it. I yield back. Someone else wish to be heard on the
▶ 4:15:12Uh Mr. Chairman, my my colleague uh Mr. Nadler just basically explained why this amendment would accelerate development of Penn Station. Now, if there's anyone in America or the world who thinks that Penn State development is going, Penn Station development is going too slowly, I'd like to meet that person. This station is overdue for redevelopment by about six decades. It's not happened.
▶ 4:15:41And the model in the rest of the world that's been so successful is to allow what's called value capture by the railroad that actually increases the value of that real estate by the service that they provide and not have that tax revenue go somewhere else. That's exactly what this amendment makes possible. This amendment makes possible the kind of station development that we've seen everywhere else in the world.
▶ 4:16:09Now, if you could look at New York City and say Penn Station should be the model of the rest of the world for how it exists today. Oh, wouldn't it be great if every station in Paris and London and Beijing looked like Penn Station? Then I would agree with Mr. Nadler. That's what we should do. Keep things the same. Keep the same process and state in place that's failed us for decades.
▶ 4:16:33What this amendment does is allow New York to catch up with the rest of the world to allow Amtrak, whose fundamental service provides the value in this property, to take some small benefit from the development on their property.
▶ 4:16:53It makes no sense for the for for the development that benefits because of this trans transit service, because of this train service, because of this basic service to just go somewhere else, especially to to a place that's failed to make this happen for decades. So that's the bottom line.
▶ 4:17:16If you think that Penn Station is the way it should be and the model for the rest of the world today, that it has been a model of development, then let's keep this the same. If you think that we should instead have stations, beautiful train stations that we have in the rest of the world, if we should catch up with the rest of the world, then we need to modify the program.
▶ 4:17:40This amendment is based on this amendment is based on procedures that have been proven in the rest of the world.
▶ 4:17:48Would the gentleman yield?
▶ 4:17:49Yes, sir.
▶ 4:17:50Nobody thinks that uh Penn Station is good. I agree. Nobody thinks that. But this amendment would not improve it. it would hand the decisions over how to deal with it to uh to the Trump administration with and and to and to selected developers without an RFP This amendment hands the decisions over to Amtrak.
▶ 4:18:22This maybe the first time I've ever heard a Democrat not support Amtrak making these kinds of decisions. It's in Amtrak's interest to pro produce a station that serves its travelers and Amtrak has actually done done fairly well with right across the street with Moahan Station. Moistan station is really a good model for this. That needs to happen for Penn Station as well.
▶ 4:18:49Moyahan station shows and proves the value of having the private sector involved in redeveloping a station property. If you compare Moahan station to Washington Union Station where where it's just been done by the government, I think you see a dramatic difference.
▶ 4:19:07Would the gentleman yield?
▶ 4:19:08Yes, I will. Moan station is indeed a model for development. It's it's it's very good. I travel through it every back and forth every every week. uh were in session. But what this bill would do without my amendment is to hand the decisions to um to a department of transportation that is now controlled uh by people who have no interest in properting
▶ 4:19:39uh contracts based on um uh uh but just to just to be clear but just to be clear sir what this amendment does is ensures that the additional revenue venue that comes from this development goes to Amtrak. That's what this amendment does. It ensures that that revenue goes to Amtrak and it should. That's the way railroads railroads work all over the world is that when they provide a service that increases the real estate value around a station, they get to capture that value.
▶ 4:20:13Mr. Chairman, we're out of time.
▶ 4:20:16Would the gentleman yield? Time's up.
▶ 4:20:19Would the gentleman yield?
▶ 4:20:20Time's up.
▶ 4:20:24Does anyone else wish to be heard?
▶ 4:20:29Seeing no one, I want to thank the gentleman for his leadership on this very important issue. I support the amendment and with that yield back. Are there any amendments to the amendment?
▶ 4:20:40Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. All oppose sing five is saying
▶ 4:20:48The opinion of the chair the eyes have
▶ 4:20:53The eyes do have it.
▶ 4:20:56The amendment is
▶ 4:20:56yes for recorded vote.
▶ 4:21:00Gentlemen request a vote on the amendments previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the questionnaire are post count.
▶ 4:21:14Mr. Colton.
▶ 4:21:16Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 4:21:20An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Scolton of Michigan number 109.
▶ 4:21:27That objection amendment be considered as read. Miss Colton, you're recognized.
▶ 4:21:31Thank you again, Mr. Chair. Let me just be honest. As the mother of two school-aged boys, the kindest thing I can do for teachers is help them burn off some energy before class, whether they walk or bike to school. This amendment, which mirrors my bipartisan kids on the go act, would reduce the non-federal cost share under the Safe Roots to School projects for states that employ a full-time program coordinator.
▶ 4:21:55The Safe Routes to School program has proven to reduce traffic accidents involving children, increase physical activity, and improve neighborhood safety. States with these designated coordinators have the data to back it up, too. When states employ a safe rootsto coordinator, they are four times more likely to offer resources to help these programs thrive.
▶ 4:22:18That means more grant money for local communities and more technical assistance to ensure these plans actually yield safety benefits. States with these coordinators are also 12 times more likely to assist communities in accessing these dollars and tools. This program and these coordinators bring real results to CA kids to school safely, a priority for every parent. And that's why countless states employ Safe Roots to School Coordinators. My home state of Michigan is in good company.
▶ 4:22:49Scan standing through the list of states represented up on this dis. It's worth noting that North Carolina, Florida, Utah, Georgia, Ohio, Colorado, New Jersey, Indiana, Illinois, Alaska, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Kansas, and All employ safe routes to school coordinators. And it would save money if my amendment became law.
▶ 4:23:16This amendment is critical to support local governments, encourage physical activity, and most importantly, keep our children safe. Out of respect to this four corners agreement, Mr. Chair, I will withdraw this amendment, but I ask that the chair and ranking member continue to work with me on this effort.
▶ 4:23:32Thank you. And I yield back.
▶ 4:23:33Of course, Hillary, we will.
▶ 4:23:35Thanks. Thanks, Sam.
▶ 4:23:38Thank you.
▶ 4:23:42Mr. Kn,
▶ 4:23:44thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. Designate
▶ 4:23:47an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. KN of North Carolina number 016.
▶ 4:23:55Without objection, the amendment we considered as read. Mr. Kn, you're
▶ 4:23:59Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Earlier this Congress, a small trucking business owner described how his company's identity was stolen by a technologically advanced criminal network who then used the information to divert and steal multiple cargo loads. These con artists were able to exploit the current weakness within the FMCSA's registration system, specifically the FMCSA's safety and fitness electronic records system to perpetrate their crimes.
▶ 4:24:27And they do so with relative ease and security. According to the National Insurance Crime Bureau, cargo theft is now costing the industry and then by extension consumers up to $35 billion annually with a 1,500% increase in incidents since just 2021. Motor carriers, which are often family-owned and generational businesses, spend years building their reputations.
▶ 4:24:54But these sophisticated criminals are using gaps in the US DO's registration process to steal the identities pose as legitimate businesses and move freight under false pretenses. Small businesses are not equipped to fight this kind of large-scale, often state sponsored technologically driven fraud on their own.
▶ 4:25:16FMCSA systems must be modernized so the agency is better able to identify suspicious activity right from the onset, automatically flag the potential fraud, review high-risk registrations, and then promptly take action against these chameleon carriers and other bad actors before they do detrimental damage to our economy and to the business owners. My amendment is straightforward.
▶ 4:25:42It modernizes fraud detection and strengthens enforcement tools within the Federal Motor Carrier Safety registration system. Specifically, it requires the FMCSA to implement automated systems within one year that can flag suspicious commercial vehicle There are many reasons why we are here and why this amendment is needed. Sluggish and sticky bureaucracy is certainly a driving force for this need.
▶ 4:26:13But how we regulate is just as important as what we regulate. And during my time in Congress and on this committee, I have found that far too often regulatory agencies are burdened with systems and technology that are simply put too old and too slow. We see this in aviation. We see it in permitting. And we certainly see it in this space, the commercial vehicle registration system. Not utilizing the latest technology burdens the good actors and allows the bad actors to slip through the cracks.
▶ 4:26:43Utilizing an automated system to flag suspicious registration activity will free up valuable time and manpower at FMCSA to pursue fraudulent activity. Getting these fraudulent carriers off the roads and doing so quickly will ensure the carriers who do business the right way are not competing with those who are cutting corners. I thank the chairman and the ranking member for holding this mark up today and I thank them for giving me the opportunity to speak on this important need.
▶ 4:27:12I urge my colleagues to support the common sense amendment and I yield back.
▶ 4:27:17Rick, uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, we're going to support this amendment. And I understand it got a little late getting the manager's amendment, but there there was a desire to do that. Uh so I will not um uh burden the committee with the rest of my statement. We support the amendment. Urges adoption. Back.
▶ 4:27:33Does anyone else wish to be heard? See no one. I appreciate the gentleman's uh work on this. I also support the With that, I yield back. Are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 4:27:51All opposed signify by saying nay. Opinion of the chair. The eyes have it. The eyes do have it. The amendment is
▶ 4:28:07Miss Fouchy
▶ 4:28:11Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 4:28:16an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Fushi of North Carolina number 064.
▶ 4:28:25Without objection, the amendment would be considered as as read. Valerie, you're recognized.
▶ 4:28:30Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe many of my colleagues in this room can agree that we should be fighting for a more affordable and more resilient American transportation system. Part of that fight includes helping American families access electric vehicle charging networks across the nation, whether they live in a major city, a rural community, and anywhere in between.
▶ 4:28:54The purpose of the federal investments we make in these surface transportation bills is to ensure that Americans have the infrastructure they need to get where they want to go. Millions of Americans have chosen to purchase and drive electric vehicles for a myriad of reasons, ranging from personal preference, environmental reasons, or just because they grew tired of paying sky-high prices at the pump.
▶ 4:29:21During this affordability crisis, it is important that Americans have the freedom to choose more affordable transportation options should they wish to. The Trump administration has already turned a corner and provided more than $800 million in funds from the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Program to states.
▶ 4:29:42Federal policy and investment has already spurred $426 million in private charger manufacturing investment and nearly 6,000 jobs. while expanded charging access could generate
▶ 4:29:57$4 to5 million annually in public health
▶ 4:30:02My amendment would auth reauthorize what was agreed to in the bipartisan infrastructure law and would continue to fund the national electric vehicle infrastructure program for the next five years. This is about continuing the good work Congress has done on a bipartisan basis to deliver affordable transportation alternatives to the American people while boosting the domestic supply chain for charging infrastructure across the country. Thank you and I yield back.
▶ 4:30:38Does anyone else wish to be heard on the Seeing none, I recognize myself. Um, this bill doesn't continue um funding for NEVA or the charging and and fueling uh infrastructure programs. I believe that highway tax dollars are much better spent on roads and bridges that all users need instead of catering to a very small group of uh or category of vehicles. And therefore, I do oppose the amendment and urge my colleagues to vote no.
▶ 4:31:09And with that, are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. All oppose signify by saying nay. If any of the chair, the nays have it. The nays do have it. The amendment is not agreed to. Thank you, Val. Mr. Delusio.
▶ 4:31:40Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 4:31:43an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Duzio of Pennsylvania number 124.
▶ 4:31:50Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Duzio, you're
▶ 4:31:54Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, and I will offer and withdraw this amendment in light of the four corners agreement. uh and some headwinds here for this amendment. But I I do want to bring attention to the fact that I'm all about and all supportive of increasing federal funding for passing passenger rail, giving riders more flexibility, but I worry and don't want to see us subsidizing private operators without assurances that every worker performing railroad work is covered by the same labor laws, retirement system, unemployment system, collective bargaining framework.
▶ 4:32:24I don't think we should have a two-tiered rail workforce where one sees the benefits of federal law and their protections and other that doesn't. And I worry that is exactly what section 106 of this bill would do. This amendment would fix that provision by requiring any new provider to meet those railroad labor standards when they perform railroad craft work. Workers who have earned and secured those benefits have been reaping the benefit of life-saving programs for a long time now.
▶ 4:32:51I don't want to see a patchwork approach that leaves new workers behind. Uh but in light of the withdrawal, I look forward to working with the committee in the future to address this issue, Mr. Chairman, and I will yield back.
▶ 4:33:02Thanks, Chris. Appreciate it.
▶ 4:33:10Miss Pope.
▶ 4:33:12Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 4:33:16Yes, name. An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Poe of New Jersey number
▶ 4:33:25Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank the committee for including language from the writer safety act of which I am a strong supporter. I also want to thank uh Representative Desane for co-sponsoring this amendment. Our amendment would update the definition for a transit support specialist, including a more detailed description of the ex expectations and duties of this very important position.
▶ 4:33:55Representing a district relying on public transit, I know how important having more support for passengers and staff is. My amendment would ensure that transit support specialists are given specific duties that go beyond security. including monitoring transit stations, providing assistance to riders, assisting with medical emergency, and responding to mental health crisis.
▶ 4:34:24Providing public uh transit stations with medically trained, unarmed personnel would uh strengthen safety standards, reduce fair evasion, and give passengers a greater peace of mind. In an act of of good faith, I will w will I will withdraw this amendment to work on a bipartisan basis to advance this policy.
▶ 4:34:52I'd like to invite my Republican colleagues to work with me on this issue. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
▶ 4:35:00Thanks, Nelly. I appreciate it and we'd be happy to work with you.
▶ 4:35:08Miss Gillan.
▶ 4:35:13Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 4:35:17an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Gillan of New York number 081.
▶ 4:35:24Without objection, the amendment be considered as read. Laura, you're
▶ 4:35:29Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, my amendment will address the rising number of attacks on passenger and commuter rail workers by ensuring these assaults can be charged as a federal offense. In 2025, Amtrak recorded nearly 200 assaults on conductors, assistant conductors, ticket agents, customer service representatives, and other workers. In the course of their normal duties, passenger rail employees across the country continue to experience assaults.
▶ 4:35:59Under current law, any assault against a rail crew member is subject to the local jurisdiction in which the assault occur. Intercity trains can pass through and service dozens of jurisdictions, each with its own law enforcement and justice system. As a result, if an assault occurs aboard a moving train, it can be extremely difficult or impossible to prosecute offenders. For decades, it's been a federal crime to interfere with flight crews.
▶ 4:36:26My amendment will provide the same protection to our rail workers so they can do their jobs without fear and focus on running trains safely and efficiently. My district in Nassau County is serviced by the largest commuter railway in the country, the Long Island Railroads. Thousands of our hardworking railway employers, uh, railway workers, excuse me, help move nearly 300,000 New Yorkers daily. They deserve the federal protections that we grant to essential transportation workers across other industries.
▶ 4:36:56I want to thank Congressman Van Drew for co-sponsoring this amendment as well as our state standalone legislation, the Passenger Rail Crew Protection Act. and I urge all of our colleagues to join us in supporting this bipartisan effort to protect rail workers, safeguard passengers, and hold asalants accountable. Thank you and I yield back.
▶ 4:37:17Someone else wish to be heard on the Fortunately, I understand what you're you're trying to do. Um, but I have to oppose the amendment since it it establishes criminal penalties which is outside our committee's um jurisdiction. And so um with that I do have to oppose the amendment. Are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 4:37:48Opposed signify by saying nay. Any of the chair the nays have it. The nays do have it. The amendment is not agreed to. Thank you Laura. What purpose does Miss McDonald Rivet seek recognition?
▶ 4:38:13Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 4:38:15Please designate
▶ 4:38:16an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss McDonald, Rivet of Michigan, number 061.
▶ 4:38:25Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I offer this amendment because if we really want to build our roads and fix our infrastructure, we need to cut red tape. In Michigan, our roads and bridges get beaten up all year round. For many smaller rural towns, the cost of repaving roads or repairing bridges, especially is simply too big to take on alone. So projects get delayed for years. They get more expensive. And frankly, often nothing gets fixed.
▶ 4:38:54Most people in my district drive drive drive long distances to work and the potholes in traffic from closed bridges actually cost them money. What we're hearing from communities is that they need a system that actually works and a federal partner they can rely on. The fix is simple. Have more funds that go directly to local governments to make critical road and bridge repairs without taking on massive debt.
▶ 4:39:19That's why my amendment would add the Full Basics Act, a bipartisan push led by myself and Congressman Breznahan. Our bill would help local communities repair and rebuild crumbling infrastructure, expand funding for bridge repairs, make lo make travel safer for our rural communities, and ensure local governments can better access federal funds for their infrastructure projects.
▶ 4:39:43I am incredibly proud of the bipartisan support for the basics act with significant parts of our legislation incorporated into the Build America 250 act. One of the most important would flash through red tape and provide billions per year in new funding to repair bridges nationwide. A quarter of which is set aside specifically for locallyowned bridges.
▶ 4:40:04Another provision pulled back pulled from our basics act would boost the surface transportation block grant program with flexible funding to benefit our state and counties and continue the safe streets for all program to prevent roadway fatalities. The significant portion of the basics act included in the broader legislation will make a world of difference for communities facing the choice between crumbling infrastructure or massive debt.
▶ 4:40:31Seeing the broad support included from committed leadership to include key provisions of the basics act in this legislation, I plan to withdraw this amendment as we work together to continue supporting for support for our communities throughout this Congress, including support for rural transportation planning organizations. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
▶ 4:40:51Thank you, Kristen. I appreciate it.
▶ 4:40:55Oh, you want to uh go ahead.
▶ 4:40:58Thank you. Um, this amendment simply emphasizes the need for one of my top priorities, this Congress, the Basics Act. I want to recognize my partner on this bipartisan common sense piece of legislation, uh, Representative McDonald Rivet, along with local leaders, uh, mayors, specifically Mayor Mike Lombardo of the city of Pittston, who first brought this to us, emergency responders and community members across northeastern Pennsylvania who helped shape and advocate for this effort.
▶ 4:41:24This legislation was driven by the needs of our communities and the people of northeastern Pennsylvania deserve to see those priorities delivered. When the Nandy Coke bridge closed, emergency response time nearly doubled. The closure of the Water Street Bridge connecting Pittson and West Pittsson has forced all traffic onto the Fort Jenkins Bridge despite its own serious structural needs. These are major bridges, but the same story is playing out on smaller bridges and communities throughout our district.
▶ 4:41:49The basics act is about getting federal dollars directly to local communities and putting local leaders in control of the infrastructure in their own backyards. I'm proud to see a bill America 250 reflects a lot of those values, especially the local bridge set aside. Combined with this amendment to ensure fair distribution throughout the states, these investments will finally reach communities that have been waiting in line for years. That is a real win and it deserves recognition, but there's still a lot more work ahead.
▶ 4:42:15I look forward to continuing to work on this committee to ensure the final passage has strong local control and delivers the biggest wins possible for our communities. I yield
▶ 4:42:29Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to speak in support of Representatives McDonald Rivet and Brnan's amendment. I think it is it is a common sense bipartisan solution to support local governments. The amendment would add additional resources for local communities to repair and build roads and bridges, expand funding for bridge repairs, prioritize safety for local and rural communities, and ensure local governments can better access federal funds for their infrastructure projects that were left
▶ 4:43:00out. This would help communities in my district as well, where people rely on locally owned roads and bridges every day to get to work, school, healthcare, and local businesses. Having come from local government, I can tell you that these local roads networks also support freight corridors and supply chains that move goods across communities and states. Our transportation infrastructure is a system where Congress's investments should make sure to invest in the whole system.
▶ 4:43:30That's why the surface transportation block grant program is the workhorse of the formula programs and why states transfer funding into this program and why locals and regional government support it. Increasingly like we saw in representatives McDonald Rivet and Breahan's bill HR7437 the basics act would go a long way in making sure the whole transportation system is supported.
▶ 4:43:55Local governments own 43% of the federal aid highway network and 50% of bridges and STBG is how they get funding to keep up with it. Locally owned roads currently 34% of the vehicle miles traveled in the United States. We should all keep working together to ensure we support our full transportation network and have a better drive for everyone. I commend my colleagues for their hard work and wanted to add my voice in support of their amendment. Mr.
▶ 4:44:25Chairman, I yield
▶ 4:44:28Christian, you still want it withdrawn.
▶ 4:44:30Mr. Chair, I'd like to withdraw my
▶ 4:44:32Without objection, so ordered. Thank you very much.
▶ 4:44:38Mr. Friedman,
▶ 4:44:40I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 4:44:42an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Freriedman of California number 043. Without objection, the amendment will be considered as red. Mr. Freeman, you're recognized.
▶ 4:44:53Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. My amendment restores formula funding for the Protect program, which allows us to make our communities safer from natural disasters like fire. And as you all know, California is no stranger to natural disasters of many forms. I don't need to remind the committee of the devastation we saw out of Los Angeles in the aftermath of the January 2025 wildfire fires. California will have received $631 million in protect formula funds over fiscal years 22 through 26.
▶ 4:45:22But every state faces natural disasters and every community deserves funding to manage that everinccreasing risk. Natural disasters don't discriminate based on party or congressional borders. We have a responsibility to ensure that every American is equipped to handle major disasters when they arise. Um, I urge my colleagues to be thoughtful in this manner and I yield back.
▶ 4:45:50Mr. Huffman is recognized.
▶ 4:45:52Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am proud to co-sponsor this amendment with Representative Freriedman to restore the formula funding for the protect program. This is the kind of program we should be strengthening, not gutting. The reality is that climate resilience is no longer some abstract future challenge for transportation policy. Any serious transportation planner will tell you it is here right now.
▶ 4:46:17Communities all over the country are dealing with roads, highways, and critical infrastructure that are literally failing under extreme weather, flooding, erosion, sea level rise, wildfire, landslides, sometimes even a king tide in the middle of a sunny day in lowlying areas. In my district, we're living with it every day. Last chance grade in Delnor County, a critical stretch of Highway 101, is slowly sliding into the Pacific Ocean. This is not just another road project.
▶ 4:46:46It is the only reliable connection for entire communities on the North Coast. And when that corridor fails, people lose access to emergency services, schools, healthcare, jobs, and commerce. Further south, Highway 37 in the North Bay faces chronic flooding and sea level rise that threatens one of the region's most important transportation corridors.
▶ 4:47:07Addressing this challenge requires a long-term climate resilient infrastructure solution, including raising and redesigning portions of the highway, restoring surrounding wetlands to provide natural flood protection, and modernizing the corridor to withstand future sea level rise and extreme weather events. These are exactly the kind of projects the protect program was designed to help address large-scale resilience investments that states and local communities simply cannot tackle alone.
▶ 4:47:37The formula component of protect is especially important because it gives states predictable funding they can actually plan around. Eliminating that formula funding undermines long-term resilience planning at exactly the moment when we should be accelerating it. So, let's be honest. Every dollar we fail to invest in resilience now becomes a much larger disaster recovery bill later on. We've already seen the cost of waiting until infrastructure collapses before acting.
▶ 4:48:04The protect program recognizes that resilient infrastructure is not optional anymore. It's a core transportation infrastructure priority. So I strongly support Representative Freriedman on this amendment. Uh and I yield back. Miss Freriedman, I understand you may want to withdraw your amendment. Is that
▶ 4:48:27Yes. I hope that every member of this community is
▶ 4:48:33I'm going to yield to Mr. Molton.
▶ 4:48:36Sorry, Mr. Chairman. Just
▶ 4:48:38just wanted to comment on this as well. You know, my my home state of Massachusetts is on the front lines of climate change. From Salsbury to Provincetown, storms surge, flooding regularly put our communities at risk, often making roads impossible for residents and emergency responders. And I want to just underscore that point. When roads flood, it's not just a It's not just a cost. It's a threat to public safety. The science is clear.
▶ 4:49:07Climate change is here, and the consequences of inaction are accelerating. Our local communities are often bearing the brunt of that inaction. The protect program and is an example of exactly what Congress should be doing to support our cities and towns back home. This amendment does not it strengthens the program. It does not reduce the funding needed to keep our roads open. I work hard every year to secure money for Massachusetts to make sure our physical and natural infrastructure is stronger.
▶ 4:49:37Protect grants are a crucial source of funding that my communities are waiting on and I urge us to figure out how to deliver that support. Thank you. Go back.
▶ 4:49:47Any other members seek to be recognized on this amendment? Seeing none, uh I understand that you want to withdraw the amendment. Is that
▶ 4:49:56Yeah. It's my hope that every member of this committee is willing to work with us to make sure that we support our communities. And with that, I will withdraw the amendment.
▶ 4:50:05For what purpose does Mr. figures seek
▶ 4:50:08I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 4:50:10The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 4:50:13An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Figures of Alabama number
▶ 4:50:21Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Figures is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 4:50:27Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh bridges along the Gulf Coast continue to face repeated stress from hurricanes and flooding and storm surges. And my amendment ensures that the financial assistance made available under the highway infrastructure program uh can prioritize projects that will strengthen that resilience, improve safety, and most importantly perhaps enhance evacuation capacity uh across and along the Gulf Coast corridors.
▶ 4:50:50Uh this amendment also clarifies that projects located in or serving coastal communities involving uh projects such as bridge lighting, drainage improvement, storm hardening, and intelligent transportation systems are eligible bridge projects. Uh because the Build America 250 act authorizes the largest investment in America's bridges. I want to ensure that practical safety and resilient improvements including uh those such projects are eligible for financial assistance. Coastal communities like Mobile, Alabama continue to face disproportionate infrastructure risk.
▶ 4:51:20yet they remain critical to our supply chains, disaster response capabilities, and national security interests. This amendment helps ensure that those coastal communities like mine are not continuing to be left behind and expands eligibility. Uh with that, I'll yield. Any other members wish to be recognized on this amendment? Seeing none, I thank Mr. Figures. I recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the amendment.
▶ 4:51:49While I appreciate the gentleman's attention to bridges in his region of the of the country, this program is about providing all states with the resources necessary to address their bridge needs, and I fear this amendment is overly prescriptive. For that reason, I oppose the amendment. Are there any further speakers on the Seeing none, are there amendments to the Seeing none, the question is on the amendment.
▶ 4:52:19All those in favor signify by saying I. All those oppose opposed signify by saying nay. The naysay have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 4:52:42Can we now Amendment.
▶ 4:52:46Can we do that? Is it okay? Now,
▶ 4:52:51for what purpose does Mr. Johnson seek
▶ 4:52:53I have an amendment at the desk, sir.
▶ 4:52:55The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 4:52:58An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Johnson of South Dakota number 077.
▶ 4:53:06Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Johnson is recognized for up to five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 4:53:12Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It has been 44 years since Congress updated its gross vehicle weight limits. 44 years. A lot has happened since 1982, and I think it's high time for Congress to uh revisit that standard. Uh the amendment before you is a pretty simple one. It just allows those gross vehicle weights to be increased to 91,000 lbs, a modest increase if you add a sixth axle.
▶ 4:53:39Now, that sixth axle is sort of the straw that stirs the whole drink that makes sure we do this in an effective, cost-effective, and safe way. Now, I want to be clear, this would only apply to federal infrastructure and it would only apply to those states that want to voluntarily opt in. Nobody would be made to do anything. As we have seen time and time again, our supply chains are really really sus susceptible to strain and to disruption.
▶ 4:54:10And when they're strained, when they're disrupted, that place places real costs on the system. Those are real costs that fall on real families. And so rather than just continuing to optimize these supply chains for efficiency, efficiency, efficiency, we've got an opportunity here to add some resilience and to add some capacity. That way, our supply chains are not so vulnerable. When you're looking at a pilot program, this gives us an opportunity to gain more data.
▶ 4:54:38It gives us an opportunity to work with states where this is a good fit. I suspect most of my colleagues know there are already 40 states that allow for more than 80,000 uh pounds at uh at the different times on nonfederal infrastructure. This gives those ina states an opportunity to voluntarily better sync their network with the federal network.
▶ 4:55:01For those of you that care about dairy, as I do, an economic study estimated that modernized truck weights could save cheese, butter, and ice cream manufacturers truck trips annually. Just for that one industry, that's $200 million. For those of you who care about beef as I do, this policy would enable livestock haulers to move the same number of cattle with four trucks instead of five.
▶ 4:55:30That's going to be a real quality of life improvement for those hollers and again more efficiency, lower prices for people throughout the supply chain. For those of you who like to see things built in your districts, as I do, building material companies will be able to increase the efficiency of their truck trips by 20%. That's more crushed stone, cement, readymix concrete, hot mix asphalt and pipe getting delivered to job sites faster.
▶ 4:55:58There are uh some concerns that have been raised I think by and large by well intentioned people. So let's just uh deal with those a little bit for those concerned about safety. The vehicles in the pilot program will have a sixth axle. That means more braking power. Uh the US DOT study found that 91,000 lb six act axle vehicles will break one foot shorter more quickly uh than uh the standard 80,000 load.
▶ 4:56:27For those concerned about road wear and tear, the sixth axle has been proven in studies to reduce road wear and tear. The Minnesota DOT found that the addition of the six axle created a 37% reduction in road wear and an overall reduction in the number of trips. Of course, fewer trips, less wear and tear.
▶ 4:56:47For those who are concerned about interotal shift, US DOT's comprehensive truck size and weight study said there would be only a modest shift of less than 1/ half of 1%. And then finally, for those of you who are concerned about energy emissions, this pilot would result in 21,400 fewer metric tons of carbon dioxide per year per truck.
▶ 4:57:13Now, if you don't believe any of those studies or if you think maybe the data is uh too aged, boy, do I have good news for you. This pilot program will give us realworld data to be able to test out whether or not this is the best way to expand capacity uh within our supply chain. And so, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank so many members on both sides of the aisle who have worked with us to try to get this wording right.
▶ 4:57:41This pilot parag program allows willing states to be able to better utilize their federal and to have an effective and safe way to relieve the very real constraints and the very real strains within our supply chains. And with that, I would yield
▶ 4:58:01Mr. Carveral.
▶ 4:58:04Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am speaking out in opposition to the amendment. This would allow for a 91,000 lb truck pilot program. It pushes heavier trucks onto our roads and bridges without ensuring our infrastructure is ready to handle the added stress.
▶ 4:58:23I have heard clearly from safety advocates and law enforcement law enforcement in my district that increasingly increasing truck weight limits raises serious concerns. They have shared with me the risks they pose on our roads and other users. From experience, they know the safety hazard. Our local governments already own a significant share of the federal aid highway system, and nearly half of all bridges.
▶ 4:58:52Many of these structures are aging and already under strain. Increasing truck weights only accelerate wear and tear, raises maintenance costs, and shifts the burden onto taxpayers and local communities. And this isn't just about roads and bridges. It's about safety. Heavier trucks mean longer stopping distances, more severe crash impacts, and greater risk for passenger vehicles sharing the road.
▶ 4:59:19For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to oppose these amendments. Thank you. I yield back.
▶ 4:59:25Mr. Perry.
▶ 4:59:27Thank you, Mr. chairman, and I certainly thank the um the maker of the amendment, the next governor of South Dakota, and I agree with him on this issue. Um my friend uh Mr. Carbajal said that it's going to make it less safe, but the gentleman from South Dakota just told you how it's going to be more safe. Said that there's going to be more wear and tear on the roads, but the gentleman from South Dakota just told you how there's going to be less wear and tear on the roads.
▶ 4:59:55other axle, that other set of wheels and tires, that other set of brakes makes a profound difference. Ladies and gentlemen, it's time to be in the 21st century. You got trucks that cube out before they wait out. I mean, it's just inefficient. It's just and it's and and quite honestly, it's completely irrational and unnecessary. Not to mention the fact that this is simply about freedom of choice.
▶ 5:00:23As the gentleman from South Dakota said, if your state doesn't want to do it, well, God bless them, don't do it. But if you want to get into the 21st century and help the people that are paying the taxes, that are driving on the road, that want this stuff delivered as efficiently, effectively, and and with cost respect efficiently as possible, then by all means, choose And if you don't like that the states that that don't want to
▶ 5:00:53recognize your freedom to choose, then move to Mr. Johnson state, I guess. But shouldn't it be the federal government's position to allow the states to decide if they want to do this? I I can't imagine a real actual good reason to vote no on this amendment. I can't I mean, I know the claims are being made, but let's face it, they're specious. They're facious.
▶ 5:01:18I get the politics of it, but the facts are irrefutable and indisputable, and I would urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield.
▶ 5:01:27Mr. Johnson. Thank you, uh, Mr. Chair. This is a classic, uh, camel with the nose in the tent, uh, situation. Uh, you let that nose in, it's going to, uh, end up being a whole camel that's in there. Uh, we're in an interstate commerce situation here.
▶ 5:01:47You start with one state, allow that state to u allow these 91,000 pound missiles uh onto the highways and then that it will be unstoppable one missile uh from one state to the other. But I rise in opposition to the amendment because of serious safety concerns that have been shown not only from studies, but from firsthand real world experiences from law enforcement and truck drivers.
▶ 5:02:17Who knows better than these two crews? Almost certainly nobody casting a vote today. Let me mention a few facts that make clear why a so-called pilot project, one that waits to count the crashes and fatalities, is the wrong approach. Fact: Heavier trucks have higher crash rates.
▶ 5:02:40In Washington state, a 91,000 lb truck was 47% more likely to be involved in a crash than an 80,000lb truck. Fact, heavier trucks tend to have a higher center of gravity because the additional weight is often often stacked vertically. Raising the center of gravity increases the risk of rollovers.
▶ 5:03:07Fact, more weight means more strain on critical safety components. A federal study found that trucks over 80,000 pounds had higher out of service rates than 18% more brake and 18% more brake violations.
▶ 5:03:25Fact, a study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that trucks with any out of service violations are 362% more likely to be involved in a crash. Supporters of this amendment point to a 1- ft difference in stopping distance, but crash severity is driven by mass and speed.
▶ 5:03:52When the weight goes up, the force of a crash goes up and so does the likelihood of serious injury or death. If a one-ft stopping difference made these trucks safer, we wouldn't see higher crash rates, higher violation rates, higher rollover rates, or higher crash severity. Mr. Chairman's facts matter.
▶ 5:04:16Using the traveling public as test subjects is not how we determine whether heavier tracks, heavier trucks are more dangerous. One death means this experiment is a failure, but it will be too late for that person and his or her family. So, I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this amendment. And with that, I yield back.
▶ 5:04:42Mr. Burles.
▶ 5:04:46Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the sponsor of this amendment. Look folks, we're experiencing high inflation and there's very few things that we can do about that. This is one of them. This is the one thing that this committee can do to address the rising costs of everything that you and I buy that goes on the shelves. Everything has to be trucked in and everything has weight.
▶ 5:05:15this is the one thing that we can do to to potent have a small impact um on on reducing the cost of the goods and the services that people are having to buy. And um and and so and I've heard some of the arguments against this.
▶ 5:05:30One one of the most economically ignorant argument I've heard is when people say, "Oh, well this will this will reduce the the need for truckers." let me Milton Freriedman had a famous uh story. The the famous economist, he was traveling in Asia and he was traveling in I think it was it was it's reported that it was in China at the time.
▶ 5:05:55And at that time that he was traveling, they wanted to show him a job, a works project, a construction project where they were building roads. And they took him out there and all he saw was workers laboring with shovels to work on the roads.
▶ 5:06:09and he asked them, "Aren't you aware of any kind of modern machinery like tractors or bulldozers or earth movers?" And they responded by saying, "Well, this is a jobs program and using machines would put people out of work and reduce employment." To which Milton Freedmer replied, "Oh, if that's your goal, why don't you take away the shovels and give them spoons?" And see, there is the there's the rub.
▶ 5:06:34Are we really gonna be that ignorant to just say let's let's keep ourselves limited so that we can pay the extra cost just so we can say that we're going to make people work. If anything, let's try to do something that reduces the burden on every American, reduces the cost of the goods that every American buys. A cost a vote for this is a vote to reduce inflationary costs.
▶ 5:06:59and I thank the gentleman for offering it and I I greatly will support him and I yield
▶ 5:07:05Mr. Chairman, Mr. Molton, Mr. Chairman, I'd ask to be recognized to enter into the record um by way of unanimous consent a letter from DEF County, Georgia in opposition to this amendment.
▶ 5:07:18Without objection, Mr. Bolton, you're
▶ 5:07:22I appreciate the citation of Milton Freeman. You know, Milton Freeman was an economist. Economists believe not just in costs but in benefits. They do believe a cost benefit analysis, right? Well, let's talk about the costs here. Americans killed by large trucks in Americans who can't come home to see their kids or kids who can't come home to see their parents.
▶ 5:07:51All thanks to large trucks. We're not going to solve that. by stopping a large truck a foot shorter. What it points out is that the fundamental problem here is truck safety across America. We had this big debate about rail safety. Zero deaths over 10 years from hazmat on rail. And yet every year over 5,000 Americans get killed.
▶ 5:08:19We should be doing something to reduce that cost before we just raise truck weights. And what are raised trucks weights going to cost? Yes, they are more likely to flip over as my colleague pointed out because of a higher center of gravity. They are going to give more wear and tear to our bridges. In fact, the bill increases the bridge formula project funding from 5.5 to 9 billion per year, including a 25% set aside for locally owned bridges.
▶ 5:08:49Like, why are we even bothering with that? I know
▶ 5:08:51if we're just going to eliminate it with increasing truck weights. My colleague Mr. Perry talked about why this why on earth should this be a federal what not why on earth should this be a federal standard if it's adequately managed by the states. I mean that's like saying that we shouldn't have had an interstate highway system. Just have the states figure it out. This is interstate commerce. So it matters to have standards.
▶ 5:09:19And the point is that the current standards are inadequate. We don't improve safety for Americans. We don't improve the dismal state of our roads and bridges by increasing truck waste. It's the exact opposite of what we should be doing. And if we were serious about costbenefit analyses, we're serious about listening to people like Milton Freeman, then that's what we'd be doing. Mr.
▶ 5:09:47Chairman, I yield Mr. Collins.
▶ 5:09:51Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd uh I'd like to address a couple of the issues that we're talking about here. Number one, on stopping distance. I don't know if anybody realizes or not, but we have ABS now. That's anti-lock brake systems out there. And we also have disc brakes which significantly reduce the stopping distance of large trucks. And uh as someone who has those trucks out there, I can attest that that is a true fact.
▶ 5:10:18It is a significant difference in the stopping distance. Also, when when you uh when you raise the truck limits and you talk about all these trucks being out there, you reduce the number of trucks on the road. Uh it doesn't take any less distance to stop one at 91 as it does at 80. But what you did is you removed at least one truck for every eight loads that are being or 10 loads that are being carried out there.
▶ 5:10:48So there's less trucks on the load road to begin with uh when you go to this. And uh the third thing is I would say that for those that are talking about being topheavy and tipping over and stuff like that, you know, as somebody that has been running road uh stability or ant the anti-rollover devices, they've been out there for 15 years now.
▶ 5:11:08You don't see any jack knives and you don't hardly see any rollovers anymore because of the technology that is out there with this equipment that stops individual brakes one at a time to keep the truck straight and keep it upright. So, you know, we we are advancing in technology. Trucks are safe. Uh the majority of the accidents that are caused out there not by the tractor trailers, it is caused by the four-wheelers out there. So, with that, Mr. Mr. Chairman, I encourage a yes vote and I yield back.
▶ 5:11:36Any other members wish to speak on the amendment? Seeing none, I recognize myself for five up to five minutes to speak on the amendment. I'd like to thank the gentleman, Mr. Johnson, for offering this amendment. The amendment would establish a pilot program to allow states to increase the weight limit on federal interstates within their state up to 91,000 lbs for six axle vehicles. This lightweight variance would improve freight efficiency and support the supply chain.
▶ 5:12:05This is something I know the agriculture industry and others have sought for a long time. I encourage you to uh support the amendment. Are there any further speakers on the amendment one last time? Seeing none, are there any amendments to the Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. I.
▶ 5:12:28All those opposed signify by saying nay.
▶ 5:12:32The eyes have it. Mr. Chair ask for a record vote.
▶ 5:12:37The gentleman requests a vote on the amendment. As previously announced, pursuant to committee rule 6F, further proceedings on the question are As a notice to uh committee members, after this next amendment, we will go into our first round of votes on all those amendments that had been all those votes that that had been uh suspended. For what purpose does Mr.
▶ 5:13:03Owens seek The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 5:13:10An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Owens of Utah number 047.
▶ 5:13:17Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Owens is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 5:13:23Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to first of all thank uh Chairman Graves and ranking member Larson for all the hard work they put into leading up to this day's uh markup. It's been a real pleasure working aside both of you uh through this process. This amendment is especially important to fast growing states like Utah and communities across the west that are building transportation systems for the future not just for today. Current CIG evaluation metrics rely heavily on existing population density and current ridership levels. That is a disadvantage.
▶ 5:13:53Uh this this can disadvantage rapidly growing regions like sallay city and the Wasach Front where population growth is accelerating and a major transit investments are being planned years ahead. In Utah, we already have seen the impact of this growth. Projects like the frontr runner expansion are critical not only for today's mobility but also as we prepare to host the 2034 Winter Olympics. We cannot wait until congestion becomes unman unmanageable before investing in the infrastructure.
▶ 5:14:24This amendment simply gives project managers and sponsors FTA additional flexibility to consider population growth trends and transit oriented development planning alongside traditional ridership matrix when evaluating evaluating uh projects. This does not disadvantage long established transit systems. It simply ensures that the fast growing regions across the country, especially in the west, are evaluated more fairly and can better compete for federal transit investments.
▶ 5:14:53I'm I also appreciate the bipartisan collaboration on this issue. Uh I'd especially like to thank my colleagues from Utah, my colleague from Utah, uh Congressman Mike Kennedy, and across the aisle, my fellow Westerners, Congresswoman Titus and Congressman Stanton, for co-sponsoring this amendment. It's been a pleasure working with members on both sides of the aisle who understand the unique transportation challenges and growth pressures facing our communities.
▶ 5:15:19I appreciate the committee staff working with our office on this language and urge uh support for this amendment. Thank you and I yield
▶ 5:15:27Any other members wish to be recognized on the amendment? Mr. Larson.
▶ 5:15:31Yeah, I think Mr. Chair support this amendment uh that represent Owens introduced. a amends the CIG program to allow for different writership forecasting methods, allowing for forecasts that account for population density, growth rate, and development planning activities. The underlying bill itself as well makes a number of reforms to expedite the CIG review process and break ground on transit projects more quickly. This amendment is a complement to those policies and I urge its adoption. With that, yield back.
▶ 5:16:00Gentlemen yields back. Anybody else wish to speak on the amendment? Seeing none, I recom recognize myself uh to speak on the amendment. Uh the chairman supports the amendment and encourages his colleagues on the committee to support it as well. Are there any further speakers on the Seeing none, are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 5:16:30All those opposed signify by saying nay. The eyes have it and the amendment is agreed to. Okay. So, the committee will briefly, let me underscore briefly, recess to allow members to return or to get here in this particular case uh for our first vote series.
▶ 5:16:54Thank you, M.
▶ 5:24:57We want everyone here.
▶ 5:25:00Agreed. We got So there's some people on the floor.
▶ 5:25:07We're going to call the committee back to order. Instead of recessing while we wait for members, we're going to try to roll through another amendment or two. Next amendment.
▶ 5:25:21Mr. Webster.
▶ 5:25:23I'm right here.
▶ 5:25:24Um, you got an amendment.
▶ 5:25:26Thank you, Chairman.
▶ 5:25:29So, the amendment
▶ 5:25:31at the desk designate
▶ 5:25:34an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Webster of Florida number 039.
▶ 5:25:41Without objection, the amendment be considered as read. Mr. Webster, you Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, this amendment would strike section 204 and replace it with language establishing a privately capitalized federal infrastructure bank. That means uh none of the money would come from the federal government or from the state government or from the local government. It's all privately financed.
▶ 5:26:11The goal would be to provide a framework that enhances financing program for major infrastructure projects um while ensuring working uh uh the oversight and safeguards are against uh any foreign adversary we have. Other than that it provides money that we won't have unless we establish this.
▶ 5:26:36So that means if we have uh $500 trillion dollars, uh there's not going to be any more unless somebody's going to raise taxes, and that's probably not going to happen. Or we get the uh our own $500 trillion payable to not the government, not the state government, not the federal government, not the local government. So, you'll back my time,
▶ 5:27:09Mr. Larson.
▶ 5:27:10Uh, thank you, Mr. First. I just want to clarify. I know we called y'all back for votes. We're just waiting for a few folks to come back on the floor. So, there's a everyone so there's a full compliment here and that's just kind of what we're kind of sucking it in that place. So, um, with regards to Webster, uh, and as well the Carbajal amendment, uh, certainly, um, it'd be great to be able to support these, but given the terms of the big four agreement, uh, I will have to oppose it, but the bipartisan collaboration between Mr. Webster, Mr. Carval is very important.
▶ 5:27:39I have brought this legislation uh, to the four here. Uh and I know getting more opportunities to finance surface transportation projects has been a priority for both members and I share their support for ensuring there as many tools as possible for transportation investment as I know members uh other members do. This support helps explain why there's we have the popularity of the DOT financing programs like TIFIA RIFF and WIFIA and I do understand as well there's some jurisdictional concerns committee on financial services with this provision.
▶ 5:28:09So for that reason I'll oppose the amendment at this time. I bet back.
▶ 5:28:20Thank you Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you and ranking member Larson for your vision in putting together today's build America 2050 surface reauthorization. This bill is an important step towards rebuilding our roads and bridges to get a state to a state of good repair. The amendment that Representative Webster and I are proposing, this bipartisan amendment today, would further those investments authorized in today's bill by enacting an infrastructure bank. Mr.
▶ 5:28:49Chairman, an infrastructure bank is a common sense bipartisan solution to help leverage private dollars, not taxpayer dollars, private dollars, and provide local governments with another financing tool for needed infrastructure projects at little to no cost to the federal government. This can be a win-win for the American people and taxpayers alike.
▶ 5:29:11As the demand for infrastructure investments continues to grow faster than our ability to meet it through our current investments, we need tools that expand our capacity. I I understand you have concerns, including this legislation and today's markup. I hope that we can continue to work through this proposal to get something across the finish line. I want to thank Representative Webster for his leadership and hard work on this. Thank you and I yield back.
▶ 5:29:36Does anyone else wish to be heard? Seeing none, I'm gonna have to oppose it, but I want to work with you.
▶ 5:29:44I'm moving.
▶ 5:29:44So, I will withdraw it if I get some uh
▶ 5:29:48commitments that you're going to work with me on it.
▶ 5:29:50And work with uh Representative
▶ 5:29:54We'll we'll go from there.
▶ 5:29:56You can count on it, Daniel.
▶ 5:29:57Okay. Thank you. You'll back and uh withdraw the
▶ 5:30:03Without objection. So ordered. Mr. Madler
▶ 5:30:37Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 5:30:41I have an amendment to this designate
▶ 5:30:44an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Nadler of New York number 043.
▶ 5:30:52That objection amendment be considered as read. Jerry, you got five minutes.
▶ 5:30:55Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this amendment restores and strengthens the low or no emission bus grant program so transit agencies can replace aging diesel buses with cleaner, more reliable vehicles while supporting American manufacturing. Federal investments in low and zero emission buses have already generated more than $380 million in bus manufacturing investment and supported at least 2,000 jobs.
▶ 5:31:21But demand far exceeds available funding with transit agencies requesting roughly six times more than current federal programs can provide. For New York City, this is urgent. The MTA operates a 5800 bus fleet, the largest in North America, and plans to transition the entire fleet to zero emission buses by 2040. It also expects all new bus deliveries to be zero emission beginning in 2029.
▶ 5:31:51That transition will require sustained federal support. New York's buses serve every burrow and are especially critical in communities where subway access is limited and residents rely on buses to reach work, school, healthcare, and essential services. But this is not just about New York. Communities across the country are trying to modernize their bus fleets, reduce diesel pollution, lower operating costs, and provide more reliable service.
▶ 5:32:20Whether in a dense urban system, a small city, or a rural transit network, cleaner buses mean cleaner air, stronger domestic manufacturing, and better transportation options for riders, and better health for residents. This amendment would help accelerate clean bus deployment deployment in New York City and nationwide, especially in communities that have endured decades of diesel pollution, traffic congestion, and poor air quality.
▶ 5:32:48This is a straightforward investment in riders, environmental justice, American jobs, and the transit systems millions of people rely on every day. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and restore this vital program. I yield I recognize myself uh to speak on the amendment.
▶ 5:33:09The amendment establishes a u a new competitive grant program solely for uh for green buses and in doing that it diverts money away from u uh from um other formula programs and for that reason I have to I have to oppose Rick.
▶ 5:33:27Um thank you Mr. Chair. Uh so we had a loan no program as part of the uh BIL uh it was very successful but just would note for members during negotiations we weren't able to keep it however we kept the eligibility for transit agencies to uh use their funds for uh low and no emission uh bus grants. So it's the program doesn't exist in this bill. The function and the eligibility continues to exist.
▶ 5:33:56Uh that's the best we can get uh to date and I just wanted to remind members of that that I yield back.
▶ 5:34:07uh on the amendment.
▶ 5:34:11Go ahead.
▶ 5:34:12I don't understand the opposition here.
▶ 5:34:15I don't get it. We got a problem with low emission buses and we don't want to have a program. Is that it? The biggest thing is just it diverts money away from
▶ 5:34:25Oh, it takes money away from authority,
▶ 5:34:28from diesel buses. There are companies in California that are manufacturing, battery powered buses, hydrogen powered buses, and we don't want to go that way. We want diesel. Is that what I'm understanding here? I don't get it. yield back.
▶ 5:34:53Does anyone else wish to be heard? Seeing no one, are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 5:35:08All oppose signify by saying nay. Any of the chair, the naysay have it. Um the nays do have it. The amendment is not agreed to. Thanks, chair. Mr. Perry. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. Desonate an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Perry of Pennsylvania number 223.
▶ 5:35:38Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Perry
▶ 5:35:42Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment would prohibit recipients of federal transit funding from instituting a universal fair free policy that it would allow all users of public transportation service provided by or on behalf of such recipient from using such service without paying a fair. Transit is by far the most subsidized form of transportation. More than 80% of expenditures are paid by subsidies.
▶ 5:36:09So, it's absolutely critical to ensure that transit agencies seek to recover additional fairbox revenue rather than eliminate the fairbox altogether. Transit agencies claim universal fair-free policies are necessary to attract additional ridership. But there's actually little evidence to support these claims. In fact, it likely has the opposite effect. Surveys show that transit riders place a much higher value on service, including on-time performance, service frequency, speed, etc.
▶ 5:36:39than on price. This is true of transit dependent riders as it is of choice riders. Instead of eliminating fairs, reducing operating revenues that leads to less effective and reliable service, reducing the appeal of transit to these choice riders.
▶ 5:36:56Additionally, real world examples of universal fair-free policies have been associated with spikes in vandalism, vagrancy, and crime aboard the transit vehicles themselves, increasing security cost, and further deterring ridership because no one wants to get on a transit vehicle where the criminals are hanging out and sleeping and waiting to prey on you because it doesn't cost them anything to be there.
▶ 5:37:20With the mayor overseeing the nation's largest transit largest transit system demanding free buses, this is a vital taxpayer protection tool that we must implement now. Everything can't be free. I urge adoption and I yield the
▶ 5:37:36Right. Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. I oppose the Perry amendment. Um I do not focus on what the mayor of the largest city in the country is doing. I focus on what Island County Transit is doing. Island County Trans Island County Transit in my district um a very small rural transit agency has been operating universal free a fair free transit service since its inception in the 1980s. It doesn't have a security problem. It doesn't have a vacancy problem.
▶ 5:38:03Um Island Transit receives approximately 70% of its operating revenue from a voter approved locally collected sales tax. That's how they do it. Under that provision, Island Transit and other transit agencies will be forced to assume the cost of collecting affairs, which they have already looked like looked at in the past and found it is it just the the cost of doing it in their in their model doesn't justify doing it. It upended its operations for no good reason.
▶ 5:38:29So, let's not dictate this uh from Congress about what Island Transit should do or any other transit agency. Um there are other problems that transit agencies have. We should resolve those. This isn't the one. Uh, so I oppose this amendment and ask others to oppose it.
▶ 5:38:42Mr. Chairman,
▶ 5:38:46Mr. Chairman, this amendment would punish cities like New York for even considering bold policies to make transit more affordable, accessible, and New York City depends on the largest transit system in the United States, which serves as essential infrastructure for millions of residents each day. For many riders, the cost of the fair is not a small inconvenience. It's a real barrier.
▶ 5:39:10Instead of helping transit agencies meet the affordability crisis facing working families, this amendment would impose a blanket federal prohibition on universal fair-free transit policies. That is the wrong approach. Decisions about fair policy should be made by state and local leaders who understand their writers, their budgets, and their transportation systems, not dictated from Washington through a one-sizefits-all restriction. This amendment is especially harmful for New York City.
▶ 5:39:40The MTA receives federal transit funding and this language could block future efforts to make buses or other services fair free even if New York identifies a sustainable funding source to replace fair revenue. It could also chill innovation and prevent the expansion of successful pilot programs designed to speed up service, reduce boarding delays, and make transit easier to use. Let's be clear.
▶ 5:40:07No one is saying transit agencies should eliminate fairs without a responsible funding plan. Local governments already have to balance their budgets and make difficult decisions about operations, service, and revenue. What this amendment does is take a policy tool off the table entirely. At a time when Americans are facing rising costs, Congress should be expanding access to public transportation, not restricting it.
▶ 5:40:32It re it reduces congestion, connects people to opportunity, supports the regional economy, and gives working families a more affordable alternative to driving. This amendment would make it harder for cities to lower costs for riders and improve mobility. It is anti-rder, and deeply harmful to New York City, and as the ranking member said, deeply harmful to other areas. I urge my colleagues to oppose it.
▶ 5:41:01Does anyone else wish to be heard?
▶ 5:41:05Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm opposed to this amendment, but I want to specifically speak on a claim that Mr. Perry made suggesting that transit is the most subsidized form of That's if you just look at fairs. But of course, there are a lot of other costs to transportation.
▶ 5:41:25The highway trust fund alone has received half a trillion between a quarter and a half a trillion dollars of general fund transfers just to keep it solvent since 2008. There's a tremendous cost to congestion on our highways that's reduced by transit. There's an enormous cost to accidents because tens of thousands of Americans are killed on our high highways every year.
▶ 5:41:50A mere handful in transit accidents in the last two There's a cost to emergency response. We never think about the cost of highway travel in terms of the police, the fire service, the emergency response services that have to be paid for by taxpayers because so many people get killed on our highways. I know Republicans are immune to the costs of pollution, but the people that you represent are not. That's another cost as well.
▶ 5:42:20There are costs to congestion to simply the economic cost of being stuck in traffic. Even Milton Freeman would agree with that. There are land use costs because so much more land is taken up by One track has the capacity of between six and 10 highway lanes. Downtown development taken up by parking spaces instead of being productively used.
▶ 5:42:46These are all costs of having a society unique in America that is so dependent on cars. And why is it so dependent on cars? Because we subsidize the hell out of them. So irrespective of the the virtues of having fair free transit, it's just simply false the idea that transit takes more subsidies than the alternatives.
▶ 5:43:12And that's why the rest of the world, which is making economic decisions on how to invest tax fair money in transportation, invests in a lot of transit, invests in a lot of rail, invests in highspeed rail, which we're still struggling to build here in America. the only developed country in the world that doesn't have or isn't building highspe speed rail. There's not some vast railroad conspiracy that has infected every other country. But thanks to make America healthy again, it just hasn't come here yet.
▶ 5:43:40No, it just makes economic sense. And that's why why the rest of the world does it. Unfortunately, too often it's the auto lobby, the oil lobby, the automobile lobby, the airline lobbies that reduce investment in rail here in America. Take these decisions out of an economic analysis and make them political. So, let's just set that rumor to bed.
▶ 5:44:09There's a reason why it's more efficient to take trains, why it costs less, and it takes less taxpayer dollars. Mr. Chairman, I yield Does anyone else wish to be heard on the Seeing no one or any are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 5:44:37All oppose signify by saying Any of the chair of the ns have it. Gentlemen request a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6f. Further proceedings on the question are Is this on the voting
▶ 5:45:0679 Thank you.
▶ 5:45:10There's been a lot of I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 5:45:13an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Garendi of California number 079 with vision one.
▶ 5:45:22Without objection, amendment be considered as read. Mr. Gmen, you're
▶ 5:45:26Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There's been a great deal of discussion throughout this day about bridges. Uh, and yep, they're a problem. No doubt about it. Uh, this amendment is pretty simple, and that is to see if we can find a way to keep our bridges in good repair. Uh we know that many of these bridges um are corroding for various reasons. Some steel, sometimes there's problems with the concrete.
▶ 5:45:52But this is specifically amendment to develop a more robust effort across the nation to prevent our bridges from corroding. So it's a corrosion prevention and repair bill. Rather simple. Um, we can go into all the details if you like, but considering that we got a whole lot of work out ahead, if you like your bridges to uh continue to uh be sturdy, if you want your bridges to uh fall down, then vote no.
▶ 5:46:22If you want your bridges to be uh properly maintained, you'll vote yes on this. I ask for an I vote.
▶ 5:46:31Does anyone else wish to be heard on the
▶ 5:46:36Seeing no one, um, Oh, Mr. Johnson.
▶ 5:46:42Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment because it does something simple and long overdue. It cuts out wastes. Right now, too many transportation projects are forced to run the same environmental review twice. once by the state and once by the federal government. Even when both reviews look at the same impacts, the same data and the same outcomes.
▶ 5:47:08That is duplication and it slows down projects without improving environmental protection. This amendment fixes that. It takes the old pilot program and turns it into a permanent fully functioning tool that lets qualified states carry out one high quality review instead of two. It also expands the program so airports and ports can benefit from the same streamlined process.
▶ 5:47:36That means faster timelines, fewer bureaucratic delays, and no loss of environmental safeguards. We are not weakening standards. We are eliminating paperwork that does nothing but burn time and taxpayer dollars. When a state can meet the same requirements with one review, there's no reason to force them to do it twice. This amendment is about efficiency, accountability, and common sense. It helps states deliver projects faster.
▶ 5:48:07It keeps environmental protections intact. And it frees up time and resources for the work that actually matters. So, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment and I yield back.
▶ 5:48:23Does anyone else wish to be heard? Seeing no one, I do support um the intent of of your amendment, John. Um but I have to oppose it. I believe there'd be significant unintended con consequences um for every bridge project. Um you know bridge corrosion is bridge corrosion prevention is very very important.
▶ 5:48:46Um specifically applications of of paints and and other materials are not the only way to prevent um corrosion and I think this amendment would make it difficult for those uh for other methods to be utilized. So with that I yield back. Are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 5:49:18All oppose signify by saying nay. The opinion of the chair, the naysay have it. The nays do have it. The amendment is not agreed to. will allow it. Gentleman requested a roll call vote as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the question are postponed.
▶ 5:49:47So boss just finished closing um on the floor. So he should be back any minute. So, we'll start we'll run one more
▶ 5:50:10We'll go ahead and start. He should be on his way.
▶ 5:50:16He was managing a bill on the floor.
▶ 5:50:21All right, we'll go ahead and start He should be here any minute. So first amendment number 78 offered by Mr. Garmendy which a recorded vote was ordered which a recorded which was not agreed to by voice vote is a recorded vote still ordered. John
▶ 5:50:44I really don't understand the I really don't. uh apparently some uh discussions have taken place long before we began this process of amendments and I don't have all the details on that but apparently it is not wise to proceed with this amendment. Don't know why. Don't know who's making these decisions, nor do I know why they're making these decisions, but they are.
▶ 5:51:14It's all so strange. I'm going to withdraw the amendment. Thanks, John. Next, amendment 224, which is offered by Mr. Prair, and which recorded vote was ordered, which was not agreed to by voice vote. Is recorded vote still ordered? Recorded vote is still Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. The chairman intends to vote no.
▶ 5:51:42Ranking a vote no.
▶ 5:53:55All members been recorded or wish to be Does anyone wish to change their vote? Hearing none, close the board and announce the total.
▶ 5:54:11Mr. Mr. Chairman, on that vote there are 16 yays and 49 nazs.
▶ 5:54:15A voted 16 yays, 49 nazs. The amendment is not agreed to. Next amendment number 62 offered by Mr. Johnson of Georgia in which a recorded vote was ordered which was not agreed to by voice vote. Is a recorded vote still
▶ 5:54:34It is not.
▶ 5:54:39Thank you very much. Next, amendment 294 offered by Miss Titus, which a recorded vote was ordered, which was not agreed to by voice vote. Is a recorded vote still Yes, a recorded vote is still requested. Members will record their votes using the electronic voting system. The chairman intends to vote no.
▶ 5:55:04Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um uh we have an agreement on this one as part of a big two agreement. So I'll be voting uh voting no on this but only me
▶ 5:55:18or you'll open the board
▶ 5:55:23may question please Mr. Larson I have a question.
▶ 5:56:35everyone been recorded? everyone
▶ 5:57:06been recorded? Who wishes to be Does anyone wish to change your vote? Seeing no one, close the board. Announce the total.
▶ 5:57:20Mr. Chairman, on that vote, there are 35 yays and 31 nazs.
▶ 5:57:24I voted 35 yays and 31 nazs. The amendment is agreed to. Next, amendment number 154 offered by Mr. Mass which recorded vote was ordered which was not agreed to by voice voters. Recorded vote still requested. Recorded vote is still requested. Members were recorded to vote by electronic device. The chairman intends to vote no.
▶ 5:57:49Rank and vote no.
▶ 5:57:51Open the board. I know. Did they know what it was?
▶ 5:58:29are you voting? Has everyone voted to wishes to be recorded? Does anyone wish to change their vote?
▶ 5:58:46Seeing none, close the board. Announce
▶ 5:58:51Mr. Chairman, on that vote, there are 22 yays and 44 nazs.
▶ 5:58:55I voted 22 yays, 44 nazs. The amendment is not agreed to. Next amendment 148 offered by Mr. Burchett in which a recorded vote was ordered and which was not agreed to by voice vote is a recorded vote still Recorded vote is still requested. Members will record their votes using electronic voting system. The chairman intends to vote no.
▶ 5:59:19Ranking vote no.
▶ 5:59:21Open the board.
▶ 6:00:03anyone been recorded that wishes to be Does anyone wish to change their vote? Seeing none, close the board and announce the total.
▶ 6:00:15Mr. Chairman, on that vote, there are 29 yays and 37 nazs.
▶ 6:00:18I voted 29 yays and 37 nazs. The amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 6:00:28Next amendment number 94 offered by Mr. Nails. Which recorded vote was ordered? Which was not agreed to by voice vote. Is recorded vote still requested?
▶ 6:00:36Yes, sir.
▶ 6:00:37Recorded vote is still requested. Members will record their vote using electronic voting system. The chairman intends to vote no.
▶ 6:00:43Rank and vote yes. rank vote. Yes.
▶ 6:01:36everyone been recorded? Who wishes to be Does anyone wish to change your vote? Seeing no one, close the board and announce it to
▶ 6:02:00Mr. Chairman, on that vote there are 54 yays and 11 nazs.
▶ 6:02:04I voted 54 yays, 11 nazs. The agree or the amendment is agreed to. Next amendment 23 offered by Mr. Collins in which recorded vote was ordered and which was not agreed to by a voice vote. Is recorded vote still requested?
▶ 6:02:22Yes, sir.
▶ 6:02:22Recorded vote is still requested. Members record a vote using electronic system. Chairman intends to vote no.
▶ 6:02:29Ranking will vote no. Open the board. Who else?
▶ 6:03:04everyone been recorded or wishes to be Anyone wish to change their vote? Seeing none, close the board and announce the total.
▶ 6:03:14Mr. Chairman, on that vote, there are 27 yays and 39 nazs.
▶ 6:03:18I voted 27 yays, 39 yays. The amendment is not agreed to. Next amendment 79 offered by Mr. Strick Mr. Strickland in which a recorded vote was ordered which was not agreed to by voice vote. Is a recorded vote still A recorded vote is still requested. Uh members will record their votes using electronic voting system. Chairman intends to vote no. Uh
▶ 6:03:46ranking will vote no due to a big four Open the board.
▶ 6:04:24everyone been recorded or wishes to be Has anyone wish to change their vote? Seeing none, close the board and report the total.
▶ 6:04:42Mr. Mr. Chairman, on that vote there are 30 yays and 36 nazs.
▶ 6:04:46A voted 30 yays, 36 nazs. The amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 6:04:53Next amendment 41, revision one offered by Mr. Fong which recorded vote was ordered which was agreed to by voice vote is recorded vote still requested.
▶ 6:05:04recorded vote is still requested. Uh members will record their votes using electronic voting system. The chairman intends to vote I.
▶ 6:05:12Ranking will vote no.
▶ 6:05:14Open the board.
▶ 6:05:52has everyone been recorded who wishes to be recorded. Does anyone wish to change their vote?
▶ 6:06:09Seeing no one close the board. announced
▶ 6:06:13Mr. Chairman, on that vote, there are 35 yays and 30 nays.
▶ 6:06:16I voted 35 yays and 30 nays. The amendment is agreed to. Next, amendment 45, revision one offered by Mr. McDow, on which a recorded vote was ordered, which was agreed to by voice vote. Is a recorded vote still Yes. A
▶ 6:06:41recorded vote is still requested. Members will record their votes by electronic device. Chairman intends to vote I.
▶ 6:06:47Ranking vote I.
▶ 6:06:49Open the door or board. Which one was it?
▶ 6:07:32Has everyone been recorded who wishes to be recorded? Does anyone wish to change your vote? Seeing no one, close the board. Announce the total.
▶ 6:07:47Mr. Chairman, on that vote, there are 64 yays and one nay.
▶ 6:07:50I vote 64 yays and one nay. The amendment is agreed to. Next amendment 77 offered by Mr. Johnson of South Dakota in which a recorded vote is ordered which was agreed to by voice vote. Is a recorded vote still
▶ 6:08:08A recorded vote is still requested. Members will record their votes using an electronic device. The chairman intends to vote I.
▶ 6:08:15Ranking a vote no. Open the board.
▶ 6:08:56Has everyone voted who wishes to be Has anyone wish to change their vote? Seeing no one, close the board. Announce the total. Mr. Chairman, on that vote, there are 35 yays and 29 nays.
▶ 6:09:20Did you vote at all?
▶ 6:09:23Did it record at all? I'd ask unanimous consent to solve a
▶ 6:09:44No problem on this side.
▶ 6:09:49Okay. So, we'll have Mr. Burchett um reflected as a yes in the vote tally.
▶ 6:09:57Make sure you push the right buttons,
▶ 6:10:01Um so, what's the what's the total There are 35 yays and 29 nazs.
▶ 6:10:11I voted 39 or 35 35 yays, 29 nazs. The amendment is agreed to it. Okay, this concludes our first vote series. So, we're going to resume uh debate, amendment debate.
▶ 6:10:34Um and then we will announce the next vote series as it comes up and we'll continue with amendments as we um once we close out trying to get everybody back. Um the house when do we intend to vote on the
▶ 6:10:50we don't have that many right now
▶ 6:10:52couple hours we will be voting on the floor or in an hour or so
▶ 6:10:57in an hour we'll be voting on floor. So we're going to continue debate. Stubber, you got an amendment.
▶ 6:11:23Mr. Sober.
▶ 6:11:32I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 6:11:35An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Stalber of Minnesota number 049.
▶ 6:11:43Without objection, the amendment be considered as read. Mr. Stalber, you're recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 6:11:48Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to briefly discuss last week's Supreme Court decision in Montgomery vers Kuribbe which has fundamentally reshaped the logistics industry. In the absence of a clear federal or legal standard for carrier selection, brokers and shippers will now have to individually establish criteria for the selection of safe motor carriers.
▶ 6:12:08The Supreme Court opinion noted that brokers may not always be in a good position to objectively assess carrier safety and that there was an absence of
▶ 6:12:22I need some order in the um hearing room
▶ 6:12:28and then we'll give Mr. Ster his time
▶ 6:12:30Thank you, Mr. Chair.
▶ 6:12:32Go ahead. Um there's an absence in meaningful safety uh related regulation of brokers at the federal level. This ruling shifts a nationally consistent system towards a patchwork of liability standards that will drive up costs and hit small trucking companies and the small business that rely on them the hardest. And this ruling will shift loads away from small carriers to larger fleets with the resources to navigate compliance requirements. Costs in the supply chain should be of concern to every member of this committee.
▶ 6:13:01If operating costs increase, insurance costs for brokers and carriers increase, and the need to defend against litigation increases. The cost of moving household goods and food will increase as well. Without a clear federal guard rails like my motor carrier safety selection standard act, we are leaving the market exposed.
▶ 6:13:20I have long sought greater safety on our nation's road by requiring freight brokers and shippers to rigorously verify that a motor carrier is properly registered, adequately ensure, and fully compliant with federal safety standards before entrusting them with a shipment. I am concerned about the ramifications of this decision for small carriers, small businesses that engage in trucking companies directly, and freight brokers. Mr. Mr.
▶ 6:13:44Chairman, I urge this committee to hold a hearing on the impacts of the Montgomery decision on cost, truckload capacity, and the risks of f fraud and false claims in the industry. I also encourage this committee to prioritize working with with FMSCA to ensure the agency continues to finalize regulations targeting fraudulent actors in the trucking space and promoting compliance with an agreement that we will continue to work together on this. Mr.
▶ 6:14:11Chairman, I am withdrawing the amendment at this time and I yield back
▶ 6:14:25without objection. So order
▶ 6:14:34you want to
▶ 6:14:45Mr. Johnson.
▶ 6:14:48Think I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 6:14:51an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Johnson of Georgia number 063.
▶ 6:15:00Without objection, the amendment be considered as read. Mr. Johnson, you're recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 6:15:04Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Over the last decade, assaults on transit operators have increased by more than 232%. A staggering trend that puts the people who keep our transit systems running at real and great risks. These are frontline workers who show up early, stay late, and keep our communities moving. They should not have to fear for their safety just for doing their job and serving the public.
▶ 6:15:31And when the risk keep rising, Congress has a responsibility to make sure agencies have the resources they need to protect their workers and their writers. My amendment fixes that by allowing transit agencies to use their existing federal formula funds for security and crimerevention operating expenses.
▶ 6:15:54No new spending, no new programs, just clear authority to use the tools they already have to keep writers and workers safe. It helps them install cameras, emergency call boxes, and better lighting. It helps them deploy mobile safety apps and modernize fairgate technology.
▶ 6:16:15And it ensures they can respond quickly when safety concerns Because a transit system cannot be reliable if it is not safe. And it cannot be safe if agencies are unsure whether they can use their own federal funds to protect the people they serve. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment and I yield back.
▶ 6:16:47The members wish to be recognized on the Seeing none, I recognize myself. I I do oppose the amendment. Um, apart from a technical technical issue with this amendment, the manager's amendment um, doubled the amount in the underlying section that may be used to address crime on public transportation. So, I oppose efforts to further increase federal uh, operating assistance for agencies that have not meaningfully addressed uh, crime on their systems.
▶ 6:17:16And therefore, I do have to oppose this. And I'd urge my colleagues to uh, to vote no. Um, are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. All oppose signify by saying nay. In opinion of the chair, the nays have The gentleman requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6f.
▶ 6:17:45Further proceedings are postponed. Mr. Burchett.
▶ 6:17:54Mr. Chairman, I have a amendment at the
▶ 6:17:59an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Burchett of Tennessee number 149.
▶ 6:18:09Without objection, the amendment will be considered as red. Mr. Bridget, you're
▶ 6:18:12Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For many class 2 and class 3 railroad projects, holding company structures are used for routine legal and administrative purposes and allowing those entities to apply directly can provide a clearer and more efficient path for grant administration. Congress recognizes these holding companies within appropriation language. Codifying holding companies as potential rail recipients of grant reduces red tape and paperwork for the Federal Railroad Administration for the railroads.
▶ 6:18:41And I can't understand why anybody would not support this. And I ask my colleagues to support this and reducing unnecessary pay paperwork. And I yield back. And I'd like a recorded vote. Mr.
▶ 6:19:09we'll get there.
▶ 6:19:12Shice, you want to speak on it?
▶ 6:19:14Uh, thank you, Chairman. Uh, the ranking member opposes the amendment from Representative Burchett. This amendment would make the holding uh holding companies of shortline railroads eligible for consolidated rail infrastructure and safety improvement grants or Chrissy grants. Shortline railroads are already eligible for these grants regardless of their ownership structure. Chrissy allows short lines to make safety and environmental upgrades that they would otherwise not be able to afford.
▶ 6:19:41Shortline railroads provide critical services and this is why they're eligible to receive grants. This amendment would expand eligibility to railroad railroad holding companies, some of whom are held by investment firms whose net income can exceed $1 We'll even have a far smaller pot of funds available for rail grants after advanced appropriations expire at the end of fiscal year 2026.
▶ 6:20:05As a result, the ranking member does not support expanding eligibility for private holding companies that are able to raise funds in the private markets for their companies. The benefits of supplanting private capital with public funds would go to dividends for private shareholders, not for public benefit. The ranking member urges colleagues to oppose this amendment and I yield back.
▶ 6:20:26Someone else wish to be heard on the
▶ 6:20:29Mr. Chairman, could I say something
▶ 6:20:32at this point or do I need to wait?
▶ 6:20:34Yeah, you can go ahead. I'll yield to
▶ 6:20:36Okay. I I realize what's going on here and I realize that, you know, when you're not sitting at the table that you you're not heard and I realize the deal has already been cut. But I want to warn us warn our our party. You know, we're in the we're in the majority and we're not acting like it. We're and we'll be in the minority once again because of this kind of activity. And I'm disgusted that that both sides of the aisle that we're not allowed to deals have been cut.
▶ 6:21:06And I think that's wrong. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 6:21:09Does anyone else wish to be heard on the Seeing no one, are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those all those in favor signify by saying I. All oppose signify by saying nay. The opinion of the chair, the naysay have it. The gentleman requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6f. Further proceedings on the question are
▶ 6:21:58Mr. Mr. Carson. the clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 6:22:04Yes, sir.
▶ 6:22:05An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Carson of Indiana number
▶ 6:22:14Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Carson is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 6:22:21Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, my amendment supports workforces at American Rail Maintenance Facilities. I'm proud to represent one of the finest maintenance facilities in the country, Beach Grove, Indiana. Too many times over the years, there have been shortsighted attempts to shrink the workforce and outsource critical rail safety and repair work performed by highly skilled workers.
▶ 6:22:50If the US wants the best and most reliable rail systems, we have to invest in our rail workforce and support them as they advance their skills with new technologies and exciting new equipment that improve safety and efficiency. My amendment provides the provisions in the rail equipment pool subtitle of the bill section 10301 from reducing the work product or the workforce at US rail maintenance facilities.
▶ 6:23:18The underlying bill provision to allow rail equipment pooling can provide flexible flexibility to keep our trains running efficiently, smoothly, and safely. But these provisions should not be uh used to reduce the workforce or the quality work performed at American rail maintenance facilities, including the premier facility in Beach Grove, Indiana.
▶ 6:23:41The amendment is endorsed by the International Association of Machinists, IBEW, Smart Union, and the Transportation Workers United. I urge my colleagues to support this great amendment. I yield back the balance of my time. Gentleman yields. Does any other members want to be recognized on the amendment? I oppose the amendment.
▶ 6:24:03The passenger rail equipment pools established is the underlying bill will be managed and operated by state compact for the purpose of acquiring railroad equipment for use by pool participants. The amendment is unnecessary as the purpose of these pools is to spur growth and competition. I'm concerned that the amendment will have unintended consequences that could constrain the equipment's pool's ability to function as Congress intends.
▶ 6:24:31I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and I yield back. Are there any other speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, the question is is are there any other amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question on the amendment is all in favor say I.
▶ 6:24:53All oppose say nay.
▶ 6:24:55My opinion and the uh the naysay have it. Mr. Chairman, I'd like a recorded vote.
▶ 6:25:07Gentleman wants a recorded vote. The gentleman requests a recorded vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the question are
▶ 6:25:25What purpose does Mr. Nails seek
▶ 6:25:28Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. The clerk will designate the
▶ 6:25:33an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 8870 offered by Mr. Nells of Texas number
▶ 6:25:41Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Nails is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 6:25:48Thank you, sir. Uh this amendment would address a serious problem that is affecting the truck trailer manufacturers and could jeopardize thousands, yes, sir. Thousands of jobs. Here is the problem that involves rear bumpers that are on truck trailers. That's it. The rear bumpers. Federal experts at DOT and Nitsa set federal standards that all truck trailer manufacturers must meet and comply with.
▶ 6:26:12The standards set the right balance to protect people when there happens to be an accident involving a vehicle that hits the back of the truck trailer. But some lawyers, the scum, have figured out how to sue under state law, claiming that juries should ignore the federal safety standards set by DOT and should hit companies with punitive damages even when they meet those federal standards.
▶ 6:26:38In one case called the Wabash case, the jury ignored the federal standards for rear guard bumpers. ignored that the company had actually met the federal standard when it made the trailer and instead awarded the plaintiff $450 million in punitive damages. First, it makes no sense to punish companies with punitive damages when they have actually complied with and met the federal standards for those rear guard bumpers.
▶ 6:27:09Second, the juries are in essence substituting their judgment for that of the Nitsa experts and awarding huge punitive damages against the companies even though they have complied. They complied with the federal standard. Third, the experts at DOT and Nitsa spent a lot of time doing tests, analyzing multiple scenarios that fit the right balance and set the appropriate federal standard. The current standards were set. they were done in 2022.
▶ 6:27:40And fourth, the insurance costs. The insurance costs for the companies are increasing. It's in a big way. And that gets passed along to the customer. It does at the end of the day. This proposal only explicitly addresses the rear bumpers of truck trailers. And it would only prevent punitive damages from being opposed when and only when the manufacturer meets federal standards for those rear bumpers.
▶ 6:28:05Punitive damages are supposed to be reversed for malicious and willful misconduct and to punish companies for intentional causing harm. It still allows people, this legislation, it bill, it still allows people to file lawsuits and also recover damages for injuries and lost income called compensatory damages. It still allows people to even get punitive damages if the company does not meet the federal standard when the trailer is manufactured and does not preclude lawsuits.
▶ 6:28:36The current situation is unattainable. If this trend continues, we could have juries in different states that are in essence creating different benchmarks or standards for punitive damages. We should not be punishing companies that are following the law and meeting the standards that we have asked the expert at DOT and Nitsa to set for the industry. This is about fairness and preserving standards that preserve safety. With that, I thank you and I yield back.
▶ 6:29:04Gentleman yields. Any other members wish to be recognized on the amendment? Mr.
▶ 6:29:17Thank you, Chairman. Uh the ranking member opposes Nell's amendment 87. This amendment aims to limit punitive jam damages to victims of fatal crashes. This amendment presumes compliance with federal safety standards. However, manufacturers are able to self-certify their compliance. If this amendment were adopted, it would limit compensation to victims, including in situations of defective equipment.
▶ 6:29:40Limiting recovery would do nothing to ensure manufacturers actually comply with federal safety standards and will leave crash victims and their families with little recourse. The ranking member urges all members to oppose this amendment. I yield back.
▶ 6:29:54Mr. Collins, you're recognized.
▶ 6:29:55Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I strongly support this amendment. This amendment would bring back common sense to a key issue affecting the trucking industry and the companies that make truck trailers. The companies that make these truck trailers are facing unfair litigation that could put their businesses at risk. These companies spend a lot of time testing and retesting the trailers to make sure they create a product that meets all the federal standards. These companies and thousands of people they employ all want safe trailers.
▶ 6:30:26They drive on the highways, too. Congress empowered the Department of Transportation and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to set federal standards for rear guard bumpers. Many companies comply with all federal and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration standards that apply to rear guard bumpers. Yet, they have recently faced unreasonable litigation in the form of punitive damages at the state level.
▶ 6:30:52As was mentioned in the Wabash case, the jury was convinced to ignore the federal standard and instead they punished the company with a $450 million in punitive damages even though the company had complied with the federal standards when the trailer was manufactured. All because the jury apparently thought the company should have done something different than the federal standard.
▶ 6:31:17The threat of huge verdicts at the state level against these manufacturers, even when the trailers comply with all applicable federal rear impact guard standards, is putting truck trailer manufacturers at serious risk. I know from experience that most of these companies are small to medium-size businesses, and they make the trailers that haul all the goods that are crucial to our cargo transportation systems across the country. I am told that these companies are seeing their insurance cost increase substantially.
▶ 6:31:46One company told me that their insurance costs have gone up by 40 to 50% in the last few years. The mere threat and possibility of these types of lawsuits is having a serious negative impact. These costs are being passed down to the consumers, making everything more expensive to Americans. To be clear, this amendment addresses the rear guard bumpers of truck trailers.
▶ 6:32:08It would only prevent punitive damages from being imposed when and only when the manufacturer meets the federal standards of these rear guard bumpers. The trailer manufacturers face conflicting situations in different states which goes against the whole notion of having federal standards. If we continue to have conflicting standards in various states, this may put Americans across the nation at risk.
▶ 6:32:33This provision does allow for the secretary of the DOT to add additional regulations, but only after cons careful consideration and after Vitza has balanced various safety factors. Companies need the certainty of the federal standard and that is why I'm proud to support this amendment that urge all my colleagues to do the same. And Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
▶ 6:32:59Gentlemen yields. Are there any are there any other speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 6:33:13All those signify by saying nay.
▶ 6:33:19The nays have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 6:33:23Request a recorded vote. Sir.
▶ 6:33:24Gentlemen, request a recorded vote. As previously announced, pursuant to committee rule 6F, further proceedings on the question are postponed.
▶ 6:33:48for what purpose does Miss Titus seek
▶ 6:33:52I have an amendments at the desk.
▶ 6:33:54The clerk will designate the amendment. An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Titus of Nevada number 299.
▶ 6:34:04Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Titus is recognized for five minutes to speak on her amendment.
▶ 6:34:12Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. This amendment is so simple and so common sense. I I can't believe it wasn't in the original bill. It would ensure that nonprofits that represent workers, including unions, would be eligible for the rail technology and asset pilot program. This is a new program that has to do with safety and technology that's being created by the bill.
▶ 6:34:37Under the bill, those eligible include private industry, states, tribes, transit agencies, virtually everybody except the workers who are going to be actually doing the things that are studied in this pilot program. Now, workers can apply for other kind of grants under existing law, like Chrissy grants, but not this new one that's being created. That just doesn't make any sense at all.
▶ 6:35:04This new program will help develop the next generation of technology, including what's known as telmatics. This technology has great potential to help with problems like cargo theft. We've heard a lot about that in this committee, and it costs railroads more than a hundred million dollars just last year. Technological advancement, however, means nothing without robust workforce development, the people who can carry it out.
▶ 6:35:31After all, it's the railroad workers who will be entrusted with implementing these technologies into our rail safety ecosystems. They should be eligible to receive training on telematics and other technology that may be eligible under this program like the positive train control and wayside defect detectors. So, as I said, it makes no sense to let everybody apply for this except the people who are going to be implementing it.
▶ 6:35:59They're the ones who need the training because they're the ones who are on the front line. So, I would encourage my colleagues to correct this little minor error in the bill and add these uh workers to the eligibility list for the grant program, this pilot program newly created by this bill. I yield back.
▶ 6:36:21Gentle lady yields. Do any other members want to be recognized on the amendment? Thank you, Miss Titus. I recognize my this what we the amendment expands the intended purpose of the rail technology and asset pilot program beyond its intended use. Given the resources needed to get the pilot program underway, I cannot support adding additional burdensome I yield back. Are there any other speakers on the amendment?
▶ 6:36:50Seeing none, are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. All those opposed by saying nay. The nays have it and the amendment is not agreed to. Just want a recorded vote. Nope. Okay. Mr. Owens, you're recognized.
▶ 6:37:18Thank you so much. I want um I want to first of all thank the chairman and ranking member for their work on this important surface traation reauthorization. Today I offer a simple
▶ 6:37:28Hold up just a second. Pause just for a sec. The clerk will designate the
▶ 6:37:33an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Owens of Utah number 045.
▶ 6:37:41Correct. Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Owens, you are now recognized for five minutes to speak on this amendment.
▶ 6:37:48Thank you, Mr. Chairman, appreciate it. Uh again, I want to thank the chairman and ranking member for their work on this important surface transportation reauthorization that they offer a simple but impactful amendment, the bridge act digital bond pilot program. Uh Mr. Chairman, this in a rural America and small communities, municipal bonds are now are how local uh governments pay for roads, bridges, and transit. But for for too many small issuers, the high fixed costs of traditional bond deals make these projects too expensive.
▶ 6:38:18often to delay or cancel needed infrastructure. My amendment creates a modest time limit pilot at the uh at the Build America Bureau. It gives targeted grants to to help small, rural, and disadvantaged communities cover the one-time cost of switching uh and of using a qualified digital bond platform to fally assisted station projects.
▶ 6:38:40These platforms have already proven they can they can cut issuance costs, speed up settlements, and increase transparency all while fully complying with existing security laws and SMRB rules. The pilot is completely voluntary. It gives priority to smallest smallest insurers. Uh this thus thus doing $10 million or less per year as well as rural and disadvantaged communities.
▶ 6:39:06It also favors models that can help multiple jurisdictions at at once. The bill includes strong protections, bond holder continuity uh continuity plans, a coordination with the dispar depository trust company and techn technology neutral standards set by the SEC MSRB and the DC DTC. A five-year sunset annual reports and a go review. Importantly, this amendment does not mandate anything.
▶ 6:39:37It does uh does not change security laws or tax laws. It does not tie any federal transportation funding to its use. Mr. Chairman, a small rural communities with high cost and limited staff. This this program will deliver lasting savings for for every future bond. It stretches taxpayer dollars further and helps more projects get built. the smart lowcost modernization that belongs in the innovative finance title of this bill.
▶ 6:40:04I urge my colleagues of both s on both sides of the aisle support the amendment. I yield back the balance.
▶ 6:40:09Gentleman yields. Mr. David, you're
▶ 6:40:12Thank you, chairman. The ranking member opposes the Owens amendment 45. The amendment seeks to establish a pilot program to help small, rural, tribal, and disadvantaged communities better access digital municipal bonds. While the ranking member applauds the intent, it is a complex issue that needs more vetting than the time allowed by the amendment process and may also require input from various committees beyond TNI. Given that, the ranking member must oppose the amendment. I yield back.
▶ 6:40:40Are there any other speakers on the
▶ 6:40:45Seeing none, are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 6:40:56All those opposed signify by saying nay.
▶ 6:41:00The nays have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 6:41:06Mr. Owens,
▶ 6:41:07you like to get a vote?
▶ 6:41:09Recorded vote.
▶ 6:41:13Gentlemen request a recorded vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6. If further proceedings on the question are
▶ 6:41:46What purpose does Mr. Collins seek
▶ 6:41:49Mr. Mr. Chairman, I got an amendment at the desk. The clerk will designate the
▶ 6:41:54an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Collins of Georgia number 025.
▶ 6:42:01Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Collins is recognized for five minutes to speak on the amendment.
▶ 6:42:08Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My amendment would expand an existing exemption from certain sales tax to also apply to the trucking industry. Airlines and bus companies already receive this exemption. Giving the same protection to truckers will help lower cost. Gross receipts taxes are a terrible fit for the transportation industry. These taxes are sometimes called commercial activity taxes or franchise taxes.
▶ 6:42:37They act as tolls when goods originate in a state and terminate in another state or simply drive through a state. Excessive taxes on trucking raises costs for every one of our constituents. In the trucking industry, we say if you bought it, a truck brought it. Congress knows that these taxes are a terrible fit for the transportation industry. In the 1970s, we exempted airlines from paying these taxes.
▶ 6:43:04In the 1990s, we exempted bus companies from paying these taxes. This amendment would simply level the playing field by expanding this exemption to also include trucks. We should be doing everything we can to fight inflation and bring down cost. This is one more small thing we can do to help. I urge all my colleagues to support this amendment. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield
▶ 6:43:29Gentleman yields. Mr. Davids, you're
▶ 6:43:32Thank you, chairman. The ranking member opposes Collins amendment number 25. This amendment would preempt state and local taxes, fees, or levies on the transportation of interstate commerce by motor carriers. If enacted, this would limit state and local governments from collecting any revenue on motor carriers engaged in interstate transportation. This preeemption provision and related motor carrier preeemption provisions have been the subject of extensive litigation by trucking companies.
▶ 6:43:58States are already prohibited from regulating the price, route, or service of mo of a motor carrier. Congress should not intervene to further limit this authority without thorough discussion and understanding of the impacts. The ranking member urges members to oppose this amendment. I yield back.
▶ 6:44:15Gentle lady yields. Any other members want to be recognized on this amendment?
▶ 6:44:23Are there any other speakers on the Now you're going to switch.
▶ 6:44:52Mr. Collins,
▶ 6:44:56hold on.
▶ 6:44:58Lack of sleep will do that to you.
▶ 6:45:00We try to make it.
▶ 6:45:10You got somewhere to be.
▶ 6:45:13Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say I.
▶ 6:45:19All those opposed say nay.
▶ 6:45:20Nay. The nays have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 6:45:25Uh, Mr. Chairman, I request a recorded vote, please.
▶ 6:45:28Gentlemen, request a recorded vote.
▶ 6:45:33The gentleman request a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the question are
▶ 6:46:26For what purpose does Mr. Kylie seek
▶ 6:46:30Uh Mr. uh chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 6:46:32The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 6:46:36An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Kylie of California number 049. 047, I'm sorry.
▶ 6:46:47I'm blocked.
▶ 6:46:48Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Kylie is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 6:46:55Mr. Mr. Chair, all across the country, Americans are struggling with the cost of gas right now. But nowhere is this more the case than in my state of California, uh, where our drivers are paying well above even what the second highest state is paying. Uh, we're paying about $6.15 a gallon. We're paying more than Hawaii, which is an island state.
▶ 6:47:18Uh and there are several reasons for it, but uh the leading reason uh is that our state taxes gas far more uh than any other state. Uh at 61 cents a gallon, uh it's the highest gas tax uh in the country. It's a cost that many of our drivers simply cannot afford. Many are having to make tradeoffs between uh driving and uh putting food on the table.
▶ 6:47:42Uh many have said they've had to reduce their uh driving and to cut back on activities or uh other engagements um or find alternative modes uh of transport. Uh so it has become a major major burden uh for Californians. It's one of the reasons uh that we have the highest cost of living uh of any state in the country.
▶ 6:48:04Uh so I have encouraged our leaders in the state to provide Californians immediate relief by suspending the gas tax of 61 cents per gallon uh at least uh temporarily while prices are so high. Uh several other states have done this but unfortunately uh California's state government has refused uh to do so.
▶ 6:48:26Uh the good news is we do have the ability here to impose some common sense limits on the tax that can be charged uh for gas in states like California. Uh and that is through the same uh mechanism that is used to achieve uniformity uh or at least harmony in uh issues like uh alcohol purchases, minimum drinking age, uh truck weights uh and that sort of thing.
▶ 6:48:56and that is by making it a condition for receiving uh federal highway grants. And so my bill which this amendment would incorporate uh into this larger surface transportation bill is the gas tax reduction act. And it simply places a cap of 50 cents on how much a state can tax gasoline uh per gallon.
▶ 6:49:20This would provide some much needed immediate relief to my state and a few others, our drivers uh and uh would uh at the same time uh be of important interest to the federal government because the fact is that uh the federal government has significant operations uh in California, military bases, uh forest service, uh you name it. Uh and many of these operations uh involve transport.
▶ 6:49:46And so states that have uh unreasonably high state gas taxes unduly burden federal operations uh within their jurisdiction. Uh so uh it makes perfect sense for us here to address the issue of the cost of living that people are are struggling with mightily in states like California and to asssure that these states through irresponsible policies don't uh unreasonably uh burden uh federal operations.
▶ 6:50:16I should also note that California uh's very high gas tax is justified in the name of uh road maintenance and repair. uh but California roads rank among the three worst in the entire country. So the problem uh for our uh political leaders in the state is clearly not a lack of revenue, it's a lack of prioritization.
▶ 6:50:36And so I think this is a way uh to um incentivize uh states to uh in particular a state like California to take a uh more performance-based approach and to transportation funding uh and to have it be a higher priority uh in their own uh spending decisions. Uh so for those reasons, I uh would strongly urge an I vote which will provide immediate relief to drivers in my state as well as a few high tax states throughout the country. I yield back. Mr. Chairman.
▶ 6:51:08Yes. For what member For what purpose does the member seek recognition?
▶ 6:51:11Uh to uh strike last word.
▶ 6:51:16Okay. Granted.
▶ 6:51:17Mr. Chairman, I I must oppose this If the gentleman had offered an amendment saying that federal gas taxes are too high, that's for us to decide. Uh but to offer an amendment to say that California taxes are too high, well, they may well be, but that's for Californians to decide. We have no business here dictating to the states uh and deciding that California is okay and New York is not okay and Wyoming is fine.
▶ 6:51:48It's up to the states. That's what federalism is all about. State governments ought to make their own decisions. If the voters don't like that decision, they can vote their state officials out. That's what democracy is all about. Um, it may very well be that the uh I'm sure it is true, I should say, that the uh cost of gasoline is is terribly high in California as it is in New York.
▶ 6:52:14Um, but it may be a good idea to suspend that uh gas tax or it may not be depending on other things in the California budget. That's for Californians to decide. Californians elect their officials. If they don't like what their officials do, they can vote them out. So, I very much oppose this amendment because it would substitute the govern the opinions of our opinions uh on state government for state officials and that's no way to run a democracy. I yield back.
▶ 6:52:44Does any other member wish to be recognized on the amendment?
▶ 6:52:50The chair recognizes Miss Davids. Thank you, chairman. The ranking member opposes uh the Kylie amendment number 47. This amendment would withhold 8% of a state's funding aortionment for the NHPP and STBG programs if the state has a gas tax above 50 cents. States rely heavily on gas taxes to fund the maintenance and construction of their roads, including in the state of Washington, where the ranking member is from. This amendment would have disastrous consequences.
▶ 6:53:19In effect, it would punish states for investing in their transportation system and would fly in the face of user pays principles. Fuel prices have risen due to the current administration's war in Iran, and we're all looking for ways to provide relief to our constituents back home. However, encouraging states to disinvest from their roads is not the path to affordability or safe travel. The ranking member urges colleagues to oppose this amendment. I yield back.
▶ 6:53:47The chair thanks to general lady. Are there any further speakers on the Seeing none, are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. And all those opposed signify by saying
▶ 6:54:12In the opinion of the chair, the nays have it and the amendment is not agreed The gentleman has requested a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6f. Further proceedings in the question are For what purpose does Miss Brownley seek
▶ 6:54:34Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment 69 at the desk.
▶ 6:54:38The clerk will designate the amendment. An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Brownley of California number 069.
▶ 6:54:48Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Brownley is recognized for five minutes to speak on her amendment.
▶ 6:54:56Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Over the next few years, the United States will host several major international sporting events, including the World Cup and the 2028 Olympic and Parolympic Games. The underlying bill includes $50 million annually for transportation needs associated with these international sporting events.
▶ 6:55:20This funding level is simply not sufficient to meet the needs of communities across the United States that will host these events. My amendment would remove this limitation to ensure the House Appropriations Committee has the flexibility to provide adequate funding.
▶ 6:55:39As you may know, in prior US-hosted Olympic and Parolympic games, the federal government has played a critical role supporting the security and transportation needs of host communities. The last time the US hosted the Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City in 2002, more than $2.1 billion dollar in federal transportation assistance was provided.
▶ 6:56:06The 2028 games will host six times the number of athletes and five times as many sports compared to the 2002 games with events taking place across a significantly larger geographic footprint including Oklahoma City, Nashville, St.
▶ 6:56:27Louis, Columbus, and New The 2028 games will truly be a nationwide event that requires significant largecale transportation coordination and the investments we make today will benefit the American people long after the games conclude.
▶ 6:56:49The 2028 Olympic and Parolympic Games will be among the largest and most historic sporting events ever held, providing our nation with an extraordinary opportunity to showcase the very best of America to the to the world.
▶ 6:57:08Ensuring transportation systems operate smoothly and efficiently will help guarantee that these events highlight American excellence and innovation, not traffic congestion and delays. I urge members to support my amendment to ensure Congress continues its longstanding commitment to supporting US-hosted international sporting events. Mr. Chairman, I yield
▶ 6:57:39The chair thanks the gentle lady. Do any members wish to be recognized on the
▶ 6:57:49Thank you, Miss Brownley. I recognize
▶ 6:57:52Oh, please.
▶ 6:57:53Does the gentle lady wish to be recognized further? uh, no, go ahead.
▶ 6:58:00All right. Uh, I'll start from the top. Thank you, Miss Brownley. I recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the amendment. And as the chair, I oppose this amendment because it would provide for an indefinite authorization. For that reason, I must oppose this amendment. I appreciate the time and I yield back. Are there any further speakers on this amendment?
▶ 6:58:20Seeing none, are there any amendments to the amendment?
▶ 6:58:25Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those
▶ 6:58:27Mr. Chairman, I understand the committee has concerns about the amendment and I hope we can continue working together to address this important issue moving forward. So, at this time, I will respectfully withdraw the amendment.
▶ 6:58:40Thank you, ma'am. Without any objection.
▶ 6:58:49For what purpose does Mr. Sonier seek
▶ 6:58:55Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 6:58:58The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 6:59:00An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Donier of California number 039.
▶ 6:59:09Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Dier is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 6:59:17Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My amendment would protect funding for the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure uh NEV program and charging and fueling infrastructure CFI program, both of which were established under the bipartisan infrastructure law. These programs are critical to building a reliable national charging network and ensuring the United States remains competitive in the global transition to cleaner trans transportation.
▶ 6:59:46Electrical vehicle adoption is growing rapidly both here at home in the United States and around the world. Last year, more than one and a half million electric vehicles were sold in the United States, including in the San Francisco Bay area, one in four. And in California, just about that total number, one in four, accounting for roughly nationally accounting roughly 1 in 10 new vehicle sales.
▶ 7:00:14Globally, EV sales exceeded 17 million vehicles in 2024. China allow alone now accounts for more than half of all global EV sales and their largest auto manufacturer is about to surpass Toyota as the largest automanufacturing uh car company in the world.
▶ 7:00:36As this continues to as China continues to aggressively invest in charging infrastructure and EVs, uh the advanced vehicle technology becomes more and more important to the global competitiveness for the United States. We should be leading this transition. These investments are also critical to addressing climate change. Transportation remains the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, accounting to roughly 30% of total emissions.
▶ 7:01:06Expanding EV infrastructure helps reduce emissions, improve air quality, and decrease our dependence on fossil fuels, as well as make us globally competitive and give consumers choice. In our last reauthorization, we made the right choice by laying the groundwork for a national strategy to deploy electric vehicle charging stations along major transportation corridors.
▶ 7:01:32My amendment simply ensures that funds already authorized and appropriated by Congress cannot be frozen, delayed, or withheld without congressional approval by the administration. If we are serious about modernizing our transportation system, strengthening American competitiveness, and combating the threat of climate change, we must follow through on the investment Congress already made. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I hope you we will continue to work together on this important issue.
▶ 7:02:04I yield back.
▶ 7:02:05Thank you, sir. Do any members wish to be recognized on the amendment? Thank you, Mr. Dier. recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the amendment. Speaking on behalf of the chair, I oppose this amendment which would hamstring the DOT from administering and reviewing programs that have largely failed to deliver on their promises by billions of dollars spent. Thank you. I yield back.
▶ 7:02:29Are there any further speakers on this Seeing none, are there any amendments to the amendment?
▶ 7:02:38Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. Mr. All the In Chairman,
▶ 7:02:43if I could, I'd ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment with the provision that I look forward to working with you and the committee leadership on this
▶ 7:02:52Without objection. Thank you. For what purpose does Mr. Carbajal seek recognition?
▶ 7:03:17Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 7:03:20The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 7:03:22An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 8870 offered by Mr. Carbajal of California number 072.
▶ 7:03:31Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Carb Carbal is recognized for 5 minutes to speak on his
▶ 7:03:38Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My amendment would create a targeted carveout for individuals earning under $75,000 when it comes to new federal EV taxes and road user fees. This is consistent with the income cap for other clean energy tax credits and targets families making a modest income who make up a large part of our middle class.
▶ 7:04:01For many families in this range, they are some of the most financially burdened by increasing housing cost, higher transportation expenses, and everyday cost of living. And now, with global instability, including the war in Iran, driving up oil prices, families are seeing even more pressure at the pump. This amendment ensures we are not layering another financial burden to many middle-class families that are already struggling to make ends meet.
▶ 7:04:30I understand we need to shore up the highway trust fund and the user fees are a fair way to ensure everyone pays into the system. But let us be honest about the broader context. The highway trust fund has been unsustainable for decades, long before EVs made up a meaningful share of vehicles on the road.
▶ 7:04:51Since 2008, it has required repeated general fund bailouts and spending has exceeded gas tax revenues every year this century. That's not because of electric vehicles. It is because of a long-term structural imbalance and outdated gas tax that has not been updated since Inflation, rising construction costs, and more efficient vehicles.
▶ 7:05:17In fact, the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that nearly $330 billion will be needed over the next decade just to keep the highway trust fund solvent. So, if Congress is going to pursue long-term fiscal stability, we should do it in a way that is fair and consistent, treating all drivers equally, regardless of what kind of vehicle they drive, while protecting lower and middle class households from new cost burdens. This amendment strikes that balance.
▶ 7:05:46fiscal responsibility without punishing affordability or limiting consumer choice. I urge my colleagues to support it. With that, I yield back. Do any members wish to be recognized on the amendment? Thank you, Mr. Carbajal. I recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the amendment. On behalf of the uh the chairman, I oppose this amendment.
▶ 7:06:15The registration fee on electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids ensures preservation of the user pays principle. I'm a strong believer that if you use the system, you ought to pay into it. Therefore, I must oppose the amendment. I urge my colleagues to vote no. Are there any further speakers on this Seeing none, are there amendments to the Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. I.
▶ 7:06:45All those opposed signify by saying nay.
▶ 7:06:49The naysay have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 7:06:58For what purpose does Mr. Iselle seek
▶ 7:07:01Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the Clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 7:07:07An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Isel of Mississippi number 061.
▶ 7:07:15Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Riselle is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise today to offer an amendment addressing a serious issue affecting competition and economic growth at our nation's ports.
▶ 7:07:31Business in my district, including local leaders, port officials, economic development organizations, and major employers, have raised concerns that rail access constraints are creating an uncertainty and threatening invi investment jobs and future growth. At the port of Pasigula, there is no independent terminal railroad, meaning the port is directly served by a single class one railroad.
▶ 7:07:58For years, a local short line railroad with connections to multiple class one carriers accessed the port through reciprocal switching arrangements, creating competition and helping prevent shippers from becoming captive customers. However, that access is now being restricted, limiting options and creating uncertainty for businesses that rely on the port.
▶ 7:08:24This amendment would address that issue by requiring reciprocal switching access when a port is served by only one class one railroad and lacks a terminal railroad. It also establishes a process through the surface transportation board to ensure fair rates and resolve disputes. At its core, this amendment is about restoring fairness and competition so our ports and the businesses that depend on them can continue to grow and succeed.
▶ 7:08:55While I strongly believe this issue needs to be addressed, I also recognize the importance of working diligently to make sure we get it right. I look forward to working with committee and continuing conversation with the administration to address this issue. With that said, I'm going to withdraw my amendment today with the understanding that we will work with Chairman Graves and the committee leadership on a bipartisan path forward. Thank you and I yield back.
▶ 7:09:24Without objection.
▶ 7:09:29For what purpose does Mr. Knat
▶ 7:09:32Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 7:09:34The clerk will designate the amendment. An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Not North Carolina number 018 revision 1 formerly denoted as not 017.
▶ 7:09:48Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Kn is recognized for 5 minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 7:09:54Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Freight fraud is a very serious issue that hurts consumers in every part of the country, the trucking industry and the American economy. As I mentioned earlier, according to the National Insurance Crime Bureau, cargo theft is estimated to cost the industry directly up to $ 35 billion every year.
▶ 7:10:15Another source, the American Transportation Research Institute, puts it another way, estimating that the cargo theft cost the trucking industry more than $18 million a day in direct costs. The average victims of these crimes are small businesses that make in aggregate less than $5 million per year. Cargo theft is becoming more prevalent, more organized, and certainly more high-tech. And too often these schemes begin with fraudulent registrations or stolen carrier identities.
▶ 7:10:45Fraudulent certifications, especially when obtained explicitly for the purpose of committing further crimes, should not be met with a mere slap on the wrist. While I plan on withdrawing my amendment, I believe it exemplifies the kind of real consequences that are needed to stop the rising tide of fraud. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of this dis in the coming days to find a path forward on how we can ensure registration frauds carries meaningful consequences.
▶ 7:11:16I thank both the chairman and the ranking member for their efforts and I withdraw the amendment. Thank you and I yield back.
▶ 7:11:22Without objection. For what purpose does Miss David seek
▶ 7:11:28Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 7:11:31The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 7:11:33An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Davids of Kansas number 066.
▶ 7:11:42Mr. Oh, I'm sorry.
▶ 7:11:44Without objection, amend amendment will be considered as read and Miss Davis is recognized for five minutes to speak on her amendment.
▶ 7:11:52Thank you, chairman. I offer this amendment because I do believe our existing user pay models to fund our infrastructure is a good thing. I think it's reasonable that if you're driving on the roads, bridges, and highways, you should be expected to contribute to maintaining that system. What I don't think is reasonable is assigning a fee to consumers on an unfounded basis. It's punitive to arbitrarily charge consumers who've decided to save money and avoid uncertain and climbing gas prices.
▶ 7:12:20This new arbitrary fee limits consumer choice at a time when domestic EV markets uh when the domestic EV market is desperately trying to keep pace with international automakers. So, while the underlying bill assesses a new arbitrary fee, my amendment uses a simple methodology to at least base this process and logic and provide some parody with the federal gas tax.
▶ 7:12:41The federal EVP fee created in this bill would now be based on the previous year's annual estimate of miles traveled per light duty vehicle as reported by the FHWA, which is the Federal Highways Administration, divided by the most recent estimate of average light duty fuel economy as reported by the EPA or Environmental Protection Agency, multiplied by the Federal Gas Tax. That means the average EV driver would be paying today about what the average American driver pays in gas tax, which is just under $100 per year.
▶ 7:13:11This amendment offers parody to a new system encouraging the growth of a domestic manufacturing market and expands consumer choice. Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to withdraw my amendment, but would ask the committee for continued engagement on this issue. I yield back.
▶ 7:13:27Without objection, the committee will stand in recess to allow members to go to the floor and
▶ 7:19:01No, I mean I think
▶ 9:15:08The committee will reconvene. For what purpose does Mr. Petronis seek
▶ 9:15:19Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment on the
▶ 9:15:22Clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 9:15:25An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Petronis of Florida number 047.
▶ 9:15:33Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Petronis is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 9:15:39Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, contrary to my staff's belief, I I do think I have the ability to convince my colleagues the value of this amendment and how positive it is for our surface transportation bill. My amendment is simple. It's a narrow fix. It only allows specialized stinger steered call haulers to operate up to 88,000 lbs. And it's only for a limited window. When the first car is dropped off, it's no longer at 88,000 lbs anymore.
▶ 9:16:08The weight is already built where these trailers are safely uh engineered to handle this. This is not about creating bigger trucks or bigger trailers. It's about allowing these existing trucks to carry the heavier new vehicles that our market is now demanding. Hybrids and EVs. Consumers want it. The government now requires requires this type of fuel economy. Now, because these vehicles are heavier than ever, the haulers have lost up to 28% of their capacity.
▶ 9:16:37Now, that's roughly one to one and a half times fewer trips because of this. So, we want to that forces more trips, more trucks on the road, more fuel to be burned in the same number of cars. Some of the critics point out, well, I don't want these heavy trucks going through my communities. The problem you've got is is with my language, we will create fewer trucks through these communities. Now, the amendment solves the problem by approving efficiency. These are not longhaul routes.
▶ 9:17:08Stingers make very short trips from factories, ports, rail yards, and dealerships almost right off the interstate and major highways. The weight drops quickly. Even when the load starts, it drops below the current legal limit as soon as the first vehicle is delivered, usually after a short distance. I want to give you some examples. A GMC EV Hummer weighs 9,000 lb. A new Toyota hybrid Seoia weighs 7,500 lb.
▶ 9:17:38Now, say on that same trailer, you have a Chevy Suburban with an internal combustion engine that weighs 7,700 lb. So just delivering one of these vehicles drops the total to the current law standard. So this is just common sense and a way to save money and ultimately pass on savings to the consumer. Fewer trucks on the roads means fewer loads, fewer trips overall, which saves fuel, reduces congestion, lowers delivery costs.
▶ 9:18:06Lower costs for new cars also creates costs that are uh lower costs are eventually passed on to the consumers. Better efficiency helps keep auto prices down. These specialized stingers are already in operation. This is not something new. Most were manufactured to safely haul these weights already, so they meet the federal bridge rules as well better than older trucks. Drivers are highly trained. They're well paid.
▶ 9:18:33And the carriers are experienced leaders in safety and in maintenance. No new axles are needed on these trucks. No bigger trucks are needed. This is practical. This is safe. This is a targeted solution focused on efficiency and fuel savings without longhaul impacts or added infrastructure strain. I urge my colleagues to support this common sense amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
▶ 9:19:02Do any any members wish to be recognized on the amendment?
▶ 9:19:09Mr. Carson.
▶ 9:19:11Thank you, Chairman. I respectfully oppose Mr. Patronis Amendment 47. This amendment would force states to allow heavier trucks with a gross weight of 88,000 lbs on not just their interstates, but the broader network of federal aid primary highways within their borders. Increasing truck weight has a lot of impacts on the safety and longevity of our infrastructure and will require carefully crafted legislation. This amendment is not an allowance. It's a mandate on states.
▶ 9:19:43Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chairman, rather,
▶ 9:19:45I want to promote you.
▶ 9:19:49Mr. Chairman, I must also speak in uh opposition to this amendment uh essentially for the same reasons as uh uh Mr. Carson, despite uh the rhetoric about it's only ads for one for one at the beginning of the trip or something. This is heavier trucks.
▶ 9:20:11This would allow 88,000 pounds and that tears up our highways um and uh increases the cost to the taxpayers for no good reason. And uh I therefore there I therefore oppose the amendment.
▶ 9:20:25Thank you, Mr. Naylor. Anyone else? Mr.
▶ 9:20:31Thank you, Chairman. I think this is a great amendment. I want to speak in favor of it. I'd be curious from my colleagues if there's any amount that they would see raising the truck limit. This is a raise of 10%. From 80,000 to 88. Would you raise it.1%.
▶ 9:20:49Would the gentleman yield?
▶ 9:20:50I absolutely would.
▶ 9:20:52I would not raise it by a pound.
▶ 9:20:56Not by a pound. And I'm going to regain my time here. Uh that's really outdated thinking in my opinion when you examine trucks as an example. The last time that this was updated was 1974, 1975. I was not born then. The bestselling vehicle was a twodoor Ford Pinto that weighed about 2,000 lb. So, we're talking about a pretty big difference in technology.
▶ 9:21:22The vehicles that were hauling these things, the the brakes were significantly different. They relied exclusively on air drum brakes, manual brakes, compressed air, minimal skid protection, didn't have the computer technology. List goes on and on. To say that you wouldn't raise it one pound, I think really shows the extreme nature of the opposition to doing something that's common sense. I'm glad that I yielded.
▶ 9:21:50I think that shows exactly how extreme the thinking is on this. I wouldn't raise I wouldn't raise 88,000 80,000 to 80,01. I think the American people are probably owed a better deliberation about lawmaking than saying you wouldn't raise it. That'd be like saying uh a horse isn't allowed to run with a fly on its back. That's the kind of comparison that we're making here. Absolutely ridiculous.
▶ 9:22:19Um and and to go on to say something else. This committee has been looking at amendments about raising truck weights year after year, year after year, year after year for different reasons. Always comes up with an excuse to not look at it for one pound, 100 pounds, a,000 pounds.
▶ 9:22:40not really examining the changes that have gone on in technology and braking systems and computers in in the the braking systems that are automated on vehicles on trucks. Uh you know, it certainly it warrants a better examination than what's being given by members that are willing to so naively say, "I would not raise the weight limit on a truck, even one pound." truly a a disgrace to have thought like that.
▶ 9:23:10Uh so anyways, I'm here to speak in support of Mr. Patronis' amendment, which is common sense. Uh says let's raise the weight limit for these autohauling vehicles uh 10%. Let's take it from 80 to 88,000 lbs. Uh vehicles weigh a lot more. It's dumb to have empty trucks that haul trucks going down the road. Let's do something that makes sense for the American people. Have less trucks on the road. to the gentleman's argument about wear and tear on the roads. Well, you would have less trucks.
▶ 9:23:38Uh if you can put more on one of the trucks, let's examine that as well. And uh in that I don't know, Mr. Patronis, you need any more time on this? No. Okay. Anybody else want to argue?
▶ 9:23:52Going once. This is for debate. That's the purpose of this. It's still got a buck 35 on the clock. Nobody wants to debate, but I'll get we'll I bet we'll get a lot of nos. I yield back.
▶ 9:24:07Anyone else wish to be recognized?
▶ 9:24:11Seeing none, I recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the amendment on behalf of the chairman. Certainly, I echo these comments. This amendment would provide stinger steered auto haulers a weight tolerance on the interstate system up to 88,000 lbs. Today's vehicles are heavier than ever, reducing the average number of vehicles auto haulers can carry per trip to roughly one and a half over the last two decades. This change is needed to keep pace with the modern vehicle fleet and I urge my colleagues to support it. Uh thank you and I yield back.
▶ 9:24:40Are there any further speakers on this amendment? Seeing none, are there any amendments to this amendment?
▶ 9:24:49Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor in favor signify by saying I. I.
▶ 9:24:55All those opposed signify by saying nay.
▶ 9:24:59The eyes have it and the amendment is not agreed to or is agreed to. Pardon
▶ 9:25:19A roll call vote has been requested. Yes, sir.
▶ 9:25:32I will request a recorded vote.
▶ 9:25:37Sorry, we're just getting back into it.
▶ 9:25:38It's going to take a minute. Sorry. The gentleman requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6f. Further proceedings on the question are
▶ 9:26:01Okay. For what purposes, Mr. Garcia, seek recognition.
▶ 9:26:05Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 9:26:07The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 9:26:09An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Garcia of Illinois number
▶ 9:26:17Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Garcia is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 9:26:23Thank you, uh, Mr. Chair. Uh, this amendment, uh, seeks to preserve the neighborhood access and equity grant program, which was created, uh, under the inflation reduction act. The NAE program is all about ensuring that workingclass people have the ability to get to work on time and have access to basic needs.
▶ 9:26:45In Chicago, NAE funding was awarded to the Chicago Transit Authority to replace thousands of feet of blue track line track on the west side. Tracks along the Blue Line branch are beyond their useful life. And as a result, the CTA, our transit authority, has been forced to implement slow zones in certain sections, causing service delays for riders. Now, the bill before us seeks to eliminate the program once and for all.
▶ 9:27:16While I recognize that there are other funding programs in the bill that can fund safety improvements on our streets, I don't believe that we should be retreating in our efforts to improve safety. For these reasons, I ask my colleagues to support my amendment.
▶ 9:27:36Do any members wish to be recognized on the amendment? Thank you, Mr. Garcia. I recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the amendment. On behalf of uh Chairman Graves, I oppose this amendment.
▶ 9:27:52This amendment would restore a controversial grant program that was defunded in the Are there any further speakers on this Seeing none, are there amendments to the Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 9:28:12All those opposed signify by saying nay.
▶ 9:28:15The nays have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 9:28:24For what purpose does Mr. Papus seek
▶ 9:28:28Mr. Chairman, I have two amendments at the desk and I ask for unanimous consent to consider my amendments 117 and 121 on block. Without objection, clerk will designate the amendments.
▶ 9:28:40An onblock amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Papus of New Hampshire consisting of numbers 117 and 121.
▶ 9:28:52Without objection, the on black will be considered as read. Mr. Papus is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendments.
▶ 9:28:59Thank you, Mr. Chairman. These two amendments support the active transportation infrastructure investment program or ATIP which was first authorized in the bipartisan infrastructure law. This first amendment reauthorizes the program through 2031 and a second amendment provides a technical fix. It ensures that ATIP programs that this bill intended to make eligible under the STAG urban grant program are in fact actually eligible.
▶ 9:29:24Supporting active transportation and providing robust funding for it is critical to meet the growing demands of all types of communities in New Hampshire and across the country for convenient, accessible, well-maintained biking and walking routes. Trails, sidewalks, and bikeways make connections that are essential. These networks knit together communities, support outdoor recreation, strengthen local economies, and enhance the quality of life for residents and visitors alike.
▶ 9:29:47They also make it safer and easier to navigate communities of all sizes and enhance entire transportation systems by lowering costs of travel, reducing congestion, and supporting housing and economic development. One study from the Institute for Transportation Research and Education found that for every dollar invested in trails, $1.72 is generated. That's an estimated $344 million generated in local economies every year that ATIP is funded.
▶ 9:30:12In ATIP's last round of funding, the program was also overs subscribed 40 to1 with 350 communities requesting $1.8 billion in funding. ATIP is the only program dedicated to completing the gaps in these active transportation networks and investing in larger multi-segment projects. Over 260 organizations from across the nation from nearly every state support ATIP.
▶ 9:30:35They sent us a letter and we have an opportunity to continue to invest in the connectivity of active transportation systems just as we are in this bill in the underlying bill for roads and bridges and everything else we care about. So, I'm calling for a technical fix um and uh It's also why I've worked with Congressman Huffman to introduce legislation earlier last month to reauthorize the program and improve it so that communities can continue to expand their active transportation networks and experience the benefits that come with it.
▶ 9:31:03So, I think this is just smart infrastructure policy. I strongly urge my colleagues to uh work with us on these good ideas about how we can invest in the future of our communities and knit them together. Um I understand that there's a four corner agreement with respect to amendments here uh in terms of what's going to be included in the final version. So, in the meantime, I'll withdraw these amendments and I yield back my time.
▶ 9:31:27Without objection. We're now considering the bill for amendments. For what purpose does Miss Strickland seek recognition?
▶ 9:31:42Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 9:31:44The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 9:31:47An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Strickland of Washington number
▶ 9:31:54Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Strickland is recognized for five minutes to speak on her amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My amendment will allow states and local communities to invest in cooling infrastructure along transit corridors under the urbanized area formula grants program. Extreme heat is the leading cause of weather related deaths in the United States.
▶ 9:32:16A 2025 study from the Yale School of Public Health found that deaths linked to heat exposure in the US increased by over 50% between 2010 and 2020. In Washington state and across the country, we are seeing the effects of extreme heat on daily life, including how people interact with the transportation system.
▶ 9:32:35A 2024 study by researchers from the University of Washington, the University of Texas at Austin, and Arizona State University found a 50% reduction in public transit wrership during extreme heat days. Excessive temperatures impact individual mobility and safety, especially for people who have no other means of transportation. In Maricopa County, Arizona, extreme heat contributed to at least 40 deaths at bus stops between 2020 and 2022.
▶ 9:33:03If we are serious about making our transportation safer, we must treat extreme heat as a safety issue. Cooling infrastructure and natural solutions are cost-effective and tree cover can make a major difference in reducing heat exposure and preventing heat related fatalities in our transportation system. Not only do they provide protection to pedestrians and road users exposed to excessive heat, but they've been proven to lower surrounding surface temperatures by several degrees. What does this mean?
▶ 9:33:30It means these science-based investments help protect roadways from heat related degradation. When pavement absorbs direct sunlight and heat, it's more likely to crack and require repairs. These investments increase the lifespan of asphalt and reduce maintenance costs. As extreme heat events become more frequent and more severe, we must ensure that our communities are equipped to deliver infrastructure solutions that keep people safe.
▶ 9:33:55And just to put a finer point on it, in October of 2020, President Trump furthered his leadership on the one trillion trees initiative by signing executive order establishing the one trillion trees inter agency council. This EO actually promotes healthy and resilient forest and rangeands, but we could easily fold this into the the initiative. So, I encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support my amendment to make our transportation system safer. And at this time, I'm going to make the offer.
▶ 9:34:23I'm going to withdraw it and I'm going to ask our full committee in a bipartisan manner to look at this. This benefits every region, every neighborhood, and I hope we're able to do this in another time. I yield back.
▶ 9:34:36Without objection. We're now considering the bill for amendments. For what purposes, Mr. Ryan seek recognition.
▶ 9:34:46Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the
▶ 9:34:48Clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 9:34:51An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Ryan of New York number
▶ 9:34:59Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Ryan is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 9:35:05Thank you, Mr. Chair. My bipartisan amendment, the Crossings Act, would codify the FRA's current signal and grade crossing inspection requirements. It doesn't create new mandates. It doesn't impose any additional costs on railroads.
▶ 9:35:19It emphasizes the work that is already being performed today uh to an exceptional degree that ensures the safe operation and oversight of technology across America's entire rail But right now, large rail companies are fighting to roll back longstanding FRA regulations that require in-person inspections of highway grade rail crossings and signal systems.
▶ 9:35:43These companies want to replace proven in-person visual inspections by highly trained signalmen instead with remote cameras. And they also want to extend the time frame between these inspections from the current 30 days to 90 days. For communities like mine that have in my case over a hundred uh at grade crossings, this is a safety disaster and it is an absolute dealbreaker.
▶ 9:36:07My district in the Hudson Valley of New York has a significant amount of railroad traffic, thousands of miles of both freight and passenger rail across the district, including both Amtrak uh for passengers and CSX, which operates freight trains through one of the more densely populated urban areas of my district, including Cornwall, Newberg, Kingston, Sogerties.
▶ 9:36:28In our average cities, about 35 trains run through the heart of each of those cities every day, often carrying hazardous materials, waste, petroleum, and industrial chemicals. Of the more than 100 rail crossings in my district, a significant number desperately need redesign and safety enhancements. We should be making these crossings safer, not cutting back on the potentially life-saving in-person inspections our rail systems need to operate smoothly and safely through our communities.
▶ 9:36:56I think all of us here in a bipartisan manner are aware of the essential uh importance of safety to keep our entire economy running when it comes to our rail system. I want to thank uh my colleague and co-sponsor of this, Mr. Van Drew, for co-sponsoring this and and supporting uh the amendment. I also want to uh acknowledge eight of my Republican colleagues across the House who have been raising these concerns since February with the administration with Secretary Duffy.
▶ 9:37:23I think this is one of those uh important bipartisan safety measures that's also great for our economy. Um so I'm not sure uh Mr. Chair if uh any of those colleagues are here yet and want to speak. Um but I I yield uh back to you on that.
▶ 9:37:41Thank you, Mr. Breham.
▶ 9:37:43Thank you. I rise in support of this safety amendment. The Crossings Act protects the inspection and testing standards that are already in place and working to keep trains moving safely and efficiently. These proven safeguards help prevent failures before they come become accidents by ensuring that gates, lights, bells, and signal systems are physically inspected and tested by trained professionals in the field. These standards provide critical oversight and accountability for the safety systems that protect railroad workers, communities, and the traveling public.
▶ 9:38:13While technology and remote monitoring can support safety, they cannot replace the expertise of a well-trained human inspector. The Crossings Act ensures these proven working safeguards cannot be watered down. I yield. Do any other members wish to be recognized on the amendment? Recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the amendment on behalf of Chairman Graves. I oppose this amendment. Current inspection requirements are prescriptive and dictate the manner and methods of safety.
▶ 9:38:44The previous administration regularly blocked applications and sought reasonable variances. This amendment continues rulemaking that is inconsistent with President Trump's deregulatory agenda and urge my colleagues to vote no. Are the further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 9:39:09All those opposed signify by saying nay.
▶ 9:39:15The naysay have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 9:39:26For what purpose does Miss Hoy seek
▶ 9:39:29Um I have an amendment at the desk. Mr.
▶ 9:39:32the clerk will designate the amendment. an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Hoy of Oregon number
▶ 9:39:42Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Hy is recognized for five minutes to speak on her amendment.
▶ 9:39:48Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um my amendment would ensure that covered bridge projects receive full and fair consideration when states award competitive bridge funding. In Oregon, covered bridges were built to meet the needs of rural communities. Lane County, where I live and home of the University of Oregon, once had more than 400 of them built readily available wood to cross our rivers and creeks.
▶ 9:40:12The roof and sidings help protect the bridges from rain and decay, which made these bridges especially useful in Oregon's wet climate. Today, 20 covered bridges remain in Lane County, the most of any county in Oregon and more than any county west of the Mississippi River. Because these bridges are expensive to repair, owned by counties, and don't carry high volumes of traffic, they're often deprioritized for federal funding. But ignoring them does not make the costs go away.
▶ 9:40:42Counties still need to stabilize and repair them before they become a safety risk. The Curran Bridge and the Stewart Bridge near Cottage Grove are now structurally unstable with repair estimates of up to $5 million. Now, $5 million is is budget dust upon budget dust in this building, but it's a hell of a lot for a rural community. For years, there was a dedicated federal program to help preserve historic covered bridges, but it no longer exists.
▶ 9:41:10Now, I'm not asking to recreate that program today. I'm just asking that as states implement this bill, covered bridges are not overlooked just because they don't carry the same traffic as a modern highway bridge. the the communities responsible for keeping our roads safe deserve a fair chance to compete for the bridge funding um available under this bill. I urge adoption of the amendment and I yield
▶ 9:41:40Thank you. Do any members wish to be recognized on the amendment?
▶ 9:41:47Thank you. I'm recognized myself for five minutes to speak on the amendment on behalf of Chairman Graves. I oppose this amendment. The bridge formula program authorized in this bill provides states with the resources and flexibility they need to invest in their bridge needs. Are there any further speakers on this amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. I.
▶ 9:42:14All those opposed signify by saying nay.
▶ 9:42:18The naysay have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 9:42:32For what purpose does Miss Fauci seek
▶ 9:42:35Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 9:42:39Thank you.
▶ 9:42:40The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 9:42:42An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Fushi of North Carolina number Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Fushi is recognized for five minutes to speak on her amendment.
▶ 9:42:56Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As of today, national average gas prices are $455 per gallon, which is $1.37 up since last year. American families across the country are feeling the pressure of rising costs. And part of the work that we are doing here today is giving the American people multiple solutions to weather this current energy crisis we find ourselves in.
▶ 9:43:22One solution includes expanding publicly available electric vehicle charging networks across our nation. By investing in reliable, accessible charging infrastructure, we can help more Americans save money on fuel, reduce dependence on volatile gas prices while creating good paying jobs, and bolstering manufacturing here at home. This is about affordability and opportunity.
▶ 9:43:48Whether you live in a rural community, a suburb, or a major city, drivers should have the confidence that charging stations are available, convenient, and affordable. My amendment is straightforward. It reauthorizes what we agreed to in the bipartisan infrastructure law for the charging and fueling infrastructure grant program that provides funding to strategically deploy accessible electric vehicle charging infrastructure and other alternative fueling infrastructure.
▶ 9:44:18Thank you and I yield back.
▶ 9:44:21Do any members wish to be recognized on the amendment? Thank you, Miss Fuji. I recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the amendment. On behalf of Chairman Graves, I oppose this amendment. This bill does not continue funding for the charging and fueling infrastructure program. Thank you, and I yield back. Are there any further speakers on this amendment?
▶ 9:44:47Seeing none, are there amendments to the Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. All those opposed signify by saying nay.
▶ 9:45:01The nays have it and the amendment is not agreed to. We're now considering the bill for amendments. For what purpose does Miss Po seek recognition?
▶ 9:45:16Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um I'm sorry, Mr. uh chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. The clerk will designate the
▶ 9:45:25an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Poe of New Jersey number 036 revision one.
▶ 9:45:34Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Poe is recognized for five minutes to speak on her amendment.
▶ 9:45:39Thank you, Mr. Mr. Chairman. I want to thank also my colleague uh Mr. Van Drew for co-sponsoring this amendment. The Amtrak North nor Northeast Corridor is intricral to transportation along the east coast. So I was pleased that we were able to secure an increase in funding over the next five years.
▶ 9:46:02Maintaining a such a critical investment requires substantial support that is shared among the states, the commission and the federal government. State and commuter uh rail agencies, however, have seen increased cost share burdens.
▶ 9:46:20Today, agencies like New Jersey Transit, among others, have found themselves having to carry a higher share of the cost for capital improvements based on different metrics uh calculating splits between Amtrak and state entities.
▶ 9:46:38Our bipartisan amendment would authorize a GAO study examining the current cost share requirements for the Amtrak Northeast uh corridor capital improvement projects and impact on state and local uh transportation budgets.
▶ 9:46:58This includes reviewing current cost share requirement calculations and methodologies, methodologies, their impact on state and local transportation budgets and providing recommendations that may improve the current models. It is about fairness and ensuring the cost share takes into account rail ownership, multi-partner agreements and maintenance practices.
▶ 9:47:27As budgets across the state tightens, it is vital that we examine the current models to assess the equities in carrying the costs to maintain and improve the northeast corridor. I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment. Thank you, uh, Mr. Speaker. I yield back.
▶ 9:47:47Thank you. Do any members wish to be recognized on the amendment? I recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the amendment. On behalf of the chair, I oppose this amendment. This amendment directs a study on the cost share for Amtrak's Northeast Corridor Capital Improvements Project. A program currently has an 80% federal match, which is common across federal modal infrastructure grant programs, including rail. And I encourage my colleagues to oppose the amendment.
▶ 9:48:15Uh are there any further speakers on the Miss Pope?
▶ 9:48:18Mr. Mr. Chairman, I would like to request a recorded vote, please. we have to do a voice vote first, but but Mr. Vandrew wish to be uh recognized? Mr. Vandrew,
▶ 9:48:40just wanted to say that I support this amendment. This is simply about studying the issue and having more transparency and more clar clarity. It doesn't mandate anything. It doesn't mandate a policy change. It's just to make sure we're doing the right thing. I yield
▶ 9:49:00Are there any further speakers on the Seeing none, are there amendments to the
▶ 9:49:07Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 9:49:11I. All those opposed signify by saying
▶ 9:49:15The naysay have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 9:49:19Mr. Mr. Chairman, I would like to request a recorded vote, please.
▶ 9:49:25The gentle lady requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the question are
▶ 9:49:37For what purpose does Miss Freriedman seek recognition? I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 9:49:43The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 9:49:45An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Freiedman of California number
▶ 9:49:53Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Freriedman is recognized for 5 minutes to speak on her
▶ 9:49:58Thank you, Mr. Chair. My amendment reinstates the carbon reduction program, which funds projects designed to reduce transportation emissions from on-road highway sources. This program currently funds critical projects like congestion management and reduction, carbon pollution reduction strategies, and the deployment of alternative fuel vehicles. Now, California has received about $110 million of CPR funding per year under the IIGJA.
▶ 9:50:25These dollars translate directly into huge benefits for my constituents. benefits like noticeably improved air quality, res infrastructure that is more resilient to our natural disasters, energy efficiency, and most importantly, lower costs. Investing in decarbonization reduces energy costs for my constituents and mitigates long-term climate impacts. This program is critical to achieving California's climate goals and reducing emissions and pollution from the transportation sector.
▶ 9:50:56I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back. Thank you. Do any members wish to be recognized on the amendment? Thank you, Miss Freman. I recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the amendment. On behalf of Chairman Graves, I oppose this amendment. Proud that this bill returns our focus to improving our nation's most vital assets. This bill does not continue the carbon reduction program, which funds projects like replacing street lighting with energy efficient alternatives.
▶ 9:51:26Uh thank you and I yield back. Are there any further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 9:51:40All those opposed signify by saying nay.
▶ 9:51:43The naysay have it and the amendment is not agreed to. For what purpose does Mr. Perry seek
▶ 9:52:02Mr. Chairman, I've got an amendment at the desk.
▶ 9:52:05The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 9:52:07An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Perry of Pennsylvania number 222.
▶ 9:52:15Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Perry is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 9:52:20Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment would repeal section 13C employee protective arrangements. Since the passage of the Urban Mass Transportation Act in 1964, the taxpayers have provided well over $1.5 trillion in subsidies for mass transit. Folks, this is an astounding amount of money for anything, let alone for a mode of transportation that counts for less than 4% of commuting trips.
▶ 9:52:46and that saw its ridership peak 80 808 80 years ago. Based on any metric, the transit sector was in steep decline before the pandemic. Transit worker productivity has dropped by nearly 60% with the number of riders carried per operating employee dropping from 57,000 in 1964 to 24,000 in 2018.
▶ 9:53:12All while worker productivity in nearly every other sector has greatly increased. Inflation adjusted operating costs, that's pass per passenger per mile, are up more than 500%.
▶ 9:53:25Less than $1 pass per passenger per mile in 1964 versus $5 per passenger per mile in Modern transit ridership peaked in 2014 and has declined almost every year before the pandemic before dropping off significantly. In 2019, the average American traveled less than 165 miles on transit each year compared to 15,000 uh average miles by vehicle.
▶ 9:53:56Clearly, we need to make significant foundational changes to the way our nation funds, builds, and operates public transit. It's clear that significant inflows of federal funding has only made matters worse. Autonomous vehicle technology has the potential to vastly improve transit service and delivers some semblance of return on investment. Unfortunately, a significant barrier exists to the introduction of this technology.
▶ 9:54:23Section 13C employee protective arrangements is one of those barriers. this section of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, which makes FTA funding contingent upon a certification by the Secretary of Labor that fair and equitable arrangements are made to protect employees from losing benefits or rights and against a worsening of their employee correction employment In practice, these so-called employee
▶ 9:54:53protective agreements effectively provide transit unions veto power over any potential federal grants to their employee, giving the unions unparalleled negotiating leverage to force transit agency to cave to their demands. even though it keeps them in the, you know, essentially in the dark ages.
▶ 9:55:11Since enacted in 1964, the impact of these agreements and arrangements and the negotiating leverage they provide transit unions on the cost of transit service and the productivity of transit workers is both undeniable and offensive to the American taxpayer.
▶ 9:55:28As the stat as the statistics cited above demonstrate, these arrangements have devastated the transit sector and created a black hole that sucks taxpayer money and has left the system broke, broken, and bleeding out cash. Look, I know this is political, but I mean, we just can't keep doing this. There's got to be an answer. can't continue to throw good money after bad in pursuit of new technological approaches without addressing the issues that have undermined our previous investments.
▶ 9:55:58And so I I I'm sure that I'll get some plenty of no votes on this. But if somebody else has some better way of doing it, I'm happy to entertain whatever that better way is. Um but they're pretty clear like this is not working yet. We're going to just keep throwing more money at it and I I don't really know how you how any of us can account for that.
▶ 9:56:22So, at least I'm going to stand up and be heard on this issue and let the people that uh employ me here know where I stand on it. So, I would encourage a yes vote on this amendment. I'll yield the balance.
▶ 9:56:33Thank you, Mr. Perry. The chair recognizes Miss Davids.
▶ 9:56:38Thank you, Chairman. The ranking member opposes Perry amendment number 222. This amendment would repeal what are known as the 13C transit labor protections. This critical 13C provision ensures the rights of workers under existing collective bargaining agreements and ensures the protection of employees against a worsening of their position. We owe our transit workers the support they need to be successful and safe on the job.
▶ 9:57:03The underlying bill invests in American workers, in their safety, in their training, in their future in the US and in the economy. This amendment goes in the opposite direction and amounts to a slap in the face to transit workers. The ranking member supports critical safeguards for the women and men who keep our transit system running every single day. The ranking member strongly urges a no vote. I yield back.
▶ 9:57:28Thank you. Are there any further speakers on this amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 9:57:42All those opposed signify by saying nay.
▶ 9:57:45The nays have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 9:57:51The gentleman requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the question are
▶ 9:58:06I recognize Mr. Mr. Duzio to offer amendment 77 on Mr. Garamondi's behalf.
▶ 9:58:12Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 9:58:14Clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 9:58:16An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Duzio of Pennsylvania on behalf of Mr. Garmeny number 077.
▶ 9:58:25Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Delusio is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 9:58:34Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I'll keep this simple and short. I think if we are serious about wanting to make more stuff here in America, we should be buying American. And that starts with our government, the federal government. This amendment led by Mr. Gar Mendy and Mr. Westerman would require that to the maximum extent practicable. All cement used in projects that receive Department of Transportation funding must have the entire manufacturing process occur within North America and comply with federal performance, labor, and environmental laws. Uh, with that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back.
▶ 9:59:07Gentleman yields back. Any other members seeking to be
▶ 9:59:22Mr. Andrew,
▶ 9:59:24uh, let me say briefly, there are a cartel of producers who produce the and even those that are located in the United States of America are not American companies by and large at all. Um, so I think and if we only bought all American, we still wouldn't have enough at this point. So we want to get projects done quickly. We want them done efficiently. And yes, we do want to buy American.
▶ 9:59:53Until we produce more in the United States, it is a real problem and a real challenge and this would create some real issues. So, I have concerns with it. I yield back.
▶ 10:00:05Any other member seek recognition? Mr. Carbajal.
▶ 10:00:11Thank you, Mr. Chair. I uh I tend to agree with u Mr. Van Drew. I think that until we have more supply, uh, this could pose some unintended challenges. That's why we also moved to get an exemption from BABA in the bill, the bipartisan infrastructure law, because we came to the conclusion and understanding that we just don't have the supply that is needed to be able to
▶ 10:00:41execute and implement the many infrastructure projects in our country. So I I just want to raise and echo similar concerns as Mr. Vanrew raised. I think the amendment is well intentioned, but uh there's a different reality that we have to come to terms with. With that, I'll yield back.
▶ 10:01:04I now recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the amendment on behalf of the chairman. Uh chairman opposes the amendment. Uh the underlying bill does not provide any materials preference. Conversely, this amendment would require that all cement used in projects receiving federal financial assistance use quotequalified cement. So I oppose the amendment. Are there any further speakers on the amendment?
▶ 10:01:32Seeing none, are there amendments to the Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say I. I. All those in favor say nay.
▶ 10:01:44The opinion of the chair, the naysay have it.
▶ 10:01:46Mr. Chairman, request a record vote,
▶ 10:01:50The gentleman requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the question are For what purpose does Mr. Van Drew seek
▶ 10:02:07Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. The clerk will designate the
▶ 10:02:12An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Van Drew of New Jersey number 123.
▶ 10:02:20Thank you.
▶ 10:02:21Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Van Drew is recognized for up to five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 10:02:27Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise today in strong support of this amendment to expand access to automated external defibrillators commonly known as AEDs at transportation facilities across the United States of America. At its core, this is about one thing and only one thing, saving lives. Every year, hundreds of thousands of Americans suffer sudden cardiac arrest.
▶ 10:02:55In those moments, every single second counts. Survival rates drop rapidly with each passing minute without defibrillation. When an AED is nearby and it's used quickly, it can mean the difference between life and death. Yet, most bus terminals, furry terminals, rail stations, and interstate rest areas either letter lack readily accessible AEDs or do not have clear coordinated emergency response protocols.
▶ 10:03:25in place to respond to these frightening emergencies. My amendment is simple. It simply allows states allows states and localities to use existing federal surface transportation block grant funds to purchase and deploy AEDs and develop emergency response plans at these facilities. It does not spend more. It does not create a new spending program. It does not impose a new federal mandate.
▶ 10:03:54It simply gives communities more flexibilities to use existing transportation dollars to protect the traveling public. This is the type of practical measure that should unite all of us. Let me tell you, and I know this, I'm I'm a dentist and I've seen people go into cardiac arrest. Cardiac arrest doesn't care whether you're a Republican. It doesn't care whether you're a Democrat. It just happens.
▶ 10:04:19It doesn't care whether you are in an airport, a ferry, a terminal, or a rest stop off the interstate. If an AED is available, when someone collapses, a mother goes home to her family, a father gets another chance, and a child keeps a parent. I truly sincerely believe that on this specific vote, every single one of us that vote for this will look back and be grateful that we supported it. An amendment that will literally save people's lives.
▶ 10:04:49We will save lives if we do this. I want to thank Congresswoman Gillan for partnering with me on this effort and I truly sincerely urge my colleagues to support this amendment. Thank you, Chairman, and I yield back. Do any members wish to be recognized on any other members?
▶ 10:05:11Uh, Miss Gillan.
▶ 10:05:13Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in support of this bipartisan amendment which would make life-saving defibrillation technology more accessible and available in our transportation hubs. According to the American Heart Association, over 356,000 out of hospital cardiac arrests occur in the United States each year. The chances of survival decrease 7 to 10% for every minute without defibrillation. But with rapid use of an AED, survival rates can double or even triple.
▶ 10:05:44Each year, tens of thousands of Americans suffer sudden cardiac arrest in public spaces. By making sure AEDs are on hand in busy transportation hubs across America, we can save lives. This amendment, which is modeled off legislation that Congressman Vandrew and I introduced last year, would direct the departments of transportation and health and human services to issue guidelines for AED placement and emergency response planning in transportation hubs such as rail and bus terminals and highway
▶ 10:06:15rest areas. It would also allow states to use existing transportation grant funding to help pay for AEDs and emergency response planning in public spaces. I thank Congressman Van Drew for his leadership on this issue and I urge adoption of this common sense life-saving measure. And with that, I yield back.
▶ 10:06:37Mr. Larson is recognized.
▶ 10:06:39Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I would love to support this amendment. This is one of those amendments that um is doing really truly really great things. uh expanding the availability of AEDs in transportation facilities, providing allowing the secretary to provide guidelines, uh certainly not opposed to the intent to facilitate access to this equipment.
▶ 10:07:00In fact, the underlying bill convenes a transportation rule committee to look at whether certain medical and first aid equipment should be more readily available um at transit stations, on vehicles, and such. The rulemaking committee will convene stakeholders including transit agencies, labor unions, physicians to develop recommendations to the secretary who will determine whether or not to issue new rules and this approach will ensure that experts are thinking through all the facets of implementation.
▶ 10:07:26So thankfully we've got great language in the underlying bill and given the steps already in the underlying bill, I'll oppose the amendment. I yield back.
▶ 10:07:37Any other member wish to speak on the Seeing none, I recognize myself for a quick second. I think what uh the ranking member said was absolutely perfect and so we'll leave it there. Are there any further speakers on the Seeing none, are there amendments to the Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 10:08:06All those opposed signify by saying nay. The naysay have it. May I have a recorded vote?
▶ 10:08:15The gentleman requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the question are
▶ 10:08:30For what purpose does Mr. Johnson seek recognition? Uh, I have a u an amendment at the desk. It's 061 which I'd ask unanimous consent to offer along with uh to offer and withdraw along with uh amendment 069.
▶ 10:08:48Without objection, the clerk will designate the amendments.
▶ 10:08:53An onblock amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Johnson of Georgia containing numbers 061 and 069.
▶ 10:09:03Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Johnson is recognized for up to 5 minutes to speak on the onblock amendment.
▶ 10:09:10Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise today to strike section 10412 on the self-contained propelled freight vehicle. Section 10412 pushes the Federal Railroad Administration towards a final rule on self-contained propelled freight vehicles before we fully understand how this technology interacts with every facet of the rail network. This technology is not inherently bad. It may even prove useful.
▶ 10:09:40But new technology should not be rolled out based on the judgment of one FRA administrator alone. It should be examined, tested, and evaluated by all the people who understand how it will interact with the existing rail system. That means the workers, the operators, the safety experts, the industry, and the public should all have a say.
▶ 10:10:03Section 10412 bypasses that collaborative approach and it moves the decisionmaking into a narrower lane before the testing is complete and before the people who operate and maintain our rail system every day have had a meaningful say.
▶ 10:10:21With regard to um amendment 069, I also um it I have another amendment that allows states to modernize the freight safety data systems that are essential to keeping our roads and freight corridors safe.
▶ 10:10:39Right now, states are required to manage an enormous amount of freight safety information with systems outdated, fragmented, and in many cases unable to keep up with the demands of a modern freight network. We ask states to make datadriven decisions, but we do not give them the flexibility to update the very systems that produce that data. That is a gap that my amendment closes.
▶ 10:11:05It will allow states to use their existing federal planning funds to modernize freight safety data systems. Nothing more, nothing less, because safety decisions are only as strong as the data behind them. If we want safer highways, if we want fewer crashes, if we want a freight system that works for communities, then we need to give states the ability to modernize the systems that inform those decisions.
▶ 10:11:32I hope I can work with the committee to find ways to address both of these issues. And with that, I will withdraw both of uh those amendments. Unblock amendment is withdrawn.
▶ 10:11:55For what purpose does Mr. Carson seek
▶ 10:11:59Mr. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. The clerk will designate the
▶ 10:12:04an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Carson of Indiana number 059.
▶ 10:12:12Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Carson is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 10:12:20Thank you, Chairman. Uh my last amendment also supports the rail maintenance workforce, but it's a bit broader. Uh it addresses new services related to the same rail equipment pools subtitle section 10301.
▶ 10:12:34The underlying bill allows these pools to be used to lease or purchase equipment by interstate compact member states and also provide eligibility for the federal railroad rehabilitation and improvement financing program or riff. My amendment improves these equipment pool provisions by requiring that any new services under this section will be subject to all current and applicable laws.
▶ 10:13:02This includes the Railroad Retirement Act, the Railroad Labor Act, and the Railroad Unemployment Act. Uh my amendment um really looks into how providing more flexibility to allow rail equipment pools should not be done at the expense of maintaining strong labor standards for safety and workforce protections.
▶ 10:13:24Which is why this amendment is supported by the International Association of Machinists, IBEDW, Smart Union, and the Transportation Workers This amendment ensures that any employee of a rail service provider under this section who is adversely affected by equipment pool agreements will be covered by current labor protections. This is only fair. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield back the balance of my time.
▶ 10:13:56Any other member wish to comment on the Seeing none, I recognize myself to speak on the amendment on behalf of the chairman. The chairman opposes amendment. The amendment runs counter to the purpose of the equipment pools. They are intended to spur competition and Let's see.
▶ 10:14:26I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment. Are there any further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I. All those opposed signify by saying nay. In opinion of the chair, the nays have The amendment is not agreed to. For what purpose does Miss Titus seek
▶ 10:14:56Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. The clerk will designate the amendment
▶ 10:15:01amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Titus of Nevada number 301.
▶ 10:15:08Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Titus is recognized for five minutes to speak on her amendment.
▶ 10:15:14Thank you very much. This amendment would ensure that all traditional rail workers, not just the operating crafts, would be covered by labor protections and benefits. Congress has given these to other rail workers. uh the operating crafts as I said and I think that it should apply across the board.
▶ 10:15:32I've just learned recently though since this process has been unfolding today that there is ongoing um discussion between the industry Herszog and labor on this issue. some of the players have unfortunately left town because of the holiday. Um, and they say that they're not they haven't come to an agreement, but they're very close and they will have language ready next week before the bill goes to the floor.
▶ 10:16:03Uh, I'll I'm willing to withdraw the amendment if I can have some assurance from the chair that when they reach that agreement, he'll work with us to see if there's a way to uh get that in this bill. I yield back.
▶ 10:16:18We'll do without objection. For what purpose does Mr. Hub Huffman seek recognition? Pardon me.
▶ 10:16:35I have an amendment at the desk, Mr.
▶ 10:16:36The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 10:16:38An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Huffman of California, number 076, revision 1, formerly denoted as Huffman073.
▶ 10:16:50Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Huffman is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 10:16:56Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I do want to thank ranking member Norton and Congressman Frost for joining me in offering this amendment. So, it's about something very basic, uh, which is about the federal government keeping its word. Now, the underlying bill includes language protecting grants awarded prospectively under this authorization. Um, that's good that in the future uh when the government promises to award one of these grants, that promise will not be broken.
▶ 10:17:26Our amendment simply extends that same protection to grants that were previously announced the past 15 months under the bipartisan infrastructure law. If Congress believes future grant commitments should be honored, then we should also ensure previously announced grants are honored as well. It's it's pretty basic.
▶ 10:17:46Communities across this nation, states, cities, tribes, ports, transit agencies, regional planning organizations, all of them in some cases have spent years developing competitive applications, securing local matching funds, conducting environmental reviews, hiring engineers, incurring all kinds of costs in reliance on the award of one of these grants, beginning project design based on grant selections that were publicly announced, announced
▶ 10:18:16by our government, by the Department of Transportation. But now, the Trump administration in some cases is arbitrarily cancelling, delaying, or refusing to execute many of those announced awards after rece recipients were already told they'd been selected and began to detrimentally rely on that uh award. These are not abstract line items on a spreadsheet for Doge to erase.
▶ 10:18:45These are real projects that communities all over our nation are counting on. Repairing bridges, improving roads, modernizing transit systems, upgrading rail and port infrastructure, building safer streets, strengthening climate resilience, reconnecting neighborhoods divided by highways, expanding EV charging infrastructure, and a lot more.
▶ 10:19:08My amendment simply says that if DOT has made a promise, if they've already announced a project for funding, the department has to keep that promise. They've got to follow through and execute the grant agreement. This is not a radical idea. This is good governance. Communities cannot responsibly plan infrastructure projects if federal commitments can be ripped away after the fact every time there's a change in political leadership. Pulling the rug out from under them creates chaos.
▶ 10:19:38It wastes money. It undermines public trust and it delays desperately needed infrastructure improvements. This amendment also reaffirms Congress's constitutional role. Congress appropriated these funds and establish these programs into law.
▶ 10:19:54Administrations do not get to selectively ignore congressional intent or overturn legally awarded projects simply because they disagree with some aspect of a grant's application or of some word used uh in the grant award. Infrastructure projects take years to plan and deliver. They require predictability, certainty, and partnership between the federal government and local communities.
▶ 10:20:21This amendment restores that certainty and ensures that transportation funding decisions are guided by law and merit, not partisan political reversals. I urge adoption of this amendment and yield Gentleman yields back. Do any members wish to be recognized on the amendment? I recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the amendment. When President Trump took office, his DOT inherited a backlog of more than 3,200 unobligated grants.
▶ 10:20:50The department has worked diligently over the past 18 months to clear this backlog, requiring the obligation of all these grants without any further flexibility, checks or review would be ill advised. Oppose the amendment. Are there any further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say I.
▶ 10:21:16All those opposed say no. The nos have it. The amendment is not agreed to. The gentleman requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the question are
▶ 10:21:42Mr. Carbboral, you're up. For what purpose do you seek recognition?
▶ 10:21:51Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 10:21:54The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 10:21:57An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Carbajal of California number
▶ 10:22:05Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Carbajaw is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My amendment would finally extend federal hours of service protections to railroad yard masters. These are the same protections already afforded to other safety sensitive rail employees, including locomotive engineers, conductors, switchmen, dispatchers, and signal employees.
▶ 10:22:33Yard masters perform safety critical work. Yet under current law, there are no federal limits on the number of hours they can be required to work in a day, a week, or a month. That gap in federal law makes little sense, particularly as we continue to emphasize rail safety and operational accountability across our transportation networks.
▶ 10:22:57Yard masters are responsible for directing rail yard operations, coordinating train movements, overseeing switching operations, and managing the safe arrival and departure of freight and passenger trains. They serve as the nerve center of rail yard activity. Their decisions affect workers on the ground, the movement of hazardous materials, freight reliability, and the safety of communities many of these rail lines pass through.
▶ 10:23:26If we recognize that fatigue poses serious risk for engineers, dispatchers, and conductors, then we should recognize the exact same reality for yard masters. Fatigue does not disappear simply because a worker's title is different. Long hours, irregular schedules, and chronic fatigue can slow reaction times and increase the risk of mistakes. This is not a new or radical proposal.
▶ 10:23:50In fact, this language was included in the House passed Invest in America Act during the last surface transportation reauthorization process. This proposal is also bipartisan and has garnered support from my Republican colleagues like Representative Lawler. This amendment represents a straightforward worker safety measure that brings parody and consistency to federal rail safety laws.
▶ 10:24:17And I want to acknowledge the workers and labor organizations, including smart transportation division who have continued advocating for these protections. They understand better than anyone the demands placed on yard masters and the importance of ensuring workers perform their jobs safely and effectively. And at the end, it's safety for the public.
▶ 10:24:40At a time when freight rail continues to play such a vital role in our national economy and supply chains, we should invest not only in our infrastructure, but also in the safety and well-being of the workers who keep the system moving every single day. This is similar to other amendments that we've considered today by Representative Nells. This amendment is practical and reasonable.
▶ 10:25:04However, I understand the limitations of the big four agreement and wish to withdraw my amendment with a commitment from you, Mr. Chairman, to work with me on this legislation. With that, I withdraw my amendment and yield back and hope you'll comment on that working together part. We shall.
▶ 10:25:23Thank you. Any other members uh seek recognition?
▶ 10:25:32Yes, we're done. No amendment is withdrawn. For what purpose does Mr. Beg seek recognition?
▶ 10:25:40Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 10:25:43Clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 10:25:46An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Begage of Alaska number 124.
▶ 10:25:53Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Beg is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment. rise to offer an amendment that directs the secretary working with the transportation research board to study and pilot the use of natural pylon and concrete for federal aid highway projects. Natural pylon is volcanic ash.
▶ 10:26:14There are significant deposits across the western United States and when properly processed and blended with cement, it makes concrete that is stronger, more durable and more energyefficient to produce. It also reduces our reliance on foreign supply chains for construction materials. Domestic producers have already demonstrated commercial viability. State DOS have begun working with the material. The amendment is techn technologically neutral.
▶ 10:26:41It benefits any qualified producer and it's about getting longerlasting roads and bridges while maintaining the domestic supply chain. This amendment costs nothing, breaks no new ground on federal authority, and gives us the data that we need to build better infrastructure with Americanmade materials. It is the kind of investment in domestic innovation that should have broad support. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment and I yield back.
▶ 10:27:06Any other members?
▶ 10:27:08Mr. Larson.
▶ 10:27:09Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, Mr. Chair, um, I appreciate working with my good friend from Alaska, Mr. Beg. Um, but I have to oppose his amendment. This amendment establishes a pilot program to test the application of a specific form of highway pavement natural polyons as an additive to cement. Not certainly not opposed to this concept, but we can't authorize a pilot program for every kind of construction material.
▶ 10:27:32The good news for the members is that the underlying bill furthers research and development into innovative payment technologies and we've addressed the goals of this amendment in the base bill in a much more holistic manner. I'd ask my colleagues to oppose this amendment. With that, yield back. Any other members seek recognition on the amendment? I recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the amendment. The bill, the underlying bill, avoids providing materials preference. Therefore, the chairman opposes the amendment.
▶ 10:28:02Are there any further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say I.
▶ 10:28:13All those opposed say no. The nos have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 10:28:26For what purpose does Mr. Garcia seek
▶ 10:28:29Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. The clerk will designate the
▶ 10:28:34An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Garcia of Illinois number
▶ 10:28:41Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Garcia is recognized for five minutes to speak on his amendment.
▶ 10:28:47Thank you, uh, Mr. Chair. Uh, first I intend to withdraw this amendment, but the amendment would increase minimum insurance requirements for motor carriers and require that this value be indexed to account for changes in medical cost inflation. The minimum insurance requirement of $750,000 was established in 1980. Think about that.
▶ 10:29:15The minimum has not been raised since then despite the rising cost of medical care. To make matters worse, these are amendments. There are amendments rather filed to this bill that seek to allow larger and heavier trucks on our roads. Larger and heavier trucks increase the risk and severity of crashes and place our loved ones at risk. Fundamentally, my amendment is about safety.
▶ 10:29:42This isn't about trial lawyers or an attack on truckers. It's about making families who have lost loved ones whole. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And with that, I will now withdraw my
▶ 10:29:56Gentleman withdraws his amendment. For what purpose does Mr. Taylor seek
▶ 10:30:07Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 10:30:09The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 10:30:12An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Taylor of Ohio number
▶ 10:30:19Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Taylor is recognized for five minutes.
▶ 10:30:25Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm proud to speak in favor of my amendment that provides the secretary authority to enactivate US DOT numbers when FMCSA has also revoked or suspended a person or employers registration. My amendment would equip FMCSA with another enforcement tool to prevent Chameleon carriers from continuing operations under an active US DOT number after their registrations have been revoked.
▶ 10:30:50This common sense amendment will close existing loopholes that allow Chameleon carriers to continue operating and make our roads safer. I want to thank Representative Figures and Representative Shrieve for joining me in this effort. I ask now for unanimous consent to withdraw this amendment with a commitment to work on this provision as the bill advances and I yield back.
▶ 10:31:11We shall and the amendment is withdrawn. For what purpose does Mr. Patronis seek
▶ 10:31:27Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I've got a um an amendment for the bill.
▶ 10:31:31The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 10:31:34An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Petronis of Florida number 046.
▶ 10:31:41Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Petronis is recognized for five minutes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Technology is fighting me, sir. Sorry. My amendment ensures railroad projects aren't slowed down because of historic preservation reviews, unless the Secretary of Transportation decides the site is truly historically significant.
▶ 10:32:12Right now, common sense rail projects get buried under endless bureaucratic reviews that slow down repairs, waste taxpayers dollars, and stall growth. And let's be clear, it's not just some radical new idea. Highway projects have already had this exemption. My amendment simply gives rail projects the exact same fair treatment.
▶ 10:32:35If we can streamline the reviews for highway, then we should be able to do the same for railroads that move American goods, strengthen supply chains, and keep our economy running. I absolutely believe that we should protect historic landmarks. But we what we should not do is let Washington bureaucrats hold up routine repairs for months or even years over meaningless technicalities. And yes, this actually happens.
▶ 10:33:02A few years ago, there was a project to rebuild an ordinary railroad timber bridge. Nothing historic, nothing special, just basic infrastructure that needed repairs. Because the project was swapped and some timber parts for concrete, it triggered a massive federal review process. Then the bureaucrats started arguing over the color of the treated wood because newer timber has a temporary green tint. Think about this.
▶ 10:33:30Americans are waiting on infrastructure repairs while government officials debate the shades of lumber. This is exactly what is wrong with Washington. The American people are tired of projects getting stalled by unnecessary regulations and endless processes. We need a government that knows the difference between protecting true history and creating pointless delays. This amendment does exactly that. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield back.
▶ 10:33:59Any other members wish to speak on the amendment? Mr. Larson.
▶ 10:34:03Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I rise to oppose amendment 046 from Represent Petronis. This amendment would exemp exempt all property in a railroad ride ofway from the National Historic Preservation Act. The underlying bill makes changes to the National Historic Preservation Act to improve streamlining and project delivery. But this particular wholesale exemption would undermine the ability to protect historic infrastructure.
▶ 10:34:27The amendment requires the secretary to determine within a year which elements of a railroad's rideway should be considered historic. There are over 150,000 track miles in the US, some of which have been uh railroad property for over 150 years. The best information for what is historic does in fact exist with railroad property owners rather than US DOT. Yet, this amendment does not require railroads to participate in the rulemaking process governing their own property. So I would urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. With that, I yield back.
▶ 10:34:58Gentlemen yields back. Any other members wish to speak on the amendment. Seeing none, I recognize myself on behalf of the chairman. Chairman opposes the amendment under the big four agreement. Are there any further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say I.
▶ 10:35:20I. All those opposed say no.
▶ 10:35:24In the opinion of the chair, the nos have it.
▶ 10:35:27Request a recorded vote. Sir,
▶ 10:35:29the gentleman request a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the question are
▶ 10:35:42For what purpose does Miss Ho seek
▶ 10:35:45Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. I have an amendment at the desk. The clerk will designate the amendment
▶ 10:35:51an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Hoy of Oregon number
▶ 10:35:59Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Hy is recognized for five minutes to speak on her amendment.
▶ 10:36:05Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. I intend to offer and then withdraw this amendment to draw attention the committee's attention to the need to provide stable dedicated funding for our nation's freight challenges. INFA is one of the only federal programs to address major freight highway bridge port and multimmoal projects. These are often largecale projects that improve the supply chain reduce reduce highway congestion and strengthen uh rural economies.
▶ 10:36:34This bill would move INFA out of the highway trust fund and make it dependent on annual general fund appropriations. Now, I understand the pressure on the trust fund and we need to make hard choices to ensure it's solvent long term, but moving infra to a less predictable funding stream does not resolve the revenue problem. It simply makes funding um less predictable for projects that take years to plan, finance, permit, and building.
▶ 10:37:05In uh Kuz Bay, an area that I represent, the Pacific Coast Intermortal PO port project would create the first fully shipto-rail freight port on the West Coast and create 6,000 goodaying jobs for people on the south coast. That project cannot be planned one appropriation cycle at a time. So, it goes without saying, we need freight, but we need to maintain and improve it if we want our communities not just to survive, but to thrive.
▶ 10:37:35Um, we also need for the private sector to invest, and they need shity about projects over the long term. I hope to continue working with members of this committee to address this issue and I yield back.
▶ 10:37:53So, gentle lady withdraw her amendment. Yes, Mr. Chair.
▶ 10:37:57Amendment is withdrawn.
▶ 10:38:06For what purpose does Miss Sykes seek
▶ 10:38:10Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the
▶ 10:38:12The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 10:38:15An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Sykes of Ohio number Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Sox is recognized for five minutes.
▶ 10:38:27Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just five years ago, this house came together to pass the bipartisan infrastructure law. This historic legislation made a much needed and long overdue investment in our communities, authorizing 350 billion with the B dollars in funding for surface transportation alone over five years. Even members who voted against this bill have seen it have been seen at ribbon cutings taking credit for this funding and the infrastructure projects that are creating jobs and economic opportunity.
▶ 10:38:54In 2024, Ohio's 13th congressional district received over $176 million in investments from the bipartisan infrastructure law creating good paying jobs in the region and promoting more accessible transportation for my constituents and those who travel in and out of our community. But what the Trump administration But what does the Trump administration do on day one? freeze this funding, stopping these critical projects in their tracks and keeping people off of work.
▶ 10:39:18Unfortunately, this includes over $10 million that was awarded to the city of Akran from the reconnecting communities pilot program to support the reconnecting west aan interbt project, a series of market and equity based development solutions and transportation and infrastructure improvements that would reduce community strains created by the interbelt. Prior to its construction in 1970, this area was a vibrant community that was home to many black families in the area.
▶ 10:39:43However, due to redlinining and discriminatory practices, many of these families and businesses were displaced as a four-mile long sixlane highway was constructed that cut through central Akran decon deconnecting downtown and West Akran. These pauses were done without congressional approval and are a slap in the face to the communities that believe they were set to receive these funds and now face projects in limbo. Our constituents, states, and localities deserve to know what funding has been paused and why.
▶ 10:40:11And my amendment would require the Department of Transportation to report on detailing what projects have had their funds withheld, terminated, or required or or rescended, excuse me, or required to change their original scope and why. I urge my colleagues to increase transparency around these freezes on behalf of all of our constituents across the country and vote for my amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield back. Do any other members wish to be recognized on the amendment?
▶ 10:40:39I recognize myself for five minutes to speak on the amendment. I cannot support the amendment. The bill already makes clear that the secretary may not terminate, delay, or withhold grant agreements funded under the Build America 250 on non-stutory agency priorities. Therefore, chairman opposes the amendment. Are there any further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say I.
▶ 10:41:09All those opposed say no.
▶ 10:41:12The nays have it. The amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 10:41:23For what purpose does Miss Fushi seek
▶ 10:41:27Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. The clerk will designate the
▶ 10:41:32An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Fushi of North Carolina number 063.
▶ 10:41:40Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Fushi is recognized for five minutes to speak on her amendment.
▶ 10:41:46Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am proud to offer this amendment which I worked on with my friend and colleague, Congressman Max Miller. I also want to thank Representatives Rushan and Raleigh for co-sponsoring the Impact Act 2.0 on which this amendment is based.
▶ 10:42:04Through the Impact Act and Impact Act 2.0, we have been focused on strengthening American manufacturing and advancing innovation in the materials we rely on every day to build our roads, bridges, and critical infrastructure. Cement, concrete, and asphalt are essential to every community we represent. They also present a real opportunity to improve affordability, strengthen domestic supply chains, and reduce emissions.
▶ 10:42:34Impact 2.0 removes barriers to using innovative and novel construction materials, and gives states flexibility through the surface transportation block grant to increase the supply of domestic materials. It also establishes a voluntary federal highway administration grant program to provide technical assistance and support to help accelerate state DOT adoption of performance-based specifications and standards.
▶ 10:43:03These measures will help give American producers and startups the market certainty they need to produce these materials at scale. We have a pivotal opportunity to innovate in the materials that build our transportation infrastructure. If we want lower cost, high-performing materials, we need to support US-led innovation and make sure states have the tools to put it to work.
▶ 10:43:29In my own district, Biomason is a local example of the kind of innovation this amendment would support. They are using biotechnology to manufacture lower emissions concrete and help revolutionize the material sector. This amendment supports both sides of the market. The American producers working to scale novel construction materials and the state DOS that need confidence to use them.
▶ 10:43:58At a time when global demand for building materials is growing, we should be investing in American innovation. reducing our reliance on important cement and supporting good paying jobs. This amendment does just that. Mr. Chairman, I also ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter from supporters of the Impact Act 2.0 in support of this
▶ 10:44:25Without objection.
▶ 10:44:27Mr. Chairman, I understand this amendment will not be adopted today, but I hope we can work together to find a path forward for this amendment as this process moves forward. And with that, I withdraw the amendment and I yield back.
▶ 10:44:43Chairman appreciates the gentle lady's comments and look forward to working with you. The gentle lady withdraws the For what purpose does Miss Pose seek
▶ 10:45:00Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 10:45:03Clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 10:45:05An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Poe of New Jersey number 041, revision 2.
▶ 10:45:14Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Poe is recognized for five minutes to speak on our amendment.
▶ 10:45:20Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, my amendment would require the transportation rulemaking committee to make recommendations on how vehicles equipped with automated driver systems will impact job intentions intention and qua quality. In my district, commuters rely on public transit and workers who keep our transportation system running.
▶ 10:45:46From train conductors to shuttle drivers to bus operators, these workers help people get where they need to go while navigating difficult traffic. Nearly 20,000 buses and train serve my district. That means thousands of operators are vital to our economy and responsible for getting people home safely.
▶ 10:46:11I stand in solidarity with these workers and I want to ensure that as automated driver systems are developed, bus and train operators are protected and pri u prioritized. Technology is quickly evolving, but we cannot leave these workers behind. I recognize that my colleagues may need more time to review this language.
▶ 10:46:36Therefore, I will withdraw my amendment in order to move forward with future uh to prioritize the workers impacted by automation. Thank you, Mr. uh chairman. I yield back.
▶ 10:46:51The amendment is withdrawn. For what purpose does Miss Freriedman seek recognition?
▶ 10:47:01I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 10:47:03Clerk will designate the amendment. An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Freriedman of California number 040.
▶ 10:47:13Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Freriedman is recognized for five minutes.
▶ 10:47:18Thank you, Mr. Chair. My amendment would reinstate two critical programs that this bill eliminates. The reduction of truck emissions at port facilities program and the healthy streets program. The truck emission program works to reduce idling at port facilities, including through the electrification of port operations.
▶ 10:47:36Now, people who live near ports and freight corridors know how polluting those industries can be and the impacts that that can have on their communities and on children, on air quality, and they deserve all of our best efforts to reduce those impacts. Uh the transportation sector accounted for 29% of total US carbon pollution in 2022. Each leg of our transportation sector needs to take steps to reduce that pollution to protect our communities and keep them healthy.
▶ 10:48:04And this program is a critical critical component of that work. Now, the healthy streets program works to alleviate urban heat islands, improve air quality, and reduce heat impacts to infrastructure. Now, heat is already the leading weather related cause of death in the United States. It's a bigger cause of death than storm surge, than hurricanes, than anything else. And this program works to alleviate those heat islands, improve uh air quality, and reduce heat uh and and and mitigate that.
▶ 10:48:32And in Los Angeles, we've got entire neighborhoods that just don't have enough of that lifesaving um tree canopy. And we and again, those communities deserve all of our best efforts. Um with that, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back.
▶ 10:48:48Any other members wish to be recognized on the amendment? I recognize myself to speak on the amendment. On behalf of the chairman, I oppose the amendment. The bill consolidates, eliminates, and defund the underlying bill consolidates, eliminates, and defunds more than a dozen programs and focuses our limited resources on addressing our core needs. Therefore, I oppose the amendment and urge my colleagues to vote no. Are there any further speakers on the amendment?
▶ 10:49:18Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say
▶ 10:49:26All those opposed say nay.
▶ 10:49:29The nays have it and the amendment is not agreed to. For what purpose does Mr. Gillan, pardon me, Miss Gillan seek recognition?
▶ 10:49:42Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 10:49:44The clerk will designate the amendment. An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Gillan of New York number 084.
▶ 10:49:54Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Gillan is recognized for five minutes.
▶ 10:49:59Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Railroads use computer-based dispatch systems to move and coordinate train traffic and to provide protection to employees working on the tracks. New dispatching systems and updates to existing software are currently implemented without any oversight, testing, or regulation by the FRA. When software pro problems are identified, the vendors who build the systems are often slow to offer fixes.
▶ 10:50:26This forces the trained dispatchers responsible for operating these systems to troubleshoot the technology under live conditions and use workarounds until safety defects are corrected. On multiple occasions, system defects, errors, and failures have put freight and passengers in extremely dangerous situations. Besides system errors, the lack of oversight leaves America's rail system vulnerable to cyber attacks.
▶ 10:50:51Earlier this year, the FRA issued a notice that our rail network is at risk from Iranian state sponsored cyber actors. Without congressional action, the FRA may be unable to protect our rail supply chain from these malicious actors. Mr. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to submit that FRA notice for the record.
▶ 10:51:09Without objection.
▶ 10:51:10Thank you. My common sense amendment would grant the FRA the authority it needs to conduct oversight of rail dispatching systems, keep our tracks safe, and hold vendors accountable for their products safety and reliability. Thank you to my colleague, Congressman Nells, for co-sponsoring this important amendment and my standalone bill, the Safe Tracks Act. This issue ex extremely ex extremely serious for Long Islanders and for all Americans and it deserves to be addressed by this committee.
▶ 10:51:38I'm glad that the underlying bill today takes at least a partial step in the right direction by requiring a J GAO study to to study the issue and report back to Congress. But much more work remains. So while I'm prepared to withdraw the amendment, I would ask the chairman and ranking member to commit to work with me and Mr. to address this critical problem and support the dedicated dispatchers who keep our trains safe and running on time. Thank you and I yield back. Chairman would be happy to do so. The amendment is withdrawn.
▶ 10:52:13For what purpose does Mr. Perry seek
▶ 10:52:16Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 10:52:18The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 10:52:20An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Perry of Pennsylvania number 226.
▶ 10:52:28Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Perry is recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 10:52:32Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment would strike the California highspeed rail working group and instead prohibit funding from the project entirely. While the underlying bill tacitly acknowledges the issues this project has faced by restricting funding for two years or until the working group issues its report, it fails to meet the gravity of the situation.
▶ 10:52:55The latest projections as of April 30th, 2026 estimate all in cost to reach 230 billion, a 700% increase over initial cost estimates. For reference, the Eisenhower interstate system cost 129 billion. Moreover, the project was supposed to be completed six years ago, but Castra now estimates that completion date solely for phase 1 to be 2032.
▶ 10:53:22Given the track record of this project, even these estimates are rosier than reality. This project is more than two decades old and there has yet to be a single track laid. As Secretary Duffy pointed out, using the previous cost estimate of 135 billion, you could buy every resident of San Francisco and LA nearly 200 roundtrip flights between the two cities. I mean, that's astounding. The project is a poster child for government waste.
▶ 10:53:52I don't know why we're fooling around with it. The things got to be terminated. We got to have some sanity here. We're 30 trillion 3040 trillion dollars in debt. Like who in the Sam Hill thinks this is is going anywhere? I just urge adoption and I yield the balance.
▶ 10:54:09Mr. Larson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um I oppose half of this amendment, but I I can't vote for half of it. Um certainly opposed the the ban the prohibition on funding, but I also I haven't been a fan of the working group idea, but we have members on this committee that both have supported and opposed
▶ 10:54:40this project itself, but this language on the working group does represent a bipartisan compromise uh that started somewhere else um in terms of intensity and we got it to where it is right now. And so uh I am you know certainly obligated to stick with the working group approach on this.
▶ 10:55:03The other thing I would note that the uh compromise does prohibits funding to the authority for two years while the working group is performing its study. I have not not yet been a fan of the California highspeed rail project. And what I don't like is this committee becoming the committee on California highspeed rail.
▶ 10:55:24But perhaps this amendment, sorry beha, perhaps the language in the bill and the underlying bill will help solve this problem for us for a while so we can get on to uh much of the other work of this committee. So appreciate a lot of the sentiment from this uh from the proponent of this amendment, but I'm asking folks to vote no on this amendment. I yield back. Are there any further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment?
▶ 10:55:53Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say I.
▶ 10:55:58All those opposed say nay.
▶ 10:56:01The naysay have it. The amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 10:56:06The chairman knew that the gentleman The gentleman requests a vote on the amendment. As previously announced, pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the question are
▶ 10:56:29I recognize Mr. Deluzio to offer amendment 85 on Mr. Gary's behalf.
▶ 10:56:34Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Duzio of Pennsylvania on behalf of Mr. Garmendy number 085 revision three.
▶ 10:56:50Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Duzio is recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 10:56:56Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be very brief. I think this is a straightforward case of if you want to make more stuff in America, we should buy American in our government. This amendment of Mr. Mendy's would ensure full implementation of by America requirements for passenger rail equipment pools like trains and rail cars. I think it's straightforward. I hope folks will support it. With that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back. Gentleman yields back. Do any members wish to be recognized on the amendment? I recognize myself to speak on the amendment.
▶ 10:57:26On behalf of the chairman, I oppose the amendment. While the description of this amendment says that it is a technical amendment, this amendment would allow the secretary to impose additional terms on by America beyond what underlying statute requires. The underlying language already contains strong and enforceable by American requirements and the and the Build America by American act applies broadly to federal infrastructure projects.
▶ 10:57:52I oppose unlimited discretion for the secretary to impose whatever byameric terms the secretary wants and support the existing language that directs the secretary to follow the law. Any further speakers on this amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say
▶ 10:58:12All those opposed say nay.
▶ 10:58:16The naysay have it and the amendment is not agreed to. Chairman request recorded vote please. The gentleman requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the question are For what purpose does Mr. Van Drew seek
▶ 10:58:44I have an amendment at the desk. Chairman, the clerk will designate
▶ 10:58:47an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Van Drew of New Jersey number 120.
▶ 10:58:56Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Van Drew is recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 10:59:01Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You can judge a society based on how they treat their most vulnerable. They're very young, they're very old, and they're animals. And horses are part of the American story. They helped build this country. They carried our soldiers, worked our farms, served our communities.
▶ 10:59:23And today, they remain beloved by families, veterans, children, farmers, ranchers, and horse owners across America. They are not just livestock in the eyes of the American people. They are companions. They are working animals. They are symbols of strength, loyalty, and freedom.
▶ 10:59:45And yet, every year, thousands of American horses are loaded onto trailers hauled long distances across our nation and shipped across our borders to be slaughtered for human consumption. I want to say that again because that can't happen in America. So, they're shipped in double-decker trailers across the border and they're shipped there to be killed and then used for human consumption. That's not who we are as Americans.
▶ 11:00:15My amendment, which I'm introducing alongside uh Congresswoman Titus, would do two things. First, it would prohibit transporting horses and other equines across our borders for human consumption. You could ship them across borders. You could even sacrifice them if they're too old to keep going, but it's not for human consumption. The American people overwhelmingly oppose this practice. 83% of Americans oppose the slaughter of horses for human consumption.
▶ 11:00:45It's not a partisan issue. It's a values issue. Congress has already recognized that horse slaughter should not happen in the United States by repeatedly prohibiting federal funds from being used to inspect horse slaughter facilities. But that's a policy. It's a regulation. It's temporary. And it doesn't stop American horses from being shipped to Canada or Mexico to be killed, to be eaten. Thousands of American horses were shipped across our borders for slaughter just last year.
▶ 11:01:15The loophole is real. It's present. The suffering is real. And Congress has a responsibility to act. There's a second part of this. It would prohibit transporting horses in double decker trailers that weren't meant for horses. They're vehicles that are designed for much shorter animals. These trailers are dangerous. They're inhumane. Horses are tall, sensitive animals with a strong fight orflight response.
▶ 11:01:42When they are crowded into trailers that were never built for them, the result is panic, injury, and even more suffering. And when these vehicles crash or tip over, the consequences can be horrific. Not just for the horses inside, but for the people traveling on our road. This amendment is based on the bipartisan SAFE Act led by Congressman Vern Buchanan, which has 229 co-sponsors, 229 co-sponsors right here in the House.
▶ 11:02:12It is supported by a broad coalition of horse industry leaders, animal welfare organizations, equin rescue groups, and many others, including the Jockey Club, the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, the ASPCA, the Animal Welfare Institute, and much more. This doesn't cost us money. Mr. Chairman, the amendment is simple.
▶ 11:02:35It protects horses from dangerous transport conditions and helps ensure that American horses are not shipped away to face a cruel and unnecessary death. We shouldn't allow an animal that has given so much to this country to be treated this way at the end of life. Again, I sincerely urge my colleagues to think about this, to support this amendment, and I thank you, chairman, and I yield back. Any other members wish to be recognized on the amendment?
▶ 11:03:05Miss
▶ 11:03:07Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm proud to co-lead this amendment with my colleague from New Jersey, Representative Bandrew. We want to strengthen protections against the inhumane transportation of horses and other equines meant for slaughter. Specifically, as you have heard Mr. Andrew say this amendment would prohibit the transportation of equines where there is reason to believe they may be slaughtered for human consumption. Horses hold a unique place in our country's history.
▶ 11:03:36In the west in Nevada uh horses are symbols of our heritage and they remain an important part of ranching, tourism, sports and family life. They are beloved pets uh as they also work along beside some of our farmers. That is why more than 80% of Americans oppose horse slaughter for human consumption. American people overwhelmingly believe that these animals deserve dignity and humane treatment.
▶ 11:04:05Yet in 2025 alone, more than 24,000 American horses were shipped across our borders to slaughter houses. often after enduring long and humane inhumane journeys and overcrowded conditions. Many of these horses endure these journeys in overcrowded, inappropriate trailers, often without adequate food, water, or rest.
▶ 11:04:29Some suffer injuries, extreme stress, and exhaustion before they even reach their fatal destination. No animal that has given so much to humans should deserve this kind of end. It's a common sense and humane measure that reflects the values of animal welfare and responsible transportation safety. That makes it a winwin. So, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield back.
▶ 11:05:01Mr. Larson.
▶ 11:05:02Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I certainly appreciate what they're members trying to do and reluctantly oppose the the amendment. Certainly, I met with my own constituents on the extra expense and burden facing small farmers and caring for non-working horses. And this amendment ensures that the transport of horses is done as a matter of safe and humane, which I do support no matter where horses are being transported. Um, but based on the big four agreement, um, I will oppose this amendment and if yield back.
▶ 11:05:32Any other members wish to speak on the I recognize myself to speak on the On behalf of the chairman who is a farmer, he opposes the amendment that uh because it restricts the transport and sale of livestock. I'll further add that the uh chairman of the house agriculture committee uh which has joint jurisdiction over this particular issue is also opposed to the amendment.
▶ 11:06:02Are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say I. I. All those opposed say nay.
▶ 11:06:12The naysay have it. The amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 11:06:18The gentleman requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the question are For what purpose does Miss Shelton seek
▶ 11:06:35I have an amendment at the desk. The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 11:06:38An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Scolton of Michigan number 113.
▶ 11:06:46Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Schultton is recognized for 5 minutes to speak on her
▶ 11:06:52Thank you so much uh Mr. Chair. Um, I want to uh take time 8:30 at night before Memorial Day weekend uh to talk about something that's really important uh back home to uh West Michigan summers on the lake. Uh and that is invasive species uh like the sea lampray which have long threatened uh the Great Lakes in just one year. Sea lamp rays are capable of killing up to 40 pounds worth of native fish. before sea lamp break control.
▶ 11:07:20They killed so many fish that Great Lakes um entire fisheries collapsed along the Great Lakes. Tens of thousands of jobs were lost. Fortunately, coordinated efforts have reduced the sea lampray population by over 90% and rehabilitated the Great Lakes. But communities must continually invest in these projects. Uh you might be asking what that has to do uh with with roads and surface transportation. A lot actually.
▶ 11:07:46This amendment would ensure that projects to prevent the movement of invasive species are also eligible under the national culvert removal replacement and restoration program so that they can work in tandem. Uh this may sound like a niche issue, but invasive species impact all of our communities and come with real economic harm and there is a way to address them uh as we work on these restoration projects. Out of respect for our four corners agreement, I am going to withdraw this amendment and I I thank you for the opportunity to to raise this issue.
▶ 11:08:16Um, however, I work I encourage all of my colleagues to continue to work with us uh towards infrastructure investment that helps communities continue to combat uh these invasive species and and to keep it in mind in in these critical construction projects. I yield back.
▶ 11:08:31Gentle lady withdraws the amendment. For what purpose does Mr. Nails seek
▶ 11:08:45I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 11:08:47The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 11:08:49An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Nails of Texas number 093.
▶ 11:08:56Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Nails is recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 11:09:01Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment, it's real simple. It simply updates federal law to ensure that peer-to-peer car sharing platforms are treated fairly and consistently under the same vicarious liability framework that Congress already established for traditional car rental companies through the Graves Amendment. The purpose here is straightforward.
▶ 11:09:22If a company or vehicle owner is not negligent and did not engage in wrongdoing, they should not be held automatically liable for the actions of a driver simply because they provided access to the vehicle. Congress recognized this principle in 2005 when it enacted the Graves Amendment.
▶ 11:09:41At that time, Congress understood that rental car companies should not face unlimited vicarious liability for accidents caused solely by the renters's actions where the company itself was not negligent. But the transportation marketplace has evolved dramatically since 2005. Peer-to-peer car sharing platforms did not meaningful exist. It did exist when the Graves Amendment was written in 2005.
▶ 11:10:08And today, thousands of Americans use these platforms to share personal vehicles through digital marketplaces in a manner functionality similar to traditional rental transactions. Yet, because federal law predates this technology, ambiguity now exists regarding these protections apply equally to peer-to-peer car sharing participants. It's simple. This amendment simply clarifies congressional intent.
▶ 11:10:36Importantly, the amendment does not shield anyone from responsibility for their own negligence or mis misconduct. If a platform acts negligently, it can still be held accountable. If a vehicle owner acts negligently, they remain liable. And drivers remain fully responsible for the harm they cause behind the wheel. Makes sense.
▶ 11:10:58What this amendment prevents is automatic liability solely based on ownership or participation in a vehicle sharing platform absent wrongdoing. And this is not some radical or untested policy approach. 28 states have already enacted laws extending similar protections to peer-to-peer caring arrangements. Recognizing that these services should operate under a fair and predictable liability framework.
▶ 11:11:27This amendment simply aligns federal law with the modern transportation economy and ensures regulatory consistency between traditional rental car companies and vehicle sharing platforms. And at the end of the day, at the end of the day, it's all about fairness, clarity, and ensuring that federal law keeps pace with innovation. I urge the adoption of my amendment, and I yield back. Any other members wish to be recognized?
▶ 11:11:57Mr. Larson.
▶ 11:11:58Chair. Mr. Chair, I oppose the Nell's amendment. This amendment would establish, as he's noted, a vicarious liability shield for peer-to-peer rental car companies. These new rental companies allow anyone who owns a car to rent it out to anyone with a driver's license. Now, while these companies require prospective drivers to upload a driver's license photo to the app, car's owner cannot ensure who is driving since these apps are based on contactless renting.
▶ 11:12:24Granting this liability exemption only serves to further limit any legal risk these companies and provide zero incentive to improve safety, security, or screening standards associated with using the app. These seem to be solvable problems. U but this is how it is. Many of the drivers using peer-to-peer rentals may not have insurance of their own, meaning there's little to no insurance coverage for an injured party in the event of a crash. Just some problems that got to get solved on this. So, I would urge opposition to this amendment without yield back.
▶ 11:12:53Any other members wish to speak on the bill? Mr. Um
▶ 11:12:58Heard from Colorado.
▶ 11:12:59Yeah, pardon me.
▶ 11:13:00Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I support and co-sponsor Mr. Mr. Nell's amendment because it preserves the original intent of the Graves amendment while applying it to the constituents in my district and across the nation who share their personal vehicles. It also ensures that a vehicle owner is not held liable or penalized simply for owning a vehicle. If there's evidence of negligence or wrongdoing on the part of the owner, sure, a lawsuit can be filed.
▶ 11:13:27But it does not make sense to go after someone simply because an accident happened in their car. This policy is already adopted in 32 states, including my home state of Colorado, and it already applies to the rental car industry. It's good policy to extend this to car sharing as well. I want to thank Representative Nells for offering this amendment, and I encourage my colleagues to adopt it this evening. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
▶ 11:13:56Any other members seek uh recognition? I recognize myself to speak on the The Graves law has protected car rental companies from vicarious liability for customers actions. The logic was simple. If the company was not found negligent, they cannot be held liable for the actions of the driver of their rented vehicles. This amendment applies the same principle here.
▶ 11:14:21Since this law was passed in 2005, we have seen innovation in the car rental industry, including the peer-to-peer model. Peer-to-peer car rental platforms are in the same position as traditional rental car companies. They provide the vehicle to a legally licensed driver, and they cannot control what drivers do with it. Vicarious liability for someone else's conduct without fault of your own. Is exactly what the Graves Amendment was designed to eliminate. This amendment extends existing law.
▶ 11:14:52It doesn't create new law. The same bad actor exceptions carry over. Just as the Graves law doesn't provide, pardon me, doesn't protect a rental company that is negligent. This amendment doesn't protect platforms that actively enable or profit from wrongdoing. Congress has always updated the law to meet emerging technology, and that is exactly what this amendment does. Are there any further speakers on the amendment?
▶ 11:15:20Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say I.
▶ 11:15:28All those opposed say nay.
▶ 11:15:32The eyes have it.
▶ 11:15:35The amendment is not like recorded vote. The gentleman requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the question are postponed.
▶ 11:15:49For what purpose does Miss Titus seek recognition? I have an amendment at the
▶ 11:15:53The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 11:15:55An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by M. Miss Titus of Nevada number 298.
▶ 11:16:04Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Titus is recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 11:16:09Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm concerned that language in this bill dictates that the Federal Railroad Administration use a specific type of rulemaking for all future regulations that are not underpinned in safety. In short, performance-based rulemaking allows the industry to regulate itself. Now, we know what happens when an industry regulates itself. We can only hope that workers and communities are not put in harm's way.
▶ 11:16:38I've put forward this amendment as a goodfaith effort to negotiate something that is more reasonable. It's very simple. It changes the language from the Federal Railroad Administration shall consider to FRA may consider performance-based rulemaking. It also requires the FRA to justify the type of rulemaking it pursues. Now, that's whether it's performance-based or not performance-based.
▶ 11:17:04They can make the choice, but they are not forced to always use performance-based. I would urge my colleagues to vote yes on the amendment because it presents a pragmatic solution to improve this section and better protects the public and our communities. Thank you. I yield
▶ 11:17:23Any members wish to be recognized on the
▶ 11:17:27I recognize myself. Miss Titus amendment is a step backwards. The underlying bill makes a significant step requiring performance-based regulations. These performance based regulations achieve our shared goal of increasing safety rather than taking a prescriptive technology specific approach. Performance-based regulations set safety standards that let the best approach be taken. This accounts for innovation and safer options.
▶ 11:17:57So, I strongly oppose the amendment. ask for a roll call vote.
▶ 11:18:04Not quite there yet.
▶ 11:18:05Oh, sorry.
▶ 11:18:06Are there any further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment?
▶ 11:18:11Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say I. All those opposed say nay. The naysay have it. The amendment is not agreed to. Roll call. Yes.
▶ 11:18:28The gentle lady requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced. Pursuant to committee rule 6F, further proceedings on the question are For what purpose does Mr. Huffman seek
▶ 11:18:47I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 11:18:49The clerk will designate the amendment. An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 8870 offered by
▶ 11:18:59Mr. Huffman of California number 074.
▶ 11:19:02Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Huffman is recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 11:19:07Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise to offer an amendment that takes a simple but important approach to protecting taxpayer dollars and improving the long-term reliability of our transportation infrastructure. Too often in this country, we spend hundreds of millions of dollars, rebuilding the same roads, repairing the same corridors, replacing infrastructure that was never designed to withstand the real world conditions that it faces.
▶ 11:19:33Communities are left stuck in an endless cycle of damage, reconstruction, delay, and additional cost while taxpayers continue footing the bill. And so my amendment would establish something very simple, a federal useful service life standard for major transportation projects receiving federal funding where the total cost exceeds $50 million of federal funds. The goal is straightforward.
▶ 11:19:59When the government makes a major infrastructure investment like this, we should make sure that that project is built to last. The amendment directs the Department of Transportation to develop a min minimum useful service life standard for roads, bridges, and other transportation projects. Importantly, the department must account for the unique environmental and operational challenges facing different regions of the country.
▶ 11:20:25And that means designing infrastructure to withstand um as may be appropriate flooding and sea level rise in coastal communities, landslides and erosion in mountainous regions, earthquakes in seismic zones, freeze, thaw damage in colder climates, hurricanes in the south, and extreme heat and wildfire impacts in the west. It also recognizes the wear and tear caused by heavy freight movement, unstable soils, and high traffic volumes.
▶ 11:20:54This amendment also includes a common sense type of flexibility. It exempts emergency response projects, disaster recovery work, and pilot or demonstration projects testing innovative transportation technologies and safety designs. We know that the costs of failing to plan for long-term infrastructure are astronomical.
▶ 11:21:15In my district, Highway 37 of the North Bay, for example, faces chronic flooding and sea level rise that repeatedly threaten one of the region's most important transportation corridors, disrupting commuters, freight movement, and emergency access along Highway 101 and surrounding transportation corridors. Um, we repeatedly see storm surges and flooding that disrupts travel, damages infrastructure, and strains local economies.
▶ 11:21:42And in Delnor County, the north of my district, Last Chance Grade is a project that will address a major coastal route that faces constant erosion and slope failures that worsen with stronger storms. At the end of the day, this is an amendment about accountability, resilience, and fiscal responsibility.
▶ 11:22:00If we're going to spend billions of taxpayer dollars on these infrastructure projects, we should build them in a way that makes sure they're durable and that they provide long-term public benefits, not temporary patches that fail before their time.
▶ 11:22:16I urge adoption of the amendment and yield Any other members wish to speak on the I recognize myself uh to speak on the On behalf of the chairman, I oppose the amendment. It would require the secretary to set minimum service life standards, meaning a timeline before the asset could be replaced. I believe that our states know how to best manage and address their needs. Therefore, I oppose the amendment and urge my colleagues to vote no.
▶ 11:22:46Are there further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say I.
▶ 11:22:57All those opposed say nay.
▶ 11:23:00The naysay have it.
▶ 11:23:04The gentleman requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Further proceedings on the question are
▶ 11:23:18Mr. Stanton, for what purpose do you seek recognition? Mr. Chairman, I have a amendment at the desk. The clerk will designate the
▶ 11:23:30An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Stanton of Arizona number
▶ 11:23:39Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Stanton is recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 11:23:44My amendment will help housing shortages in the United States of America. Families too often being priced out. outdated federal rules are standing in the way of solutions. This amendment takes an important step to fix that. It draws from the Charge Investment Act, a bill that I co-led with Representative Buddy Carter, and I also want to thank my friend and colleague, Representative Westerman, for co-sponsoring this amendment.
▶ 11:24:09Right now, federal law locks in transit oriented development loans inside a halfmile radius of inner city rail stations. In cities where rail exists outside of the downtown core, that arbitrary line cuts off exactly the kind of development we should be encouraging. So, this amendment would expand the eligibility radius. It's a targeted fix with enormous potential in areas where uh they have the main stations outside of a downtown area.
▶ 11:24:37We're talking about new affordable housing, near transit, revitalized neighborhoods, and long-term economic growth that will pay dividends. This is a common sense modernization of federal financing tools. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and I yield back. Any other members wish to be recognized on the amendment. I recognize myself to speak on the amendment. I greatly appreciate my colleagues amendment but must oppose.
▶ 11:25:03The underlying bill includes provisions that will help enable the further development of transit and transportationoriented development projects. The committee has taken a measured approach to expanding these measures and therefore I must oppose the amendment's effort to expand eligibilities further. Are there any further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say I.
▶ 11:25:32All those opposed say nay.
▶ 11:25:34The nays have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 11:25:37I will request a vote. Chairman.
▶ 11:25:39Gentlemen, request a vote on the amendment. As previously announced, pursuant to committee rule 6F, further proceedings on the question are
▶ 11:25:58For what purpose does Miss Sykes seek
▶ 11:26:02Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 11:26:04The clerk will designate the amendment. An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Sykes of Ohio number 124.
▶ 11:26:14Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Sykes is recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 11:26:19Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am offering an amendment authorizing funding to expand Amtrak service to the Akran Canton region. Earlier in the manager's amendment, a feasibility study was included. But of course, uh resources are necessary to make sure that this feasibility study can actually happen and if it identifies the feasibility of it to actually make the project come to fruition.
▶ 11:26:43Uh the Akran Canton region is in critical need of passenger rail services which could connect our communities to the rest of Ohio and the Midwest. The announced 3D, 3C plusD and Cleveland, Toledo, Detroit corridor plans do not include a stop in the Akran Canton region, making it the only large metropolitan area in Ohio without a proposed passenger rail line.
▶ 11:27:06This is a loss for businesses and tourism in our region and for the roughly 1 million residents of the region who are left with limited transit options to access the rest of the state and the Midwest. The Akran Canton region offers travel connections through the Akran Canton airport, higher education opportunities at five distinct institutions and access to several top healthc care systems, countless manufacturing companies, and various attractions such as the Pro Football Hall of Fame, the McKinley Presidential Library, the Akran
▶ 11:27:36Art Museum, the Akran Zoo, and the Chicago Valley National Park. Furthermore, Summit in Stark counties are home to major corporations such as Goodyear, Bridgestone, Gojo, and more. The establishment of passenger rail line would allow tourists and business travelers an opportunity to travel our region without sitting in traffic.
▶ 11:27:55As Ohio is home to the fifth largest interstate system in the nation and is ranked sixth in total vehicle miles traveled, with so many travelers coming in and out of the state, rail could serve as a muchneeded addition to the current transportation system to encourage economic development, job growth, and increasing connectivity throughout the state and the country. Additionally, the five colleges and universities in our region are training a diverse and talented workforce who are ready to take on the jobs of the future.
▶ 11:28:23Expanding Amtrak to allow passenger rail stop to be built in the Akran Canton region is good for transit, the economy and the workforce. While I am excited that the bill America 250 includes a feasibility study for rail service in the Akran Canton region, we will need funding to ensure that this becomes a reality. Again, Mr.
▶ 11:28:43Chair, I do encourage everyone to support this amendment as Akran and Can region have been left out and in many of the conversations that I heard and had with businesses the Chamber of Commerce, local elected officials from both sides of the aisle who have approved this type of transit stop in our area. They said that there was no one to advocate for the Akran Canton area in the room when these initial conversations were going forth.
▶ 11:29:07And now that there is, I'm taking these needs and voices all the way to Congress with me in ensuring that not only do we have the feasibility study, we have the resources to make sure that we get passenger rail in the Akran Canton region. Thank you. And I urge all of my colleagues to think of my constituents in Ohio's 13th Congressional District and vote yes on this amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chair
▶ 11:29:29Any other members wish to speak on the I recognize myself to speak on the amendment. I oppose the amendment. The amendment would authorize Amtrak to spend an indeterminate amount of money to expand rail service in the Akran Canton region of Ohio. I have significant concerns with authorizing such a project before it underos the proper review and planning process and for that reason I must oppose the amendment. Are there any further speakers on the amendment?
▶ 11:29:59Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say
▶ 11:30:07All those opposed say nay. The nays have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 11:30:24For what purpose does Miss Fushi seek
▶ 11:30:28Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
▶ 11:30:31The clerk will designate the amendment. An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Fushi of North Carolina number 061.
▶ 11:30:41Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Fushi is recognized for five minutes to speak on her amendment.
▶ 11:30:47Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Both freight and passenger rail play absolutely critical irreplaceable roles in the American economy and supply chain, moving goods, raw materials, crops, and people across our nation every day. It is therefore imperative that this vital infrastructure be kept in safe working condition, maintained, repaired when needed, and sometimes improved upon when conditions warrant.
▶ 11:31:13In order to do this in an efficient and cost-effective way, however, state DOS need a certain measure of financial certainty. My amendment is simple. It does not increase spending in any way. It does not authorize any new type of rail infrastructure project outside the scope of what this committee has already authorized.
▶ 11:31:34My amendment would simply provide a baseline of financial certainty to states by setting aside approximately 3% of total Chrissy funding for state DOS across the country. State DOS having even this small portion of guaranteed Christy funding each year would significantly boost their ability to conduct longterm strategic financial planning for their needed rail infrastructure projects.
▶ 11:32:02Projects which are essential to keeping American goods and people moving safely across our nation. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, which represents DOS from all 50 states, is supporting this non-controversial amendment. And I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, to support its adoption so we can better equip our states to address their rail infrastructure needs. Thank you, and I yield back.
▶ 11:32:34Any other members wish to speak on the I recognize myself to speak on the amendment. Implementing a formula set aside for Chrissy could have detrimental impacts for our popular and very effective program. The FRA has expressed significant concerns about this amendment's approach.
▶ 11:32:53We should not alter a successful program given the unknown consequences and therefore I Any further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say
▶ 11:33:13All those opposed say nay.
▶ 11:33:16The naysay have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 11:33:19I request a recorded vote.
▶ 11:33:21The gentle lady requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced. Pursuant to committee rule 6F, further proceedings on the question are For what purpose does Mr. Perry seek
▶ 11:33:35Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. The clerk will designate the
▶ 11:33:39An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Mr. Perry of Pennsylvania number 227.
▶ 11:33:47Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Perry is recognized for 5 minutes.
▶ 11:33:51Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment strikes the requirement that states spend federal dollars on EV charging infrastructure. Shockingly, there is a provision in this bill that requires states to set aside a portion of their congressional correction, congestion management, and air quality or CMAC funding to procure EV charging facilities or other alternative fueling arrangements.
▶ 11:34:14While this bill ends the EV highway trust fund free rider problem, they benefited from the highway and road system while everyone else paid the bill for decades. The benefit of highway trust fund should be a highway and road system that is available on a technology neutral basis, not yet another layer of handouts to an already extremely heavily subsidized subset of vehicles. It's one thing to allow states to use federal funds to invest in EV charging.
▶ 11:34:43still wholly uh inappropriate in my opinion, but it is morally reprehensible to follow decades of free riding with a mandate that state that that forces states to spend their money on these chargers. More to the point, this couldn't occur at an worse time. As EVs are forced to compete in the free market, Americans are increasingly choosing to purchase internal combustion engines because they do not want electric vehicles.
▶ 11:35:08the first quarter EV sales in 2026 were down nearly 30% yearover-year. I mean, we're forcing states to spend money on this. This is going to be abandoned technology and it's going to be everywhere because we forced them to use it and nobody's going to or to install it. Nobody's going to be using it. This is going to turn out to be yet another boondoggle done to prop up an industry that taxpayers have been forced to subsidize to the tune of tens of billions of dollars to date.
▶ 11:35:37And and if we love this so much, I don't know why we're not subsidizing gas stations and diesel and and whatever else. I I don't know why it has to be just this one. I don't like any of it. This amendment to stop that and protect all the taxpayer George support and yield the balance of the
▶ 11:35:57Any other comments from members? Mr.
▶ 11:36:02Thank you, Mr. Chair. I oppose this amendment. um if in fact this was um obsolete or failing technology then there would be no sense in putting a fee on electric vehicles as a way to help the trust fund anticipating that there would be EV sales and EV use throughout the country in order to fund the trust fund. So that um really doesn't really get at the issue here frankly.
▶ 11:36:29Um, I totally agree with uh anyone who wants to argue that the roll out of the Navy program uh was less than stellar. So, I'm going to call it a failure and I might be one of them. Um, as well, it does not though undermine the point that electric vehicles are here to stay, which this bill recognizes by putting a fee on electric vehicles. and second uh that there's a charging infrastructure need um out there.
▶ 11:37:00So what we had kind of proposed in getting this um language in the bill was to move EV charging inside an existing program, the uh the CMAC program, a congestion management program, which is actually a much better fit because CMAC exists in order to assist localities with meeting clean air standards and EVs by definition exist to help uh well in help
▶ 11:37:30with many things, but one of them is obviously they have no emissions which helps with clean air. So that's why we um had proposed when we talked about this putting it into the CMAC program as a one a much more appropriate place focused on the function of what we were trying to of what ought to be achieved from a policy policy perspective.
▶ 11:37:50Um and um again I just would note that using having EV fees that go in the highway trust fund as Then a little bit of that EV fee arguably is going into paying for this um set aside program within the CMAC program.
▶ 11:38:09So actually it's it's a much more um uh I don't know exquisite solution to tying the policy of what CMAC does to charging infrastructure to the uh to the use of the EV fees that um that uh someone in the committee including myself uh want want to see happen. So it's a much more fair way of putting this.
▶ 11:38:35So, I would urge my members uh urge all members to oppose this amendment. I yield back.
▶ 11:38:43Any other members seek recognition to speak on the amendment? I recognize myself to speak on the amendment. I oppose the amendment. HR 8870 creates the first new revenue stream into the highway trust fund in three decades, and it does so by ensuring all users pay their fair share, meaning electric vehicles start contributing. Charging is just one type of the alternative fuel types that may be addressed under this set aside, which also includes hydrogen, natural gas, and propane fueling projects.
▶ 11:39:14However, the underlying bill takes a measured phased out approach by ending this set aside after the fourth year of the bill. In year five, no funds are set aside for these purposes. For that reason, I oppose the amendment. Are there any uh further speakers on the amendment? Seeing none, are there amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor say All those opposed say nay.
▶ 11:39:43The nays have it and the amendment is not agreed to.
▶ 11:39:47The gentleman requests a vote on the amendment as previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6F. Or is that you saying you didn't want a roll call vote? As previously announced, pursuant to committee rule 6F, further proceedings on the question are postponed.
▶ 11:40:12For what purpose does Mr. Nails seek
▶ 11:40:14Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the
▶ 11:40:17The clerk will designate the amendment.
▶ 11:40:19An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR 887 8870 offered by Mr. Nells of Texas number 091 revision one.
▶ 11:40:29Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Mr. Nails is recognized to speak on his amendment.
▶ 11:40:35Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment makes a straightforward but important correction to the rail technology and asset pilot program established in section section 10408 of the bill. So, it's in the bill. It's in the base text of the bill. I'm happy about that. It's the telematics section. We put $100 million into this and for those that aren't familiar with it, it's kind of putting a blood pressure cuff on the cars, the cars that are carrying hazardous material and all that.
▶ 11:41:05We'll know whether a door gets open on the car, whether a hatch flip open, whether we've got problems with the health and well-being of the car. It's called telmatics and it's good. It's in the base bill. Great idea. Here comes the problem. And Miss Titus, Miss Davis, think about this. Here comes the problem. The amendment, my amendment changes the federal cost share from 50% to 80%.
▶ 11:41:29Reducing the required private match from 50 down to the standard 20% match used across mode federal transportation and safety programs. And I got the document here so everybody knows here. It all is Chrissy grants 8020. National highway performance grants 8020. Cost share surface transportation block grants 8020. Highway safety improvements 9010. Safe streets and roads 9010. I go on and on. Bus and bus facilities 8020.
▶ 11:41:58And then they get to the telematics and it's 50/50. And I I don't know what the hell makes no sense to me. And so this this amendment is really simple. It changes one number in the subsection. But the one change will determine whether this program succeeds in achieving its safety mission. Right now, the bill requires rail car owners to provide a dollar for-doll private match in order to participate in telematics and rail safety technology grants.
▶ 11:42:27And as I just stated, it is not the standard in federal transportation policy. And that's the problem. The program prioritizes some of the highest risk rail cars in the country. tank cars carrying toxic inhalation hazards, flammable liquids, and other hazardous But many of those rail cars are not owned by massive corporations with unlimited capital.
▶ 11:42:54They are owned by regional operators, chemical distributors, agriculture cooperatives, leasing companies, and small or midsize fleet operators. And for many operators, this is simply it's not feasible. And more importantly, this amendment does not weaken the accountability. The bill already contains strong safeguards, including a cap preventing any single recipient from receiving more than 20% of annual grant funding.
▶ 11:43:23And so the concern about concentration or abuse is already addressed elsewhere in the bill. This amendment also does not increase the authorization level. It doesn't do it. SEP doesn't increase the authorization level.
▶ 11:43:38The program remains capped with the existing Chrissy set What changes is not total federal spending, but whether participation is broad enough to actually deploy this technology across the highest risk portions of the rail network. And that's what really matters because the benefits of telematics are not limited to private rail cars.
▶ 11:44:04These systems provide real-time safety data, predictive maintenance information, improved hazardous material visibility, and better situational awareness for emergency responders and federal regulators. And those are public safety benefits. Public safety benefits. This amendment simply aligns the cost share with the reality that the public benefits from this technology deployment just as much as, if not more, than the individual rail car owner. Mr.
▶ 11:44:32Chairman, this is a targeted amendment, a common sense amendment, and an amendment that will help ensure this program works the way Congress intends it to work. Thank you, and I yield back. Seth,
▶ 11:44:48thank you, Mr. Chairman. As Mr. Nell said, this amendment does not increase the amount of money we're spending on the program. just makes sure that it actually happens because you get to get an 8020 cost share is what you need to do to get the railroads to actually do this. And just to emphasize how important this is, in the wake of East Palestine, there was a lot of talk about these wayside defect detectors.
▶ 11:45:14If one of these detectors happened to be placed closer to where the bearing failed, then they might have caught the train before it derailed. But this is a 1960s technology. Those who were calling for more wayside detectors might have been might as well have been saying we should have more telegraphs because we were still using telegraphs on railroads in the 1960s.
▶ 11:45:40Telmatics is modern-day technology that puts a sensor on every axle, every wheel on every car. It's the kind of sensors that we have on our watches and our all over the place. They're relatively but they allow an the engineer on a train to have instantaneous of a problem in one of the cars.
▶ 11:46:07I talked earlier about how there were only rail hazmat incidences incidents in 2023 compared to the 22,543 hazardous material incidents on Rail is already very safe. But the question is how do we get that 297 down to zero? Well, maybe if we doubled the defect detectors, you might be able to cut it in half.
▶ 11:46:32But with this program, with Telmatics, you can literally get it down to zero because you're going to detect problems instantaneously. It's widely available technology. It just needs to be implemented by the railroads. And our job here in Congress is to make sure they do it. And the simple reality is they're not going to do it if it's just a 50/50 cost share. But if it's 8020, it will set them on a path that will dramatically make our railroads safer for all the American public.
▶ 11:47:03It's not going to cost any additional taxpayer money to get railroads on this path. Once they see the benefits of this, once they understand that this is an investment in zero accidents, a completely safe future, which will ultimately boost their business, they'll be off to the races. But we've got to get them started. And I'm happy to read leave uh leave yield additional time to Mr.
▶ 11:47:26Thank you uh Mr. Moan very well said again the telematics we all knew it it was important four corners of it it's in the base text of the bill we believe that telematics will make the rail industry safer much more safe we're not asking for more money we're not saying we need another 100 billion the money's there authorizing the money we just don't believe and this is really unheard of it's unheard of a 50/50 cost share you might if if it's going to stay that way you might as well not even have it in the bill because nobody's going to deploy the
▶ 11:47:57technology ology. Nobody gentleman yield. All I'm all Let me gentleman yield.
▶ 11:48:01So all I'm asking all I'm asking you
▶ 11:48:05Well, he'll yield to me. I'll think about yielding to you, Rick. Okay, fine.
▶ 11:48:09uh We're going to accept the amendment. Well done.
▶ 11:48:16If you stop talking, we will accept the
▶ 11:48:19Can we Can we go to 9010? I'm just kidding. I'm just kidding.
▶ 11:48:24Anyone else wish to be heard on the amendment? Are there any amendments to the amendment? Seeing none, questions on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 11:48:33All oppose signify by saying nay. The eyes have it. The amendments adopted.
▶ 11:48:42What purpose? Miss Titus.
▶ 11:48:44I have an amendment at the desk.
▶ 11:48:47An amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Titus of Nevada number 297. I ask
▶ 11:49:04without objection. The amendment will be considered as read. You have five
▶ 11:49:10Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment seeks to improve transit paratransit services for the nearly 20 million people who have travel limiting disabilities. It's based on the disability access to transportation act or data legislation that I was pleased to introduce with our colleague from New Jersey, Mr. Van Drew. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the ADA, people with disabilities have the right to access equally public transportation just like anybody else.
▶ 11:49:39Paratransit offers a safety net for people who cannot use regular fixed route bus services. Now, I've heard from many paratransit riders, those who are disabled, seniors, I'm sure you have, too, about the need to modernize and improve this vital service. Riders often face long wait times, and it can take many hours to just run a simple errand like picking up a prescription, dropping off children at school, going by the grocery store.
▶ 11:50:06Now, if we address the outdated, inflexible scheduling, these needless delays could mean that paratransit service can be corrected. so that it'll be more efficient and cost-effective. Now, think about how allowing a quick stop along a trip could save everyone money and time, and that's especially true for the taxpayer.
▶ 11:50:26This legislation establishes a one-stop pilot program to help paratransit riders avoid excess wait times between multiple trips, a one-stop program. It also streamlines the process for submitting accessibility complaints and it assists local communities by letting them identify gaps in transportation accessibility. Finally, it helps modernize paratransit services by prioritizing projects that use real time tracking technology.
▶ 11:50:57We have the technology available to us. There's no reason why a rider should be left sitting outside for hours in extreme weather. people who utilize paratransit services, our neighbors, our friends, our co-workers, the most vulnerable in many circumstances. So, please, let's do what's right. Vote yes on this and give them equal access to transportation like we give other people. Thank you, and I yield back.
▶ 11:51:27I'd recognize myself. Um, I have to oppose the amendment. It establishes a another brand new uh competitive grant program. And given that the underlying bill increases uh formula funding for mobility services without altering current eligibilities for mobility services, I'm opposed to standing up another uh new grant program. So I do oppose the amendment. Does anybody else wish to be heard on the amendment? Seeing no one, are there any amendments to the amendment?
▶ 11:51:59Seeing none, the question is on the amendment. All those in favor signify by saying I.
▶ 11:52:05All oppose signify by saying nay.
▶ 11:52:08Do we have a roll call?
▶ 11:52:09Opinion. The chair. The naysay have it.
▶ 11:52:11Roll call vote.
▶ 11:52:13Gentle lady requests a vote on the amendments previously announced pursuant to committee rule 6. Further proceedings on the question are postpone. Miss Sykes.
▶ 11:52:26Thank you Mr. Chair. I have an amendment at the desk. designate
▶ 11:52:30an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute to HR8870 offered by Miss Sykes of Ohio number
▶ 11:52:37Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. Miss Sykes should
▶ 11:52:41Thank you, Mr. Chair. As you all know, and indeed most Americans know by now, on February 3rd, 2023, a Norfolk Southern train carrying hazardous chemicals derailed in East Palestine, Ohio. This crash that came as a result of the derailment released hazardous chemicals into the environment surrounding the crash. These chemicals seeped into the ground and the streams surrounding East Palestine. In order to prevent a potential explosion, first responders ignited a controlled burn which spewed these chemicals into the air.
▶ 11:53:09It raised health concerns for Ohioans and Pennians alike. No one should have to deal with the horror and fallout of what was occurred in such a disastrous derailment, which is why I was proud to introduce the Rail Act in Congress. Uh, this amendment specifically, excuse me, would require railroads to provide advanced notice to emergency responders when hazardous materials are coming through their communities.
▶ 11:53:35This idea was a concern raised by Ohio governor and then questioned by the Ohio General Assembly. uh and also a testament of showing what happens when your state and federal partners communicate and talk because this bill has already been accepted in the underlying text. Excuse me. This amendment has already been accepted in the underlining text.
▶ 11:53:54But I could not uh take miss an opportunity, excuse me, to give a shout out to our state government partners who helped uh fill in so many of the gaps that we failed to do so here in the federal government with their legislation and how they moved rail safety forward. So because this has already been added and I was only using this as an opportunity to talk about how Ohio is the greatest state in the entire country, I will withdraw this amendment because it is already in underlying text.
▶ 11:54:22Again, uh I want to say thank you to our committee for taking up rail safety legislation and ensuring that the people of East Palestine do not suffer in vain. And we are doing something to ensure this does not happen in any other community in our country. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I yield back.
▶ 11:54:40Thank you, Melee. I appreciate it. Mr. Scton.
▶ 11:54:52Thank you, Mr. Chair. Giving my colleague uh some space