[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 169 (Tuesday, September 28, 2021)]
[House]
[Pages H5473-H5477]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1215
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND JOBS ACT
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XIX, further
consideration of the motion to concur in the Senate amendment to (H.R.
3684) to authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety
programs, and transit programs, and for other purposes, with the Senate
amendment thereto will now resume.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will redesignate the Senate
amendment and redesignate the motion to concur.
The Clerk redesignated the Senate amendment and redesignated the
motion to concur.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) and
the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Graves) each have 10 minutes
remaining.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Pelosi), the Speaker of the House.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and, more
importantly, I thank him for his tremendous leadership. His
understanding of infrastructure in our country and the way to build it
in a green way to honor our commitment to our children is something
that is a blessing to the Congress.
For decades he has served on the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee, and he has done so in a way that has taken us into the
future.
But we haven't had a bill in a while, and so I thank him for his
INVEST in America Act that he had earlier that is not all reflected
here, but nonetheless hopefully we will see some provisions in the
Build Back Better Act.
I rise in support of the bipartisan infrastructure bill, the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which is about jobs, jobs,
jobs, jobs. Support for this legislation is bipartisan, bicameral, and
respectful of the needs of workers and communities across the country.
Following the vision of President Biden, the bipartisan
infrastructure bill addresses a great need in America which has been
neglected for decades, as I mentioned. Our roads, bridges, and water
systems are crumbling. Some water systems are over 100 years old, Mr.
Speaker, made of brick and wood.
[[Page H5474]]
Our electric grid system is vulnerable to catastrophic outages.
We must not only rebuild the infrastructure for the 21st century
economy, we must rebuild the middle class, creating good-paying
American jobs and turbocharging American competitiveness and growth.
These are connected.
Again, I thank President Biden. He said: I am happy to work in a
bipartisan way in order to have an infrastructure bill where we come to
agreement, but I will not confine my vision to that piece, that
legislative piece. We must build back better.
I think it is very important to note for people across the country
who have seen infrastructure in the past come in and divide their
communities, perpetuate injustices, environmental injustice in their
communities, that it is necessary for us to build back better in a way
that empowers.
When I say ``rebuild the middle class,'' it is about jobs, but it is
about jobs in a new way; more inclusive for women, for people of color,
for younger people to be engaged and trained with workforce training to
participate in the new economy. With jobs and justice.
In the past our infrastructure bills have reinforced that
environmental injustice and divided communities. The Build Back Better
Act will undo that. With the passage of this bill, accompanied by the
Build Back Better legislation, with its equity piece, much of that
injustice, as much as possible, will be reversed.
It is about building up. It is not about trickle-down: Oh, this is
what we are going to do and a lot of people will benefit and maybe you
will get some of it. No. It is about meeting the needs of people, both
for the water needs or transportation needs or infrastructure needs in
many ways, but also that starts and then builds up.
Along with the Build Back Better Act, this prioritizes some aspects
of justice and opportunity.
Let me be clear. While the investments in the bipartisan
infrastructure bill are strong, historic down payments to build back
better, we are not confining our vision--as the President has said, he
is not confining his--for rebuilding infrastructure to this
legislation.
We all know that we have to build back in a responsible way to meet
our green climate initiatives, our goals, and our responsibilities in
that regard.
Passing an infrastructure bill is always exciting for what it means
in terms of jobs and taking our country into the future, and it has
always been bipartisan over the years here. Not for a while because
there was resistance when President Obama was President. We passed a
bill, but it was not of the magnitude that we needed.
This is a step closer to a once-in-a-generation investment in our
infrastructure, as the Conference of Mayors have said. Now we must go
further to build back better.
I urge strong bipartisan support for this legislation.
Mr. GRAVES of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Bergman).
Mr. BERGMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his leadership on
this extremely important issue.
I want to expose for my constituents the real truth about the so-
called infrastructure portion of the Democrats' destructive $5.5
trillion package.
You can read for yourself in the bill that only a fraction of the
funds go to roads, bridges, broadband, and other things people outside
the swamp would generally consider infrastructure, a true and
embarrassingly small drop in the bucket, considering the current state
of Michigan's infrastructure. By the way, our roads still haven't been
fixed.
But more importantly, I am asking you to read between the lines to
understand that this package will stretch the long, intrusive arm of
the Federal Government into your life, more than ever before. Your
energy bill, your taxes, your job, your Nation's borders, your economic
freedom.
As your Representative, I can't let this happen, and I urge my
colleagues to oppose this bill.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. The gentleman
once again conflates, confuses, confabulates. The bill before us is a
bipartisan bill from the Senate, $550 billion of new spending on top of
the expected income. It is not $3.5, $4.5, $5 trillion and doesn't
include all those other things. It does include roads, bridges,
highways, transit, water, wastewater, drinking water, lead pipes,
ports, airports, and broadband, which I think his constituents want.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina
(Mr. Clyburn), the majority whip.
Mr. CLYBURN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for his leadership on
this very, very important piece of legislation.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act will make critical
investments, not just in roads and bridges. This legislation will also
invest in transit, rail, electric vehicle charging stations, electric
buses, airports, ports, water, energy, environmental remediation, and
high-speed broadband internet. I will focus on this last category, the
$65 billion for broadband.
Millions of Americans are not connected to the internet. In my home
State of South Carolina, nearly 1 in 10 households lack access to an
internet connection, and even more cannot afford service. As a result,
they cannot work remotely, cannot learn remotely, and cannot access
telehealth. The internet is as essential to the 21st century as
electricity was to the 20th century, and far too many Americans are
left out.
That is why I worked closely with the House Rural Broadband Task
Force, Chairman Pallone, and members of the Energy and Commerce
Committee to craft comprehensive legislation to make high-speed
broadband accessible and affordable for all. Our bill passed the House
last Congress as part of the Moving Forward Act.
While the legislation we are considering today doesn't include that
bill in its entirety, and more action will be required, it does
incorporate many of our bill's essential principles. It gives
preference to future-focused infrastructure, prioritizes persistent
poverty communities, and includes oversight and accountability
mechanisms.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act also invests in
affordability and adoption. It requires an affordable option to be
offered on newly-funded networks, extends the monthly discount on
internet bills, and funds digital equity and inclusion projects.
Throughout our Nation's history, communities in most need of Federal
funds have all too often been the last in line.
Together with the Build Back Better Act, the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act will make America's greatness accessible and
affordable for all Americans. I urge passage of this legislation.
Mr. GRAVES of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the majority leader.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, first I want to thank probably the most
knowledgeable Member of Congress about infrastructure in this country
and our needs, Mr. DeFazio, the chairman of the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee.
He and his committee, Mr. Speaker, and members of his staff have
worked very long and very late hours over the past 2 years--and,
frankly, longer than that, going back to the 116th Congress and the
115th Congress--to produce the legislation that served as a basis for
this bipartisan bill. I also thank Chairman Pallone and the members and
the staff of the Energy and Commerce Committee, who contributed a great
deal as well.
{time} 1230
Mr. Speaker, during the course of the 2016 campaign, Donald Trump
said he was going to invest a trillion dollars in infrastructure--a
trillion dollars. In 2017, he became the President of the United
States, and in 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, no trillion-dollar
infrastructure bill was offered to this House or to the Congress.
Mr. DeFazio, myself, the Speaker, and other leaders went down and met
with President Trump. Mr. DeFazio was talking about the trillion
dollars that the President talked about. He really thought there was
probably more needed, but he was talking about the trillion dollars.
The President said dismiss that, that is too little. It is not enough.
We need at least $2 trillion--President Trump, 2019.
[[Page H5475]]
What we have before us today, Mr. Speaker, is a product that reflects
the needs of our economy, an infrastructure system in dire need of
upgrade and expansion, and addresses some, but by no means all, of the
realities of the climate crisis we face.
In fact, a bill which did a much better job passed this House, led by
Mr. DeFazio. Unfortunately, it was not subject to conference, which is
what the process ought to be.
However, this bill would enable our businesses to seize on the
opportunities presented by those challenges and to create millions of
good, new jobs in the process.
And I thank Mr. DeFazio for his leadership and advocacy.
We have before us legislation that will invest more than $1 trillion
in transportation networks--half of what President Trump said we ought
to be doing, but a very significant step nonetheless--in expanding
broadband access, in addressing climate change, and in helping our
communities build back better and more resilient.
It would enact a major component of President Biden's Build Back
Better agenda. This is part and parcel of the whole. This is a segment
of what the President has rightfully called generational,
transformational change.
I hope we can come together and pass this legislation, Mr. Speaker,
with strong support from Democrats and Republicans. The Republicans
have been browbeaten into opposing this bill, not because of
substantive reasons, but for political reasons so that President Biden
will not have a victory. But that perspective is incorrect. The people
who will not have a victory are the American people.
I hope we come together, as I said, to pass this legislation in a
bipartisan fashion to help our businesses and working families make it
in America. I use those words on purpose because I have been talking
about making it in America for over a decade.
I have been proud, for many years, to lead House Democrats' Make It
In America plan for jobs and opportunities, a plan with three core
components: infrastructure, this bill; and education, the bill to come,
although this has significant training in here for workers to get good
jobs and good-paying jobs. It is a plan with also another core, and
that is entrepreneurship.
Infrastructure has been central to our Make It In America plan since
I first put it on the table in 2010. That is because momentum has been
building for these investments in infrastructure for many years. As a
matter of fact, then-candidate Joe Biden called me up and said: I want
to talk to you about Make It In America.
We talked about it, and it is in our Democratic platform, Make It In
America.
I don't know anybody who is not for making it in America, either
manufacturing, even if it is zeros and ones, or succeeding, making it
in America.
Businesses, labor, economists, and State and local leaders have been
clamoring for Congress to do exactly what we are about to do today with
this vote. And when I say ``exactly,'' they would like more. I think
they would have liked the House bill, Mr. DeFazio's bill, much better.
But none of us get perfect, and this is a bipartisan bill.
Our Make It In America plan has called for multiyear, fully funded
authorizations to address the backlog of projects both for
transportation and for water infrastructure, and that is what Mr.
DeFazio has been leading on.
This bill includes a 5-year, $110 billion authorization for highways,
roads, and bridges; $39 billion for transit; and $55 billion in water
infrastructure to literally get the lead out and make our water safe to
drink.
It calls for making our electricity grid more resilient and more
reliable, which we included in Make It In America. This bill invests
$78 billion to do exactly that and creates a new grid deployment
authority to promote innovation and smart-grid technologies. That is
about our national security. That is a national security demand on us.
In the Make It In America agenda, we challenged Congress to promote a
modern energy infrastructure that reduces waste and incentivizes
storage and alternative forms of energy for vehicles. That is what Mr.
DeFazio did in the bill that we passed. It is not as good, I think, but
that is what is in this bill.
The $7.5 billion included in this legislation for building an
electric vehicle charging infrastructure in America, particularly in
rural, disadvantaged, and hard-to-reach communities, meets that
challenge. That is why 40 percent of the Republicans in the United
States Senate voted for it.
When House Democrats traveled across the country listening to the
American people over the last few years, we heard what they need to
make it in America. We heard about the need to expand access to high-
speed internet, including deployment of 5G wireless infrastructure.
That is what Mr. DeFazio did, and that is what this Senate bill does.
This bill achieves those goals by including $65 billion to bring
broadband access to nearly all Americans by auctioning new spectrum for
5G wireless. That is what Whip Clyburn was talking about, making sure
that all of us can make it in America because we have access to the
internet.
It is also about education, and we have called for reforms that allow
for stackable credentials for students preparing for the workforce as
well as those already in the workforce looking to get ahead by learning
new skills.
This bill before us today includes provisions that provide States
with flexibility in how they use funding to strengthen workforce
development. We all talk about that. It helps more people train for in-
demand skills, such as engineering.
In so many ways, the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
Act is a product of House Democrats--Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Scott, Mr.
Pallone, Mr. Neal--and, yes, many Republicans who have also talked
about making it in America.
We have been united in promoting this agenda for 10 years, and now we
have the chance to effect a large portion of it.
Mr. Trump talked about it; he just didn't do it.
This legislation, of course, is just one-half of an even larger
effort, as I said, by President Biden and Democrats to achieve that
objective of helping our people make it in America.
The other piece is the Build Back Better Act. That legislation, which
is progressing steadily toward consideration on the floor, would enact
the remainder of President Biden and Democrats' domestic agenda,
including major efforts to address the climate crisis and reforms that
will help millions of American families achieve economic security.
We all talk about being pro-family. That is pro-family. Childcare is
pro-family. Earned income tax credit is pro-family. Expanding Medicaid
is pro-family. So much. And if we are pro-family, we need to support
those items.
While the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act makes
investments toward tackling the climate crisis, the Build Back Better
Act will take the steps needed to transition our economy to clean
energy in line with the President's commitment to the Paris climate
agreement and Mr. DeFazio's bill that we passed through this House.
Where this legislation today invests in our Nation's physical
infrastructure, the Build Back Better Act makes investment in America's
human infrastructure.
When I go to a building and cut a ribbon at some base or whatever, I
say that is very nice, this physical structure, but if we build great
bricks and mortar but don't have people who can do the job, we build in
vain.
In our working families, in our communities, that is what we invest
in, in opportunities for hardworking Americans to get ahead.
We are moving steadily ahead with that bill, and I am hopeful that we
are nearing the finish line. I look forward to bringing that bill, the
Build Back Better Act, to the floor soon.
Mr. Speaker, I believe Democrats will demonstrate unity on both
pieces of legislation as we put President Biden and congressional
Democrats' agenda into action. Let's get it done. Vote ``yes.''
Mr. GRAVES of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my
time.
This body could and should have worked together on bipartisan
legislation to improve our roads and our bridges, wastewater
infrastructure, and other vital infrastructure components. But instead,
the majority preferred to put us through a very highly partisan
[[Page H5476]]
messaging exercise. And for what? The majority leaders' grossly
mismanaged process.
I have no doubt that they thought that their ``my way or the
highway'' approach reflected all their progressive priorities, and they
were mighty proud of it. But it led to the House, both Republicans and
Democrats, being completely sidelined in this process. And we knew that
this was the most likely outcome.
I want to highlight two key points.
The first is that today's legislation is one of the largest
infrastructure bills ever before the House, but because of the
Speaker's mismanagement of this entire process, the House failed to be
taken seriously and failed to have any input into this bill.
The second point is that this bill is a Trojan horse for
reconciliation. We all know that. Voting for this bill is a vote for
Speaker Pelosi's $3.5 trillion spending spree, and there is no way to
separate the two. Even the Speaker acknowledges this, and many others
as well.
Lost among all of these poor decisions is the absolute necessity to
address America's real infrastructure needs. I firmly believe that the
work we do on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is
critical to the economy and to the lives of all Americans, and if the
House process was bipartisan from the very start, this conversation
would have been much different, but here we are. Instead of zeroing in
on real infrastructure, the majority is talking about spending
trillions and trillions of dollars on everything that they can think
of, and I have to ask: When does it end?
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, we could have perhaps had a bipartisan bill out of the
House, except for the unified rejection of climate change on the other
side of the aisle.
Transportation is the largest single emitter of CO2
pollution in the country. This is a critical threat to our country, to
the world, and we have to deal with it.
The bill we wrote and passed would have dealt with that very
meaningfully and moved us into 21st century infrastructure. This bill
contains some of those elements that even the Republicans on this side
would not support. EV charging, nope, not in their bill. Electric
buses, nope, not in their bill. Electric school buses, nope, not in
their bill. None of those things were in their bill.
In fact, their alternative, which they didn't even offer on the
floor, by the way--so they don't really have an alternative--was $350
billion for highways, status quo, with an increase in spending. No
changes in policy except for the one, Rodney Davis' thing, which is in
the Senate bill, to gut NEPA. Then, transit flatlined over 5 years, and
rail, zero--goose egg, zero.
{time} 1245
No wastewater, no reconnecting communities, no drinking water, no
lead pipes. And by the way, every billion we spend on wastewater or
drinking water creates 20,000 good-paying jobs. No broadband in their
bill. And the list goes on and on.
So we don't have a real alternative on that side of the aisle. And
should they help to vote this down, they oppose it, then they have no
answer. The answer is a continuing resolution, status quo, funding,
flat funding.
Not dealing with the 400,000 bridges in America that need substantial
repair or replacement. The 40 percent of the National Highway System
which has deteriorated to the point where it has to be rebuilt from the
roadbed up. The $100 billion-dollar backlog in transit, a decrepit rail
system--we just had a derailment; people died--and they are going to
put zero dollars into rail in their bill.
Wastewater systems that back up into basements or flow into rivers,
and water mains that burst, I mean, we have to deal with these things.
It didn't used to be partisan. The problem is we also believe in
dealing with climate change, and they can't admit to climate change
because Donald Trump says it's a myth. And you can't defy Donald Trump
on that side of the aisle. That is very, very sad.
At least these 19 Republican Senators nodded toward it. They included
money for EV charging, electric buses in the bill--at least a little
tiny nod. They did take up our mandatory greenhouse gas reduction
program. They did take out our critical fix-it-first principles, but we
will improve on the bill with new, novel programs in the reconciliation
process yet to come and deal with some of those issues, deal with the
greenhouse gas reductions, deal with more transit, more rail, more
wastewater--in different ways. Drinking water, lead pipes, all those
things will be in the reconciliation bill yet to come.
But plain and simple, the bill before us today is the infrastructure
bill, the only option.
Mr. Speaker, I thank all my staff. There are too many to list in the
time that I have remaining, so I include in the Record a list of their
names.
Conclusion
Before I conclude, I want to take a moment to thank my
staff--especially those who drafted the INVEST in America
Act. They have spent countless days, nights and weekends
working on a transformational surface transportation bill
over the past two years.
I wish we were considering that bill today. But, without
their hardwork and dedication we wouldn't be here and about
to deliver for the America people the most significant
investment in our nation's infrastructure in decades.
Subcommittee on Highways and Transit
Helena Zyblikewcyz-Staff Director
Jackie Schmitz
Garrett Gee
Brittany Lundberg
Chris Bell
Zan Guendert
Subcommittee on Railroads Pipelines and Hazardous Materials
Auke Mahar-Piersma-Staff Director
Andrea Woehbler
Frances Bourne
Katherine Ambrose
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, they did an absolutely phenomenal job
putting this whole package together--twice, two Congresses. Real
legislative process on this side of the Hill. Even though the
Republicans lost, they participated in the process--not so much on the
other side. Some day we might get back to regular order.
Mr. Speaker, I conclude and urge my colleagues to vote in favor of
this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. TRONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of myself and my
colleagues from Maryland, Representatives Hoyer and Raskin. Our State
of Maryland has a proud history of innovation in satellite technology
and space exploration. Greenbelt, Maryland is home to Goddard, the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration's first Space Flight
Center. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which
operates a fleet of weather satellites, has its headquarters in Silver
Spring. Additionally, the largest provider of residential satellite
broadband service, Hughes Network Systems, is headquartered in
Germantown. Hughes serves consumers in some of the most rural, hard-to-
reach areas of the country.
As the House considers the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, we
join our colleague, Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD) in expressing our support
for satellite technology, which offers an opportunity for helping
achieve our broadband deployment goals. Satellite innovators in
Maryland and elsewhere have designed measures to reduce latency by
using a mix of communications platforms, including low-earth orbit
satellites and fixed wireless networks.
The infrastructure bill provides broadband grants for service
providers that meet a ``real-time, interactive'' standard for
permissible latency. We believe that residential satellite broadband
service providers could potentially meet this standard by using a mix
of geostationary and non-geostationary satellite networks or fixed
wireless networks. Satellite broadband service providers that are able
to meet the standard for permissible latency should be considered for
broadband grants provided in the infrastructure bill. We look forward
to working with our colleagues and the Department's National
Telecommunications and Information Administration staff on this
important issue.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Speaker, I have one question. Why are we using an
infrastructure bill to write the rules for new technology?
That's exactly what's happening today.
The cryptocurrency tax reporting provision in this bill will have
long-lasting and harmful implications for innovation here in the U.S.
So, we need a fix. The ``fix'' debate started in the Senate. But it
didn't go anywhere. And I said in August, if the Senate can't get it
done, we'll fight it out in the House.
So, I'll be introducing a bill to put the guardrails in place to
clarify the scope of the new reporting requirements.
We need to keep America at the forefront of innovation.
[[Page H5477]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 601, the previous question is ordered.
The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Oregon
(Mr. DeFazio).
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. GRAVES of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and
nays.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution
8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question
are postponed.
____________________