Peter DeFazio

I have introduced a bill to lift the cap on the passenger facility charge.

I am vitally interested in the needs of the airports, particularly their unmet needs.

So, I mean, the net result is that, although I assume that many operators might go ahead and comply with it once they become aware of it, but it is not mandatory because we haven't been able to adopt a rule.

I would observe that certification is, when the industry is polled broadly, the number-one issue.

I think sundering the agency is problematic when the certification is recognized by so many as the number-one problem we have today with the FAA.

That seems unreasonable. And I think it would be critical that, in this long-term bill, that we put in provisions for reciprocity.

I really want to see that move forward, and I want to help rein in the abuses of the Chinese and others.

I would hope that we can reach that same point again very quickly this year.

The cost of congestion since we began the hearing for American individuals and business was $54,750,000.

I intend to continue to push for us to actually finally put our money where our agreement has been, and get some of these things done.

I would reflect that Congress did--although most don't know it--increase the inland diesel waterway user fee, diesel tax, in a yearend budget deal 2 years ago.

Does anybody here think that a one-half of 1 percent increase in the cost of diesel would cause an undue disruption to the American economy?

I want to reinforce that. And this clock will recognize, on a daily basis, the cost of congestion to the American economy.

I think we have got to pay for it, and get started on it.

I hope that we can join and make common cause in these areas, because we do need to rebuild our country.

Let's index the gas tax--radical proposal. We can index it to construction cost, inflation, fleet fuel economy.

The American people get it. A number of all-red States have raised their gas tax. Nobody has been recalled or lost their election.

The status quo has been, we are frozen in amber. We are refusing to invest in our infrastructure.

I hope we can bring back congressionally designated spending, where we set priorities for some small amount of our annual investment.

And no net gain or---- substantial change. That is just extraordinary.

Right, but FEMA is being forced to do this by NMFS.

So, large areas, as the mayor of Beaverton mentioned--I was just looking at more maps in Coos Bay, where there has been State and local investment for hopeful massive redevelopment--and those areas become unbuildable, then the State is…

But one of the key things in our land-use law is compact growth, sometimes controversial.

So many properties now that aren't required to have Federal flood insurance in order to obtain bank financing will be required to in the future.

Yes, but the whole intent of this RPA is not hazards. That is the problem.