Congressional News Briefing with U.S. Sen. Blumenthal and U.S. Sen. Murphy on the Proposed Federal Infrastructure Plan CLICK FOR VIDEO

House debates $715 billion transportation and water bill, making its pitch on infrastructure

Ian Duncan and Michael Laris, The Washington Post

WASHINGTON - The House took up a $715 billion transportation and water infrastructure bill late Wednesday, a measure that would stake out the chamber's position in a debate over how to rebuild the nation's roads, transit networks, water pipes and sewers.

The package would provide $343 billion for roads, bridges and safety programs, $109 billion for transit agencies and $95 billion for rail. It also includes $117 billion for drinking water programs and $51 billion for wastewater infrastructure.

Much of the debate over infrastructure has played out between President Joe Biden and negotiators in the Senate, who outlined a bipartisan plan last week. But Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said this week the spending envisioned in that bipartisan plan and the House bill were close enough that he saw the potential for an agreement.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the House's Invest in America Act represents her chamber's effort to seize a "once-in-a-century opportunity to rebuild America's infrastructure," while working to lift the middle class, help the environment and focus on equity.

The bill, written by Democrats, is weighted more heavily in favor of rail than the bipartisan plan, while pitching less for roads. DeFazio said he could support more money for roads and hoped that would encourage senators to back more money for trains.

"What their framework lacks is policy," DeFazio said. "My bill is the transformative policy that the Biden administration wants."

That is where aligning the dueling proposals could prove tricky. The White House has been aggressively promoting the new Senate framework, but also has endorsed the House bill. The two sides of Congress remain divided on how money might be spent and how central climate change should be to infrastructure investments.

Congress typically takes up transportation funding bills every five years or so, approving federal programs that send money to state agencies to fund roads, buses and rail lines. Those programs are set to expire on Sept. 30. But with infrastructure at the top of the White House's agenda this year, the bill has taken on outsize significance.

In a sign of the delicate dynamics between the chambers, Pelosi praised the bipartisan framework while reiterating that a Senate bill embodying that framework would be taken up in the House only after specifics of a separate far-reaching budget bill with other Biden priorities are clear.

"Our caucus is very, very pleased with the bipartisan agreement that the president was able to achieve working with Democrats and Republicans in the Senate," Pelosi said. "There are many good features to it in terms of numbers, but not policy."

Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., is leading efforts to draft the legislative text to transform the bipartisan infrastructure framework into a bill. Senate aides said drafters are stitching together contributions from key Senate committees, including elements of bipartisan bills they have passed, as well as information from the 10 senators who reached the bipartisan deal, and the Biden administration.

Schumer has said he wants the Senate to consider both the bipartisan infrastructure bill and the broader, partisan budget bill in July. Given the time frame, DeFazio on Wednesday suggested that Senate leaders rely heavily on the House bill.

"I said ... it took my staff seven months to write the policy. I don't know how quickly you can write policy over there," DeFazio said. He urged drafters to "adopt significant portions" of the House bill and perhaps parts of bills passed by the Senate's Commerce Committee and Environment and Public Works Committee, as well.

The House bill includes measures designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions from transportation, holding states accountable for emissions on their roads, while promoting electric cars and buses. It would require states to consider alternatives such as transit before widening highways, and provides $14.5 billion for projects that would reduce carbon emissions or make transportation networks more resistant to extreme weather.

Transit funding is aimed at reducing a maintenance backlog and helping agencies provide more regular service. The bill proposes tripling funding for Amtrak to $32 billion and includes a grant fund that could be used to develop high-speed rail projects.

It also includes a $45 billion fund to replace all lead water lines across the country.

Wednesday night's debate on the bill reflected partisan divisions and contrasting visions.

"Members on the other side have said they don't want another traditional highway bill, but we can't abandon our roads and bridges just to say we want something new. Our core infrastructure has become traditional because Americans depend on it to work and to travel and to live," said Rep. Sam Graves of Missouri, the Transportation Committee's ranking Republican.

But Rep. Tom Malinowski, D-N.J., said the bill will both fix highways and "do something as new and as bold today as the interstate highway system was in the 1950s," including investing in electric-vehicle charging and rail.

"And please don't tell New Jersey commuters they're riding the Green New Deal to work every day," he said. "They just want better trains that will get there faster than they did 100 years ago."

The White House issued a formal statement of support Monday for the Invest in America Act, saying it "lays a strong foundation for achieving the President's vision on infrastructure."

At the same time, Biden traveled Tuesday to Wisconsin to promote the bipartisan framework. The White House says that approach also would fulfill its goals of improving the environment and creating new jobs, but details of how the money would be spent haven't been filled in.

He pointed to a $66 billion investment in passenger and freight rail that he said would "reduce the largest source of pollution in America: vehicle travel."

"This deal also makes the largest investment in public transit in American history," Biden said. "We're not just tinkering around the edges here."

Despite bipartisan support for increasing rail spending, leading Republicans have made it clear they oppose many of the environmental rules in the House bill.

"At every turn the majority has ensured that infrastructure programs become climate change programs," Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., said Monday during a meeting of the House's Rules Committee. "New environmental mandates, Green New Deal-like provisions will snarl construction projects. Provisions that prioritize mass transit over roads will force rural districts like my own to spend funding in ineffective ways rather than on the road improvements we so desperately need."

For DeFazio, the environmental provisions are in many ways the heart of the bill. He pointed to this week's heat wave that pushed temperatures in his home state above 110 degrees.

"I heard from my Republican colleague in (the Rules Committee) last night, 'climate change provisions don't belong in a transportation bill.' Seriously?" DeFazio said. "The largest source of fossil fuel pollution in the United States is transportation."

The House bill could attract some Republican support. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) backed the transportation elements in a committee vote and sponsored the wastewater provisions.

The version of the bill on the House floor does not include revenue-raising provisions typically included to help fund transportation spending. DeFazio said he expected they would be ironed out once the House and Senate began working together on a final version of the bill.

The bipartisan framework includes ideas on how to cover the cost, such as ramping up tax enforcement and reusing coronavirus relief money, but experts have questioned whether those proposals would bring in enough money.

Park City Wind project advances at federal level

Luther Turmelle

A federal agency has begun to move forward with its environmental assessment for Avangrid’s Park City Wind project, according to officials with the renewable energy division of the Orange-based energy company.

Avangrid Renewables officials said Wednesday the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has notified the company of its intent to go ahead with an environmental impact study for Park City Wind, an 800-megawatt, offshore wind project being developed by the company and Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners. The study is a significant component of what is the major permitting required for the project to get underway, according to Avangrid officials.

The project is important to Connecticut for two reasons: The state is looking to increase its renewable energy portfolio and the project is seen as a major economic driver for Bridgeport.

“This is another important milestone for Avangrid’s portfolio of offshore wind projects,” Dennis Arriola, the company’s chief executive officer, said in a statement.

The agency’s notification to the company initiates a 30-day public comment period to define the scope of the study, according to company officials. Bill White, head of offshore wind for Avangrid Renewables, said the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s review process is expected to take about two years before a final decision is issued.

“It’s a signal that the project has all of the necessary information and analysis that the government needs,” White said. “If we get the approval, we’d close on all the contracts necessary for the project.”

The company announced in May it was setting up a project office at 350 Fairfield Ave. in downtown Bridgeport. At the same time, Avangrid Renewables officials said they had leased space at Barnum Landing in the city to use as a construction and staging area.

“We will likely begin using the Barnum’s Landing facility at the start of construction,” White said.

The Park City Wind project is slated to be built 15 miles south of Martha’s Vineyard. It is expected to be operational some time in 2025, he said.

Once construction of the wind farm is complete, the Barnum Landing site will serve as an operations and maintenance facility for the 20-year lifespan of the project, according to White, and employ about 200 people. Barnum Landing is a 15-acre parcel located at 525 Seaview Ave. in the city.

The Park City Wind project was selected in December 2019 by the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection to become part of the state’s renewable energy portfolio. It will produce enough electricity to light 400,000 homes and provide 14 percent of Connecticut’s electric supply.

It is expected to generate an estimated $890 million in direct economic development in the state, according to company officials.