PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 111-116.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 16, 2009
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Fiscal Year 2010 Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act, Part II - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to extend through March 31, 2010: (1) excise taxes on aviation fuels and air transportation of persons and property; and (2) the expenditure authority for the Airport and Airway Trust Fund.
Authorizes appropriations for the six-month period from October 1, 2009, through March 31, 2010, for airport improvement program (AIP) projects, including project grant authority. Sets forth a formula for calculating the apportionment of AIP funding.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Extends through March 31, 2010, various airport development projects, including: (1) the pilot program for passenger facility fees at nonhub airports; (2) small airport grants for airports located in the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Palau; (3) the temporary increase to 95% in the government share of certain AIP project costs; and (4) the funding of Midway Island airport development.
Extends through March 31, 2010, state and local land use compatibility projects under the AIP program.
Extends through March 31, 2010, the authority of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority to apply for an airport development grant and impose a passenger facility fee.
Extends through March 31 2010, Department of Transportation (DOT) insurance coverage for domestic and foreign-flag air carriers. Allows further extension through June 30, 2010.
Extends through June 30, 2010, air carrier liability limits for injuries to passengers resulting from acts of terrorism.
Extends through March 31, 2010, certain competitive access assurance requirements for large or medium hub airport sponsors applying for AIP grants.
Extends for the six-month period beginning October 1, 2009, the authorization of appropriations for: (1) Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) operations; (2) air navigation facilities and equipment; and (3) research, engineering, and development.
People & committees
Rep. Rangel, Charles B. [D-NY-15] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 111-116.
Became Public Law No: 111-116.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Cleared for White House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S12969)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S12969)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H13594)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H13594)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4217.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H13594-13596)
Mr. Lewis (GA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to House Ways and Means
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to House Transportation and Infrastructure
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4217 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4217 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4217 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4217 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.