PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 115-250.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Sep 29, 2018
Airport and Airway Extension Act of 2018, Part II (Sec. 2) This bill extends: (1) airport planning and development and noise compatibility planning and programs at increased levels until October 7, 2018; (2) various expiring aviation authorities, including those under the Vision 100-Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act and the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, through such date; (3) the expenditure authority of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund through October 8, 2018, and (4) excise taxes for such fund through such date.
People & committees
Rep. Shuster, Bill [R-PA-9] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 115-250.
Became Public Law No: 115-250.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6390-6391)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S6390-6391)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection. (text: CR H9060)
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.(text: CR H9060)
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H9060)
Committee on Ways and Means discharged.
Committee on Ways and Means discharged.
Committee on Transportation discharged.
Committee on Transportation discharged.
Mr. Shuster asked unanimous consent to discharge from committee and consider.
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 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.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
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.6897 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.6897 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.6897 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.6897 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.