skip to main content

H.R. 2577: Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2016

Jun 9, 2015 at 11:35 p.m. ET. On Passage of the Bill in the House.

This was a vote to pass H.R. 2577 (114th) in the House.

It was not the final House vote on the bill. See the history of H.R. 2577 (114th) for further details.

This bill is the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2017, a yearly federal spending bill.

The bill began as the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2016. However in a House vote on May 26, the text of the bill was replaced in whole with new text making it the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2017. Our original summary follows:

The Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2016 is a national spending bill. It has been passed by the House, with a total of 79 amendments proposed and 37 accepted.

Unfortunately GovTrack does not have the staff to summarize the contents of the whole bill and all proposed amendments. We have instead included summaries of recent amendments agreed to and rejected on June 4.

Agreed to: Rep. Eleanor Norton (D-DC) proposed an amendment to ban the appropriation of funds by this bill that will violate the 5th Amendment, which grants the right to remain silent, the 14th Amendment, which prohibits government discrimination of rights among citizens, and the Civil Rights Act. Norton said in her press release that this amendment was in response to evident discrimination in urban law enforcement: “Getting this amendment in the THUD bill serves an essential purpose until we can get a permanent authorized version.” Norton introduced the related Racial Profiling Prevention Act on May 15.

Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ4) proposed an amendment to ban the appropriation of funds to the Federal Transit Administration’s proposed Rapid Growth Area Transit Program. The program would have spent $500 million on national bus services. Gosar called the program “wasteful” in his press release and claimed that the money would be better spent in the highway trust fund. “Despite millions of dollars continuing to be pumped into utopian projects attempting to recreate a European style transit system, the bottom line is traffic congestion continues to worsen,” he wrote.

Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ7) proposed an amendment to ban the appropriation of funds that would allow the Federal Aviation Administration to redesign the Phoenix Metroplex regional airspace. Phoenix is within Gallego’s district. (Press release)

Rejected: Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA4) proposed an amendment to ban the appropriation of $155 million to the Essential Air Service, which subsidizes small aircraft in rural areas. “This was supposed to be a temporary program to allow local communities and airports to re-adjust to airline de-regulation in 1978. Not only is it still going on today, it has doubled in cost in the last four years, from $130 million in 2011 to roughly $260 million in 2015,” he said in a press release. The amendment did not receive enough Republican support to pass, with 82 Republicans and all but 8 Democrats voting to reject it. (Vote)

Rep. Scott Garrett (R-NJ5) proposed an amendment to provide just under $17 million to the Federal Railroad Administration’s (FRA) Safety and Operations Account as well as cut $83 million in funding to Capital Investment Grants. The amendment was in response to the recent Philadelphia crash, as well as “over a dozen Amtrak-related accidents,” he said in a press release. The amendment did not receive enough Republican support to pass, with 92 Republicans and all but 11 Democrats voting to reject it. (Vote(

Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL5) proposed two amendments to ban the appropriation of funds for federal subsidies to Amtrak. These would have defunded Amtrak’s Operating Grants and Capital Debt Service Grants. Brooks said in his press release that “If you want safety with rail service, probably the best thing to do is to put it in the private sector and eliminate Amtrak altogether.” Both amendments were rejected with a lack of Republican support. The first with 99 opposed Republicans and the second with 101. Neither had more than one supporting Democrat.

Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA24) proposed an amendment to appropriate $28 million to the Pipeline Safety Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to create new safety rules for pipelines. The amendment was rejected with a vote of 202 to 222. The vote was split along party lines, with only 24 Republicans voting aye and 6 Democrats voting nay.

Vote Outcome
All Votes R D
Yea 51%
Nay 49%
Not Voting

Passed. Simple Majority Required. Source:

Ideology Vote Chart
Republican - Yea Democrat - Yea Republican - Nay Democrat - Nay

Seat position based on our ideology score.

Cartogram Map

Each hexagon represents one congressional district. Dark shaded hexes are Yea votes.

What you can do

Vote Details

Notes: The Speaker’s Vote? “Aye” or “Yea”?
Download as CSV

Statistically Notable Votes

Statistically notable votes are the votes that are most surprising, or least predictable, given how other members of each voter’s party voted and other factors.

All Votes

Study Guide

How well do you understand this vote? Use this study guide to find out.

You can find answers to most of the questions below here on the vote page. For a guide to understanding the bill this vote was about, see here.

What was the procedure for this vote?

  1. What was this vote on?
  2. Not all votes are meant to pass legislation. In the Senate some votes are not about legislation at all, since the Senate must vote to confirm presidential nominations to certain federal positions.

    This vote is related to a bill. However, that doesn’t necessarily tell you what it is about. Congress makes many decisions in the process of passing legislation, such as on the procedures for debating the bill, whether to change the bill before voting on passage, and even whether to vote on passage at all.

    You can learn more about the various motions used in Congress at If you aren’t sure what the House was voting on, try seeing if it’s on this list.

  3. What is the next step after this vote?
  4. Take a look at where this bill is in the legislative process. What might come next? Keep in mind what this specific vote was on, and the context of the bill. Will there be amendments? Will the other chamber of Congress vote on it, or let it die?

    For this question it may help to briefly examine the bill itself.

What is your analysis of this vote?

  1. What trends do you see in this vote?
  2. Members of Congress side together for many reasons beside being in the same political party, especially so for less prominent legislation or legislation specific to a certain region. What might have determined how the roll call came out in this case? Does it look like Members of Congress voted based on party, geography, or some other reason?

    One tool that will be helpful in answering this question is the cartogram at the top of the page. A cartogram is a stylized map of the United States that shows each district as an identical hexagon. This view allows you to see the how the representatives from each district voted arranged by their geography and colored by their political party. What trends can you see in the cartogram for this vote?

  3. How did your representative vote?
  4. There is one vote here that should be more important to you than all the others. These are the votes cast by your representative, which is meant to represent you and your community. Do you agree with how your representative voted? Why do you think they voted the way they did?

    If you don’t already know who your Members of Congress are you can find them by entering your address here.

Each vote’s study guide is a little different — we automatically choose which questions to include based on the information we have available about the vote. Study guides are a new feature to GovTrack. You can help us improve them by filling out this survey or by sending your feedback to