PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 20, 2007
Directs the Secretary of Transportation to establish a flexibility incentive grant pilot program to encourage states to establish new sources of revenue for public transportation projects and services and to reward states for creating more flexibility in the use of their existing transportation funds.
Requires the Secretary to make a grant for FY2008-FY2011 to: (1) each state whose increase in expenditures for public transportation projects and services over the preceding fiscal year was 10% or more and aggregate expenditures for such projects and services was $1 billion or less; (2) each large state whose increase in expenditures for such projects and services over the preceding fiscal year was 1% or more and aggregate expenditures for such projects and services was more than $1 billion; (3) each state that established in the first preceding fiscal year a dedicated source of revenue (i.e., state motor fuels tax, sales tax, or other specified sources of revenue) for carrying out public transportation projects and services that was not in effect in the second preceding fiscal year and which will result in a 10% increase of state funds expended for such projects and services within two years after such implementation; and (4) each state that in the preceding fiscal year amended state law or the state constitution to allow restricted highway funds to also be used for public transportation projects and services. Sets forth certain grant eligibility requirements.
Directs the Secretary to conduct, and report to Congress on, a study to evaluate the pilot program.
People & committees
Rep. Matsui, Doris O. [D-CA-5] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E597)
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
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: Jan 2, 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.1606 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.1606 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.1606 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.1606 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.