PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 27, 2009
Surface Transportation Safety Act of 2009 - Directs the Secretary of Transportation to modify certain federal regulations to: (1) allow fire services personnel to wear high visibility apparel meeting certain requirements; and (2) ensure that positive protective measures (including temporary longitudinal traffic barriers) are used to separate workers on highway construction projects from motorized traffic.
Directs the Secretary to approve the use of federal-aid highway funds by a state for patented or proprietary items that further the goals of state strategic highway safety plans.
Directs the Secretary of Transportation to revise the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices to include a standard for a minimum level of retroreflectivity that must be maintained for pavement markings, which shall apply to all roads open to public travel.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Revises requirements for the highway safety improvement program to count installation, replacement, and upgrade of highway signs and pavement markings as a highway safety improvement project. Authorizes: (1) states to obligate highway safety improvement program funds apportioned to them for projects to maintain minimum levels of retroreflectivity in highway signs or pavement markings on public roads, whether or not such projects are included in state plans; and (2) a federal share of costs of 100% for such projects.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) carry out a program to improve traffic signs and pavement markings for older drivers and pedestrians in all states; (2) review the safety of all highway-rail grade crossings in the United States and, based on such review, compile a list of the ten highway-rail grade crossings having the greatest need for safety improvements; (3) establish a national database of information on the safety of highway-rail grade crossings in the United States; and (4) allocate $20 million to each state with a population density of less than 20 persons per square mile for each fiscal year beginning with FY2010 for rural highway safety improvement projects.
People & committees
Rep. Rahall, Nick J., II [D-WV-3] · D–WV
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.
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.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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.2125 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.2125 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.2125 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.2125 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.