PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.3525 / 105th Congress

To amend the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 to specify the number and use of vehicle lanes on any replacement of the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge, and for other purposes.

See H.R.2400.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 19, 1998

Amends the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge Authority Act of 1995 to provide Federal funding for the removal of the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge after completion of any replacement crossing. Directs that any replacement bridge be open to traffic for operation of no more than 12 vehicle lanes and have two lanes reserved exclusively for one or more of the following: high occupancy vehicles, express buses, or transit. Bars such reserved lanes from being: (1) open to traffic until the systems that such lanes will be a part of in Maryland and Virginia are open to traffic; and (2) used as general purpose lanes unless such use is necessary for incident or accident management or maintenance of traffic during construction or maintenance activities. Prohibits: (1) tolls on any part of the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge Project that is reserved for local traffic; and (2) any replacement crossing from being more than 200 feet wide or from being open to traffic until completion of specified environmental and other mitigation measures. Requires the Secretary of Transportation, if the highest elected local official of a local governmental unit in which any part of the Project shall be located establishes a community oversight committee to provide comments and recommendations regarding Project design and construction, to take any such comments and recommendations into consideration and make appropriate changes. Directs the Secretary to establish the Southern Potomac River Study to: (1) study the feasibility of a new Potomac River crossing south of Interstate Route 495 and north of State Route 301 to accommodate future increased traffic in the metropolitan Washington, D.C. area; (2) select possible alignments for a new river crossing, propose possible crossing options, and identify possible financing mechanisms to acquire the right-of-way and to construct the crossing; and (3) report to the Congress. Requires the Commission to be comprised of representatives appointed from among local elected officials of the jurisdictions in which any part of the Project shall be located and representatives Maryland, Virginia, and the environmental community. Amends Federal transportation law to make available from the Highway Trust Fund such sums as may be necessary to carry out the Project.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Moran, James P. [D-VA-8] · D–VA

Committees

  • Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

    Actions

    A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

    1. See H.R.2400.

    2. Referred to the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation.

    3. Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

    4. Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E435)

    5. Introduced in House

    6. Introduced in House

    Bill text & related measures

    Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

    Related bills identified by Congress.gov

    Source last updated: Jan 2, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

    Explore the bill from different angles

    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.

    Neutral evidence review

    Objective

    Analyze H.R.3525 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Fairness and public impact

    Progressive lens

    Examine H.R.3525 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Institutions and government scope

    Conservative lens

    Examine H.R.3525 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Individual rights and government power

    Liberty lens

    Examine H.R.3525 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.

    View full prompt & sources