PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 4, 2004
Sets forth the duties of the Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), including to: (1) advise and coordinate with other Federal agencies on how to address the problem of driving under the influence of an illegal drug; (2) conduct research on the prevention, detection, and prosecution of driving under such influence; and (3) report annually to Congress on the extent of the problem in each State, including a description of the progress each State has made in addressing such problem.
Authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to transfer to the Administrator increasing percentages of funds otherwise apportioned to a State out of the Highway Trust Fund from any State that does not enact laws to prohibit driving under the influence of an illegal drug. Requires transferred funds to be used to carry out NHTSA duties. Requires the Secretary, if any funds are transferred to the Administrator, to transfer to the Administrator also a calculated amount of obligation authority distributed for the fiscal year to the State for Federal-aid highways and highway safety construction programs.
People & committees
Rep. Porter, Jon C. [R-NV-3] · R–NV
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 Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways, Transit and Pipelines.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 Energy and Commerce, 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 Energy and Commerce, 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: Jan 16, 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.3907 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.3907 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.3907 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.3907 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.