PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 29, 2014
Pedestrian Fatalities Reduction Act of 2014 - Requires any state with a per capita increase in the number of fatalities or serious injuries of pedestrians or users of nonmotorized forms of transportation in the state, or a particular county in the state, during the most recent two-year period to include in its subsequent strategic highway safety plan strategies to address that increase. Requires states to take data on such fatalities and injuries into consideration when updating such plans.
Revises any subset the Secretary of Transportation (DOT) establishes of the model inventory of roadway elements (MIRE) for the inventory of roadway safety, and used by state and local departments of transportation to implement their strategic highway safety plans, to include elements that improve safety for pedestrians and users of nonmotorized forms of transportation.
People & committees
Rep. Crowley, Joseph [D-NY-14] · D–NY
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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.4507 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.4507 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.4507 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.4507 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.