PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 19, 2019
The Commuter Parkway Safety and Reliability Act
This bill requires the National Park Service (NPS) to prioritize the funds made available under the federal lands transportation program for high-commuter corridors. (A high-commuter corridor is a federal lands transportation facility administered by the NPS that has average annual daily traffic of not less than 20,000 vehicles.)
If the NPS determines that a high-commuter corridor requires additional investment it must submit to the state
information on the condition of pavements and bridges;
an estimate of the amounts needed to bring such corridor into a state of good repair, taking into consideration any planned future investments; and
at its discretion, a request that the state transfer to the NPS a portion of the amounts necessary to address the condition of the corridor.
The bill sets forth the criteria the NPS must consider when making a determination of whether a a high-commuter corridor requires additional investment.
People & committees
Rep. Brown, Anthony G. [D-MD-4] · D–MD
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: Apr 7, 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.5503 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.5503 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.5503 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.5503 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.