PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Jul 27, 2010
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Surface Transportation Earmark Rescission, Savings, and Accountability Act - Rescinds certain unobligated amounts allocated under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) for: (1) high cost bridge projects; (2) congestion relief projects; (3) high priority corridor segments on the National Highway System; (4) rural and urban access projects and urban mobility projects; (5) innovative projects; and (6) priority intermodal transportation projects.
Rescinds certain unobligated amounts allocated under the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (STURAA) for federal-aid system demonstration projects.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Rescinds unobligated amounts under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) for certain high priority projects in which less than 10% of the amount authorized for such projects has been obligated.
Repeals the designation of a specified segment of U.S. Route 322 as an addition to Corridor O in Pennsylvania on the Appalachian development highway system.
Rescinds a specified amount of unallocated funds authorized for FY2005-FY2009 under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) for the high priority projects program.
Requires the Secretary of Transportation (DOT) to report to Congress on each authorized project in the following categories that has inactive funds or that has been completed in the previous fiscal year: (1) each high priority project authorization under TEA-21; (2) each project of national and regional significance, highway construction project in a corridor of national significance, high priority project authorization, and transportation improvement project under SAFETEA-LU; and (3) specified bridge program set-aside projects. Requires such report also to specify for each project the amount of funds authorized, any unobligated balance of funds, and a reference to its public law and section and project number.
People & committees
Rep. Markey, Betsy [D-CO-4] · D–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 394 - 23 (Roll no. 471). (text: CR H6068)
House roll call 471 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 394 - 23 (Roll no. 471).(text: CR H6068)
House roll call 471 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6112-6113)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5730.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6068-6071)
Ms. Markey (CO) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1313)
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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.5730 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.5730 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.5730 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.5730 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.