PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 6, 2026
District of Columbia Transportation Funding Equality Act
This bill makes the District of Columbia eligible for certain Department of Transportation (DOT) grant programs by treating the District as a state under the programs.
Specifically, the bill applies to the Bus and Bus Facilities Grant Program, which provides funding for capital expenses to purchase and rehabilitate buses and to construct bus-related facilities. Under the program, a state is eligible for higher payments than a territory. Currently, the District is treated as a territory under the program.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill also treats the District as a state under two additional DOT programs. The National Culvert Removal, Replacement, and Restoration Grant Program provides competitive grants to eligible entities for projects that meaningfully improve or restore fish passage for certain types of fish. The Safe Streets and Roads for All grant program supports initiatives to prevent roadway deaths and serious injuries. Currently, the District is not included under either of these programs.
Further, the bill treats the District as a state for purposes of the Growing States and High Density States Formula, which provides additional money to some places (e.g., states with a population density greater than 370 persons per square mile) and is distributed through the Urbanized and Rural Area Formula Programs. Currently, the District is not included under the formula.
People & committees
Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large] · D–DC
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
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E4)
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: Jun 16, 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.6950 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.6950 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.6950 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.6950 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.