PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.8418 / 117th Congress

One Federal Decision Act 1.3

Referred to the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 19, 2022

One Federal Decision Act 1.3

This bill requires, to the greatest extent feasible, the Department of Transportation (DOT) to conduct efficient environmental reviews for port infrastructure projects, pipeline projects, and airport or aviation projects that require DOT's approval under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA).

In addition, DOT must maintain and publish a database concerning such projects that are categorically excluded from NEPA requirements.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Davis, Rodney [R-IL-13] · R–IL

Committees

  • Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

    Actions

    A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

    1. Referred to the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials.

    2. Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.

    3. Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation.

    4. Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

    5. Introduced in House

    6. Introduced in House

    Bill text & related measures

    Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

    Related bills identified by Congress.gov

    No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

    Source last updated: Jan 3, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

    Explore the bill from different angles

    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.

    Neutral evidence review

    Objective

    Analyze H.R.8418 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Fairness and public impact

    Progressive lens

    Examine H.R.8418 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Institutions and government scope

    Conservative lens

    Examine H.R.8418 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Individual rights and government power

    Liberty lens

    Examine H.R.8418 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.

    View full prompt & sources