PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 12, 1995
District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act - Requires the Federal share of the costs of certain highway projects within the District of Columbia during FY 1995 and 1996 to be up to 100 percent, as requested by the District. Includes as eligible a project for a route proposed for inclusion in the National Highway System or of regional significance for which the United States is or becomes, before September 30, 1996, obligated to pay and with respect to which the Mayor of the District certifies that sufficient funds are not available to pay the full non-Federal share of costs. Requires the District, by September 30, 1996, to repay the amount of any increased Federal share paid for a project by the United States or such amount will be deducted from the funds apportioned or allocated to the District for the category of the project for FY 1997. Requires the Secretary of Transportation to report to specified congressional committee on: (1) each project for which an increased Federal share has been paid; and (2) any specific cause of delay in the rate of the availability of obligation of such funds.
People & committees
Sen. Chafee, John H. [R-RI] · R–RI
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 Surface Transportation.
For Further Action See H.R.2017.
Referred to the Subcommittee on District of Columbia.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S10442-10443)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S10442-10443)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 144.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Original measure reported to Senate by Senator Chafee. With written report No. 104-111.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Original measure reported to Senate by Senator Chafee. With written report No. 104-111.
Introduced in Senate
Committee on Environment and Public Works ordered to be reported an original measure.
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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 S.1023 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 S.1023 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 S.1023 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 S.1023 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.