PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 19, 1999
Woodrow Wilson Bridge Financing Act of 1999 - Amends the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge Authority Act of 1995 to authorize appropriations for FY 2004 through 2007 to the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) to pay the costs of the project for upgrading the Interstate Route 95 Potomac River crossing, which includes the rehabilitation of the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge (under current law, priority is given to costs associated with the Bridge, other than design costs).Limits the total amount made available from the Highway Trust Fund for the Federal contribution to $1.5 billion and requires amounts from the Fund for the project in excess of such amount to be provided by the Capital Region jurisdictions (jurisdictions).Requires, for FY 2004 through 2007, that every one dollar provided from the Fund be matched by at least 67 cents provided by such jurisdictions. Requires such jurisdictions to allocate payment of the matching funds as they determine to be appropriate.
People & committees
Sen. Warner, John [R-VA] · R–VA
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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S8886)
Introduced in Senate
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 S.1405 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.1405 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.1405 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.1405 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.