PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 6, 2001
Provides that with respect to the use of the emergency fund authorized under Federal highway provisions to pay the costs of projects in response to the attack on the World Trade Center in New York City on September 11, 2001, notwithstanding otherwise applicable limitations: (1) the Federal cost share of each such project shall be 100 percent; and (2) the Secretary of Transportation may obligate more than $100 million in any one fiscal year and more than $100 million for those projects.
People & committees
Sen. Clinton, Hillary Rodham [D-NY] · D–NY
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.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR 1/23/2002 S47)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(text: CR 1/23/2002 S47)
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S14062)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 275.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Jeffords without amendment. With written report No. 107-121.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Jeffords without amendment. With written report No. 107-121.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Introduced in Senate
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.1637 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.1637 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.1637 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.1637 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.