PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 9, 2015
Transportation Infrastructure Grants and Economic Reinvestment Act
The bill directs the Department of Transportation (DOT) to establish a program under which DOT shall provide competitive grants of between $10 million and $200 million to the District of Columbia, to a state, Indian tribe, U.S. territory, local government, port authority, metropolitan planning organization, transit agency, or another political subdivision of a state or local government, or to two or more of such entities working in collaboration, for eligible transportation projects (including highway or bridge, public transportation, passenger or freight rail transportation, and port infrastructure or intermodal projects) that would have a significant beneficial impact on a state, metropolitan area, or region or the United States.
DOT, in providing such grants, must: (1) ensure an equitable geographical distribution of funds, an appropriate balance in addressing the needs of urban and rural areas, and investment in a variety of transportation modes; and (2) give priority to eligible projects that require a contribution of federal funds to complete an overall financing package.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill sets forth primary and secondary criteria for selecting eligible projects.
The bill: (1) limits to 25% the amount of grant funds that may be provided to any state, (2) requires at least 20% of grant funds to be provided for eligible projects located in rural areas, and (3) allows up to 20% of the funds authorized to carry out this Act to be used to pay the subsidy and administrative costs of projects eligible for federal credit assistance under the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act upon determining that such use of funds would advance the purposes of this Act.
People & committees
Sen. Murray, Patty [D-WA] · D–WA
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 Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
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.1748 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.1748 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.1748 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.1748 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.