A bill to provide for the allocation of funds from the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund, and for other purposes.

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking.

Congressional Research Service

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 10, 1997

Requires the Secretary of Transportation to ensure that, in each fiscal year, each State's percentage of the total apportionments to all States from the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund is not less than 80 percent of the State's estimated tax payment attributable to highway users in the State paid into that Account in the most recent year for which data are available. Provides an exception for any State whose contribution to such Account in the applicable fiscal year is greater than or equal to $50 million.

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.

People & committees

Who introduced it

Sen. Inhofe, James M. [R-OK] · R–OK

Committees

Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee

6 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Legislative record

Actions

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

Apr 10, 1997
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking.
Apr 10, 1997
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3033)
Apr 10, 1997
Introduced in Senate

Primary sources

Bill text & related measures

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

Introduced in Senate · Apr 10, 1997 Formatted Text PDF

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 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

AI Conversation Starters

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 S.556 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

Discuss S.556, 105th Congress: A bill to provide for the allocation of funds from the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/105th-congress/senate-bill/556

Text version to examine: Introduced in Senate · 1997-04-10.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/105/bills/s556/BILLS-105s556is.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-14T18:21:38Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Analyze S.556 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.

Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine S.556 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

Discuss S.556, 105th Congress: A bill to provide for the allocation of funds from the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/105th-congress/senate-bill/556

Text version to examine: Introduced in Senate · 1997-04-10.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/105/bills/s556/BILLS-105s556is.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-14T18:21:38Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine S.556 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.

Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine S.556 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

Discuss S.556, 105th Congress: A bill to provide for the allocation of funds from the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/105th-congress/senate-bill/556

Text version to examine: Introduced in Senate · 1997-04-10.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/105/bills/s556/BILLS-105s556is.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-14T18:21:38Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine S.556 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.

Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine S.556 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

Discuss S.556, 105th Congress: A bill to provide for the allocation of funds from the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund, and for other purposes.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/105th-congress/senate-bill/556

Text version to examine: Introduced in Senate · 1997-04-10.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/105/bills/s556/BILLS-105s556is.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-14T18:21:38Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine S.556 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.