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 · Apr 4, 1995
National Capital Region Interstate Transportation Authority Act of 1995 - Gives the consent of the Congress to the Commonwealth of Virginia, the State of Maryland, and the District of Columbia (National Capital Region) to enter into an interstate agreement or compact to establish the National Capital Region Interstate Transportation Authority. Directs the Secretary of Transportation to convey to the Authority all right, title, and interest of the Department of Transportation in the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge. Directs the Authority to take action to address the need of the National Capital Region for an enhanced southern Capital Beltway crossing of the Potomac River that serves the traffic corridor of the Bridge. Provides for: (1) the withdrawal of a National Capital Region jurisdiction from the Authority; and (2) termination of the Authority. Authorizes appropriations.
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 S5146-5147)
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.668 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.668 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.668 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.668 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.