PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 16, 2021
Better Planning and Land-Use for Accessible Neighborhoods Act or the Better PLAN Act
This bill revises the metropolitan transportation planning process for a metropolitan area to consider projects and strategies that will enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system by better connecting housing to employment.
Additionally, the transportation planning process must address the integration of housing, transportation, and economic development strategies through a process that provides for effective integration, based on a cooperatively developed and implemented strategy, of new and existing transportation facilities.
In carrying out the planning process, a metropolitan planning organization must (1) consult with state and local entities responsible for land use, economic development, housing, management of road networks, or public transportation; and (2) coordinate with such entities to align the goals of the process with the goals of any comprehensive housing affordability strategies established within the metropolitan planning area.
People & committees
Sen. Cortez Masto, Catherine [D-NV] · D–NV
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 Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
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: Jan 14, 2025. 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.768 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.768 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.768 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.768 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.