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 12, 2011
Safe Routes to School Program Reauthorization Act - Amends the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) to reauthorize appropriations for FY2012-FY2016 for the safe routes to school program.
Revises program requirements to specify children kindergarten through 12th grade as the ones to be benefited by the program.
Revises criteria used to determine state apportionment of program funds.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Includes projects for other nonmotorized modes of transportation besides walking and bicycling as noninfrastructure-related projects.
Authorizes states to set-aside up to 10% of apportioned funds for infrastructure improvements that create safe routes to bus stops located outside of the vicinity of schools.
Requires each state that receives an apportionment to carry out an assessment of the economic and geographical distribution of funding to ensure that low-income schools are adequately able to access such funds. Defines "low-income school" to mean a school in which 65% or more of students qualify for a free or reduced price lunch under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act.
Requires each state receiving an apportionment for a fiscal year to use a sufficient amount of it to fund a full-time position of coordinator for the state safe routes to school program.
Prescribes requirements for the treatment of noninfrastructure and infrastructure projects.
Requires the Secretary of Transportation to: (1) develop and implement a comprehensive plan for evaluating the effectiveness of safe routes to school, and (2) make grants to an experienced national nonprofit organization to operate a national safe routes to school clearinghouse.
People & committees
Sen. Harkin, Tom [D-IA] · D–IA
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.
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.800 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.800 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.800 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.800 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.