Summary

A bill to reauthorize Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs, and for other purposes. Read More

Status

This bill was introduced in a previous session of Congress and was passed by the Senate on Mar 14, 2012 but was never passed by the House.

Bill Text

A BILL

To reauthorize Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act'' or the ``MAP-21''. (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. Sec. 2. Definitions. TITLE I--FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS

Subtitle A--Authorizations and Programs

Sec. 1101. Authorization of appropriations. Sec. 1102. Obligation ceiling. Sec. 1103. Definitions. Sec. 1104. National highway system. Sec. 1105. Apportionment. Sec. 1106. National highway performance program. Sec. 1107. Emergency relief. Sec. 1108. Transportation mobility program. Sec. 1109. Workforce development. Sec. 1110. Highway use tax evasion projects. Sec. 1111. National bridge and tunnel inventory and inspection standards. Sec. 1112. Highway safety improvement program. Sec. 1113. Congestion mitigation and air quality improvement program. Sec. 1114. Territorial and Puerto Rico highway program. Sec. 1115. National freight program. Sec. 1116. Federal lands and tribal transportation programs. Sec. 1117. Alaska Highway. Sec. 1118. Projects of national and regional significance. Subtitle B--Performance Management

Sec. 1201. Metropolitan transportation planning. Sec. 1202. Statewide and nonmetropolitan transportation planning. Sec. 1203. National goals. Subtitle C--Acceleration of Project Delivery

Sec. 1301. Project delivery initiative. Sec. 1302. Clarified eligibility for early acquisition activities prior to completion of NEPA review. Sec. 1303. Efficiencies in contracting. Sec. 1304. Innovative project delivery methods. Sec. 1305. Assistance to...

Read Full Text

Sentiment Map

Select:

Nation

0 Supporting
0 Opposing
0% 0%

State: CA

0 Supporting
0 Opposing
0% 0%

District: 1st

0 Supporting
0 Opposing
0% 0%

Popularity Trend

Organizations Supporting

No organizations supporting yet.

Organizations Opposing

This MAP-21 transportation reauthorization extends transportation funding and programs for 2 years at a cost of $109 billion.  While MAP-21 is earmark free and includes some reforms, it continues to fund the highway, safety, and transit programs at levels in excess of revenues expected from the federal gas tax. The conservative stance on this kind of bill is at least keeping spending to the level of revenue from the gas tax, thus not endorsing deficits and increased debt. Substantive reforms include devolution or opt-out provisions, empowering states to manage transportation taxes and spending. We oppose this bill because continuing to fund programs above dedicated revenue sources will inevitably lead to revenue increases (i.e., tax hikes) or bailouts.  And while it does not contain earmarks, MAP-21 would reward states whose congressional delegations were successful in obtaining above-the-line-earmarks in SAFETEA-LU by locking in those higher funding levels. Congress should live within its means, as opposed to perpetuating ever growing albeit somewhat streamlined government, and focus on ways to empower states such as opt-out provisions or devolution.  In order to close the funding gap, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) proposed numerous revenue raisers to close the $12 billion shortfall. Some of the revenue raisers are actually tax hikes on drivers – like a "gas guzzler tax" on vehicles that do not meet fuel efficiency standards, which would raise about $697 million over a decade. Others are funding transfers or fee diversions that could cause shortfalls in other government programs, requiring additional deficit spending in the future. As the Congressional Research Service notes, "Using any of these, however, would weaken the claim that road users pay the cost of the federal highway program." Heritage Action opposes S.1813 and will include it as a key vote on our scorecard.

Share
Heritage Action 3 years ago

Users Supporting

No constiutents supporting yet.

Users Opposing

No constituents opposing yet.

Bill Summary

S. 1812 Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Improvement Act of 2011 S. 1814 National Disaster Medical System Act