Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
The bill amends title 23 and provisions of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to expand attention to disabled-vehicle roadside crashes and work zone crashes. It requires two interagency working groups to collect and publish detailed crash data, propose strategic solutions, and increase data sharing with NHTSA.
Liberals emphasize worker and vulnerable-user protections and funding.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is primarily a study/reporting measure with administrative amendments and modest substantive statutory edits.
The bill amends title 23 and provisions of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to expand attention to disabled-vehicle roadside crashes and work zone crashes.
It requires two interagency working groups to collect and publish detailed crash data, propose strategic solutions, and increase data sharing with NHTSA.
It also directs the FHWA to report annually to Congress on use and effectiveness of work zone safety contingency funds.
Content is technical and broadly agreeable, so moderate chance if advanced alone or folded into larger transportation reauthorization; procedural and resource factors limit certainty.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is primarily a study/reporting measure with administrative amendments and modest substantive statutory edits. It provides a clear problem statement and identifies responsible agencies and expected outputs, but it omits key implementation details such as funding, deadlines, membership rules, data-protection provisions, and concrete success metrics.
Liberals emphasize worker and vulnerable-user protections and funding.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize worker and vulnerable-user protections and funding.
Generally supportive.
The bill advances worker and vulnerable-road-user safety, improves data transparency, and includes community and labor voices in planning.
They will seek stronger funding, enforceable deadlines, and explicit protections for high-risk communities.
Generally favorable but pragmatic.
Sees sensible, data-driven steps to improve roadside and work zone safety while wanting clarity on costs, overlap with existing programs, and measurable outcomes.
Supports bipartisan, technical fixes if they remain cost-conscious and administratively efficient.
Cautiously skeptical.
Agrees with the goal of improving roadside and work zone safety but worries the bill expands federal bureaucracy, increases oversight of states, and could impose unfunded obligations.
Prefers voluntary guidance and state-led solutions over new federal mandates.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is technical and broadly agreeable, so moderate chance if advanced alone or folded into larger transportation reauthorization; procedural and resource factors limit certainty.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize worker and vulnerable-user protections and funding.
Content is technical and broadly agreeable, so moderate chance if advanced alone or folded into larger transportation reauthorization; proc…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is primarily a study/reporting measure with administrative amendments and modest substantive statutory edits. It provides a clear problem statement and identifies res…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.