Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
The bill amends 23 U.S.C. §173 (the rural surface transportation grant program) to add definitions for “covered county” and “farm-to-market road,” requires the Secretary to annually list covered counties in consultation with USDA, and reserves 10 percent of program funds each year for grants for projects on farm‑to‑market roads in covered counties. "Covered county" is defined by two agricultural metrics (annual gross agricultural production ≥ $1,000,000,000 and ≥ $500,000 agricultural production per square mile), adjusted annually for inflation. The change authorizes grants for eligible projects on those roads and updates related statutory cross‑references.
Left focuses on equity, environmental review, and benefits to small farmers
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly effects a concrete statutory change (new definitions, a funding reservation, and an annual list-creation mandate) and integrates directly into 23 U.S.C. §173.
The bill amends 23 U.S.C. §173 (the rural surface transportation grant program) to add definitions for “covered county” and “farm-to-market road,” requires the Secretary to annually list covered counties in consultation with USDA, and reserves 10 percent of program funds each year for grants for projects on farm‑to‑market roads in covered counties. "Covered county" is defined by two agricultural metrics (annual gross agricultural production ≥ $1,000,000,000 and ≥ $500,000 agricultural production per square mile), adjusted annually for inflation.
The change authorizes grants for eligible projects on those roads and updates related statutory cross‑references.
Content is narrow and administratively straightforward, aiding passage in committee/House; Senate floor logistics and potential distributional objections lower overall odds unless folded into a larger package.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly effects a concrete statutory change (new definitions, a funding reservation, and an annual list-creation mandate) and integrates directly into 23 U.S.C. §173. The core mechanisms (thresholds, CPI adjustment, 10% reservation, interagency consultation) are specified, but procedural, fiscal, and accountability detail is limited.
Left focuses on equity, environmental review, and benefits to small farmers
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Left focuses on equity, environmental review, and benefits to small farmers
Likely cautiously supportive because the bill directs federal infrastructure dollars to rural agricultural communities, which can help workers and rural economies.
However, concerns would focus on whether the funding disproportionately benefits large agribusiness, bypasses environmental review, or diverts funds from transit and disadvantaged rural communities.
Generally favorable as a targeted, operational tweak to an existing rural program that supports agriculture and logistics.
Would want clarity on implementation, transparency of the covered‑county list, and assurance the 10 percent set‑aside doesn’t unduly crowd out other rural transportation priorities.
Likely supportive of boosting agriculture infrastructure and local economic growth, but cautious about federal earmark dynamics and increased federal program micromanagement.
Prefers state/local control and minimal regulatory strings attached to funding.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is narrow and administratively straightforward, aiding passage in committee/House; Senate floor logistics and potential distributional objections lower overall odds unless folded into a larger package.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Left focuses on equity, environmental review, and benefits to small farmers
Content is narrow and administratively straightforward, aiding passage in committee/House; Senate floor logistics and potential distributio…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly effects a concrete statutory change (new definitions, a funding reservation, and an annual list-creation mandate) and integrates directly into 23 U.S.C. §173.…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.