The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
S. 944·119th Congress·Introduced Mar 11, 2025

Sarah Debbink Langenkamp Active Transportation Safety Act

IntroducedTransportation and Public WorksMajor
View bill text
Sponsor
Sen. Van Hollen, Chris [D-MD]
Committees
Environment and Public Works Committee (primary)
Last action
Mar 11, 2025

Bottom line

The bill aims to significantly boost federal support and flexibility for projects designed to improve safety and connectivity for bicyclists and pedestrians.

What it actually does

This bill amends Title 23 of the U.S. Code to expand the definition of a "highway safety improvement project" to include projects that connect existing bicyclist or pedestrian infrastructure and those that reduce safety risks for vulnerable road users. It also increases the federal share for these specific project types to up to 100% and introduces flexible financing options, allowing Highway Safety Improvement Program funds to be credited towards the non-Federal share of certain active transportation projects.

Proponents argue

Proponents argue that this bill is a crucial step to address the rising rates of pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities and injuries by providing states and localities with enhanced financial incentives and flexibility to build safer active transportation infrastructure. They contend that removing financial barriers, especially for connecting existing networks and implementing proven safety countermeasures, will accelerate the deployment of life-saving projects and promote healthier, more accessible communities.

Opponents contend

Opponents, if any, might argue that allowing a 100% federal share for certain projects could reduce local ownership and accountability, potentially leading to less efficient project selection or maintenance. Concerns could also be raised about the potential for these changes to shift federal funding priorities too heavily towards specific modes, possibly diverting resources from other critical highway safety needs or maintenance of existing infrastructure.

The bill is concise and its core changes are clearly articulated, making it accessible for a quick and informed evaluation by a reader.

Section 2(a) of the bill, amending Section 148(a)(4)(B) of title 23, United States Code

Expansion of Highway Safety Improvement Project Definition

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision expands the definition of what qualifies as a "highway safety improvement project" under federal law. It adds two new categories: projects that connect two or more existing segments of bicyclist or pedestrian infrastructure, and projects or strategies specifically designed to reduce safety risks for vulnerable road users. This change makes these types of active transportation safety initiatives eligible for federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupState Departments of Transportation (DOTs)ImpactIncreased eligibility for federal fundingMechanismBroader definition of eligible projects under HSIPScaleStatewide
GroupLocal Governments and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs)ImpactIncreased access to federal funding for local active transportation projectsMechanismBroader definition of eligible projects under HSIPScaleLocal and regional
GroupBicyclists and Pedestrians (Vulnerable Road Users)ImpactImproved safety and connectivity of infrastructureMechanismMore projects focused on their safety and network integrationScaleWidespread for users of improved infrastructure

Supporters argue

Supporters argue that explicitly including these project types ensures federal funding aligns with modern transportation needs and directly addresses the growing safety concerns for vulnerable road users, facilitating the creation of more complete and safer active transportation networks.

Critics contend

No specific opposition is typically raised against definitional expansions that broaden eligibility for safety funds, as they generally provide more options for states and localities to address their specific needs.

Tradeoffs

This provision balances the need for traditional highway safety improvements with the increasing demand for and safety challenges associated with active transportation modes, potentially shifting some focus and resources within the overall HSIP framework.

Section 2(b)(1) of the bill, amending Section 148(j) of title 23, United States Code

Increased Federal Share for Active Transportation and Vulnerable Road User Safety Projects

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision allows the federal government to cover up to 100% of the cost for highway safety improvement projects that fall under the newly expanded categories: connecting bicyclist/pedestrian infrastructure or reducing risks for vulnerable road users. This is an exception to the standard federal share requirements, which typically require a state or local match, making it significantly easier for states and localities to fund these specific types of projects.

Section 2(b)(2) of the bill, amending Section 133(h)(7) of title 23, United States Code

Flexible Financing and Non-Federal Share Credit for Active Transportation Projects

prominently featuredmoderately complex

This provision introduces greater financial flexibility for certain active transportation projects funded through the Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) program. It allows the non-Federal share for these projects to be calculated across multiple projects or on a program basis, and permits the federal share for an individual project to be up to 100%. Crucially, it also allows funds from the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) to be used as the non-Federal match for STBG projects if those projects include proven safety countermeasures for bicyclists/pedestrians, address vulnerable road users in a state safety plan, or were identified through specific local planning processes and data analysis.

Section 2(b)(3) of the bill, amending Section 120(c)(1) of title 23, United States Code

Increased Federal Share for Proven Safety Countermeasures for Bicyclists or Pedestrians

mentioned in summarystraightforward

This provision adds "Proven Safety Countermeasures for bicyclists or pedestrians (as determined by the Federal Highway Administration)" to a list of project types that are eligible for an increased Federal share under Section 120(c)(1) of Title 23. This means that when states or localities implement these specific, evidence-based safety solutions for active transportation, the federal government will contribute a larger percentage of the project cost (typically 90% instead of the standard 80%).

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
  • Implementation
  • Political analysis
Ask Ledger AI about this