HR-8870-119
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 62 - 2.
Sponsored by Sam Graves (R-MO)
What it does
The BUILD America 250 Act would reauthorize and fund federal surface transportation programs — including highways, bridges, public transit, rail, motor carrier safety, and highway safety — for fiscal years 2027 through 2031. It would authorize roughly $56–61 billion per year for core highway programs, $9.2 billion per year for bridge construction and rehabilitation, and additional funding for transit, rail, freight, and innovation programs. The bill would also streamline environmental review processes, establish new safety requirements for autonomous commercial vehicles, modify the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program, and set new accountability and transparency rules for Amtrak.
Who benefits
Motorists and commuters who use roads, bridges, and public transit. State and local governments that receive federal transportation funding. Construction and engineering firms that build and maintain infrastructure. Trucking companies and freight operators benefiting from freight network improvements and autonomous vehicle provisions. Tribal nations receiving dedicated transportation funding. Rural communities served by federal lands access programs and rural transit grants. Seniors and people with disabilities receiving enhanced mobility grants. Small and disadvantaged businesses targeted by the 10% DBE aspirational goal. Amtrak passengers on long-distance and state-supported routes. Recreational boaters and sport fishers covered under Title IX. Workers in the transportation construction sector. Communities near rail crossings benefiting from safety improvements.
Who is hurt
Environmental and community groups that may oppose streamlined environmental review processes, which reduce opportunities for public input on project impacts. Competitors of disadvantaged businesses who may lose contract opportunities under the DBE program. States that currently benefit from discretionary grant programs that the bill terminates or consolidates. Urban transit agencies in areas where formula changes shift funding toward growing or high-density states. Amtrak employees and management subject to new transparency, bonus disclosure, and accountability requirements. Foreign manufacturers of LiDAR technology, who face a prohibition on their products in federally funded transportation systems. Taxpayers broadly, who bear the cost of the multi-hundred-billion-dollar authorization. Neighborhood and pedestrian advocacy groups who lose the Neighborhood Access and Equity grant program, which the bill terminates.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the bill provides essential, long-term funding certainty for the nation's aging infrastructure at a moment when the American Society of Civil Engineers has graded U.S. roads a D+ and bridges a C+, with over 42,000 bridges rated structurally deficient. They contend that the bill's environmental streamlining provisions would cut years off project delivery timelines — a persistent problem that has delayed critical repairs — while the autonomous vehicle and innovation titles position the U.S. to lead in next-generation transportation technology. The bipartisan 62-2 committee vote, they argue, reflects broad consensus that reliable surface transportation funding is a foundational federal responsibility.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the bill's environmental streamlining provisions — including expanded categorical exclusions, reduced review timelines, and state assumption of federal review responsibilities — would weaken protections for communities and ecosystems near major construction projects, repeating documented harms from past highway expansions. They contend that terminating programs like the Neighborhood Access and Equity grant program disproportionately affects low-income and minority communities that were historically divided by highway construction. Critics also argue that the DBE program's shift to individualized disadvantage criteria, following post-SFFA legal pressure, may reduce participation by minority-owned firms even as the bill maintains aspirational — but non-binding — goals.
Constitutional context
Congress's authority to fund and regulate surface transportation rests firmly on the Commerce Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 3), which grants broad power to regulate interstate commerce, and the Spending Clause, under which federal highway grants attach conditions to state recipients. The DBE program's restructuring — requiring individualized showings of disadvantage rather than presumptions based on group membership — reflects pressure from post-SFFA (2023) strict scrutiny doctrine applied to race-conscious programs, though the bill frames eligibility in economic rather than explicitly racial terms. The autonomous vehicle federal preemption provisions (Title V, Subtitle E) could face Commerce Clause and anti-commandeering scrutiny under Murphy v. NCAA (2018) if they are read to prohibit states from enacting their own AV safety rules.
Checks and balances
Congress sets funding levels and program structures; the Department of Transportation and its modal administrations (FHWA, FTA, FRA, FMCSA) implement and distribute funds; states receive apportioned funds subject to federal conditions, with courts available to review agency rules under the heightened post-Loper Bright standard of independent statutory interpretation.
Historical precedent
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA, 2021) was the most recent surface transportation reauthorization, authorizing $550 billion in new spending over five years; prior reauthorizations include the FAST Act (2015), MAP-21 (2012), and SAFETEA-LU (2005), establishing a decades-long pattern of multi-year surface transportation authorization bills.