BASICS Act

Bill Number

H.R. 7437

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 2

Policy Area

Transportation and Public Works

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2026-02-09: Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

Last Updated

2026-07-08T20:06:16Z

AI-Generated Summary

H.R. 7437: Bridges And Safety Infrastructure for Community Success Act (BASICS Act)

Purpose

The legislation aims to improve federal transportation programs by increasing funding for repairing and replacing bridges in poor condition, enhancing highway safety projects, and strengthening transportation planning at metropolitan (urban) and regional (rural) levels. It emphasizes local and regional input in project selection to ensure funds reach community needs.

Key Provisions

• Apportionment Adjustments (Sec. 3): Modifies how federal highway funds are divided among states and programs under 23 U.S.C. § 104. Introduces:
• Strengthening Bridges Formula Program: $5.5 billion annually (FY 2027–2031), allocated based on the total cost to replace or rehabilitate bridges in poor condition nationwide (using 2021–2024 average costs); minimum $45 million per state.
• Regional Transportation Planning: $150 million annually (FY 2027–2031), distributed proportionally to states' overall shares.
• Bridge Funding Program (Sec. 5): Establishes a new Strengthening Bridges Formula Program (23 U.S.C. § 180) for highway bridges on public roads, including construction, replacement, rehabilitation, preservation, and protection. Requires:
• 25% suballocation by population size (urban >200,000; 50,000–200,000; 5,000–49,999; <5,000).
• Project selection via metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs—regional groups planning urban transport), regional planning organizations, or local consultation.
• 100% federal funding share for locally owned "off-system" bridges (non-federal highways).
• Set-asides: 3% for public lands highways; up to 0.5% for Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) operations.
• Highway Safety Improvements (Sec. 6): Updates 23 U.S.C. § 148 to require 25% suballocation of safety funds by population, with local/regional project selection. Adds eligibility for projects previously funded under a specific infrastructure law.
• Local Consultation Requirements (Secs. 4, 5, 6): States must consult local governments (and may partner with nonpartisan groups representing them) for areas <50,000 population without regional planning.
• Planning Enhancements:
• Metropolitan Planning (Sec. 9): 100% federal share; expands uses to include admin costs, preliminary design, technical assistance, housing/economic studies linked to transport. Allows MPOs to become direct recipients of funds.
• Rural/Regional Planning (Sec. 10): New program (23 U.S.C. § 135(n)) for non-urban areas; funds direct support for regional transportation planning organizations (RTPOs) and economic development groups; 100% federal share; minimum $300,000 per RTPO.
• Transfer Limits (Sec. 7): Restricts states from transferring certain funds (e.g., safety, bridges) without first offering them competitively to locals/regionals.
• Sense of Congress (Sec. 8): Urges prioritizing locally selected projects and proper consultation.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• New Programs: Creates dedicated bridge formula (23 U.S.C. § 180) and rural planning funding (23 U.S.C. § 135(n)).
• Formula Shifts: Adjusts apportionment percentages (e.g., reduces some base shares to fund new programs); bases bridge funds on poor-condition costs rather than prior formulas.
• Suballocation Mandates: Forces 25% of bridge/safety funds to be divided by population, with strict local input rules—unlike prior state flexibility.
• Full Federal Shares: Eliminates local matching for planning funds and local off-system bridges.
• Direct Funding: Enables MPOs/RTPOs to receive funds directly, bypassing some state control.
• Transfer Restrictions: Adds competitive local process before states can shift safety funds elsewhere.

Potential Impacts

• Government Agencies: Increases FHWA workload for administration, data tracking (e.g., bridge costs), and approvals; states gain bridge/safety funds but lose flexibility in allocations/transfers.
• Citizens/Communities: Faster repairs for ~poor-condition bridges; more safety projects and planning in small/rural areas; reduced local costs for planning/bridges.
• Transportation Infrastructure: Targets backlog of deficient bridges; improves project delivery via better planning; promotes multimodal (e.g., road + transit) and economic-linked studies.
• No direct international effects.

Main Stakeholders

• States and State DOTs: Receive adjusted apportionments but must follow suballocation/consultation rules.
• Local Governments and Tribes: Benefit from consultations, 100% funding for off-system bridges, competitive safety grants.
• Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs): Gain direct funding, expanded uses, system access.
• Regional Transportation Planning Organizations (RTPOs): New dedicated rural funding and capacity-building.
• Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)/DOT: Oversees programs, sets asides, certifies processes.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Federalism Shift: Enhances local/regional roles in federal fund use, potentially reducing state DOT dominance—aligns with cooperative federalism in Title 23 but may spark disputes over "consultation" enforcement.
• Spending Authority: Authorizes significant new funds (e.g., $27.5B for bridges over 5 years), requiring future appropriations; no new taxes.
• Transparency/Competition: Mandates open processes for transfers, promoting accountability.
• No Major Constitutional Issues: Fits within Congress's spending power (Art. I, § 8); avoids commandeering states by using incentives/conditions on federal funds.
• Political: Bipartisan appeal (introduced by Reps. McDonald Rivet and Bresnahan); prioritizes infrastructure equity for small/rural areas vs. urban megaregions.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. McDonald Rivet, Kristen [D-MI-8]

Cosponsors (13)

Rep. Bresnahan, Robert P. [R-PA-8], Rep. Obernolte, Jay [R-CA-23], Rep. Vasquez, Gabe [D-NM-2], Rep. Baird, James R. [R-IN-4], Rep. Mrvan, Frank J. [D-IN-1], Rep. Calvert, Ken [R-CA-41], Rep. Carbajal, Salud O. [D-CA-24], Rep. Morrison, Kelly [D-MN-3], Rep. Van Orden, Derrick [R-WI-3], Rep. Mackenzie, Ryan [R-PA-7], Rep. Neguse, Joe [D-CO-2], Rep. Smith, Adam [D-WA-9], Rep. Valadao, David G. [R-CA-22]

Recent Actions

• 2026-02-09: Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
• 2026-02-09: Introduced in House
• 2026-02-09: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Bridges And Safety Infrastructure for Community Success Act — issued 2026-02-09 — PDF (21 pages)