Highway Formula Fairness Act
- Bill Number
- S. 3972
- Origin Chamber
- Senate
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 2
- Policy Area
- Transportation and Public Works
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2026-03-03: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
- Last Updated
- 2026-03-23T20:24:06Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The Highway Formula Fairness Act (S. 3972) aims to revise the method for calculating and adjusting federal funding apportionments to states for key highway and transportation programs. It seeks to create a fairer distribution by tying minimum funding levels more closely to states' contributions to the Highway Trust Fund through user taxes, while basing initial shares on historical data.
Key Provisions
- Affected Programs: The bill applies to apportionments for fiscal year 2027 and beyond under the following programs in title 23 of the U.S. Code:
- National Highway Performance Program (section 119).
- Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (section 133).
- Highway Safety Improvement Program (section 148).
- Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (section 149).
- National Highway Freight Program (section 167).
- Carbon Reduction Program (section 175).
- PROTECT Program, subsection (c) (section 176; focuses on resilience and safety aspects).
- Metropolitan Planning (section 134).
- Calculation Method:
- Initial Amount: Each state's share starts as a proportion of total available funds, based on the state's apportionments relative to all states in fiscal year 2012.
- Minimum Guarantee Adjustment: Initial amounts are adjusted so no state receives less than 95% of its "applicable percentage" of total funds.
- The "applicable percentage" is calculated as the state's estimated highway user tax payments to the Highway Trust Fund (excluding the Mass Transit Account) divided by the national total for the most recent fiscal year with available data.
- Apportionment Process: The Secretary of Transportation must apportion funds for these programs on October 1 of each applicable fiscal year.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Replaces subsection (c) of section 104 in title 23, U.S. Code, which previously outlined a different adjustment mechanism (likely a broader minimum return or other formula from prior authorizations like the FAST Act or BIL).
- Shifts the baseline from recent or variable shares to a fixed 2012 proportion, with adjustments emphasizing a 95% return on state-specific tax contributions rather than a uniform national minimum (e.g., the prior 92% or 95% overall guarantee in some laws).
- Introduces a tax-contribution-based metric for the minimum, potentially simplifying and targeting fairness compared to multifaceted factors like population or mileage in older formulas.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) will need to update data collection and calculation processes for tax contributions, potentially streamlining apportionments but requiring new fiscal year reporting.
- On Citizens: Residents in states with high highway user tax contributions (e.g., fuel taxes) may see more stable or increased funding for road maintenance, safety improvements, freight transport, and emission reductions, leading to better infrastructure. However, "donor" states (those contributing more than they receive) could gain relative to "donee" states, affecting regional equity in transportation projects.
- On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though enhanced U.S. highway freight funding could indirectly support cross-border trade efficiency (e.g., with Mexico or Canada via programs like section 167).
Main Stakeholders Affected
- States and Local Governments: Primary recipients, especially "donor states" like Texas and Arizona (reflected in bipartisan sponsorship by Senators Cruz, Cornyn, Kelly, and Gallego), which may receive funding closer to their tax inputs; "donee states" with lower contributions relative to needs could face reduced shares.
- Highway Users and Taxpayers: Drivers, freight companies, and commuters who pay into the Highway Trust Fund, benefiting from potentially fairer returns on their contributions.
- Federal Agencies: DOT and the Federal Highway Administration, responsible for implementation and data verification.
- Environmental and Safety Advocates: Groups focused on air quality (section 149), carbon reduction (section 175), and safety (section 148), as funding stability could support ongoing projects.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Aligns with congressional authority under the Commerce Clause to regulate interstate highways and spend for the general welfare; no apparent conflicts with existing statutes, but may require DOT rulemaking for precise tax estimation methods.
- Constitutional: Neutral; promotes equal protection in funding distribution without discriminating against any group.
- Political: Addresses long-standing debates on highway funding equity (e.g., the "donor-donee" imbalance), potentially reducing tensions between high-contribution and high-need states. Bipartisan introduction signals broad appeal, but could spark regional disputes during reauthorization of surface transportation laws.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (3)
Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX], Sen. Kelly, Mark [D-AZ], Sen. Gallego, Ruben [D-AZ]
Recent Actions
- 2026-03-03: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
- 2026-03-03: Introduced in Senate
Bill Versions
- Highway Formula Fairness Act — issued 2026-03-03 — PDF (4 pages)