WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HR 7437

BASICS Act

119th Congress Introduced by Jim Baird and 6 co-sponsors

The BASICS Act creates a nationwide Strengthening Bridges Formula Program to fund bridge replacement and rehabilitation, prioritizing safety, planning, and local coordination.

Introduced in House
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HR 7437

Overview

  • Bill: HR 7437
  • Session: 119th Congress
  • Title: Bridges And Safety Infrastructure for Community Success Act (BASICS Act)
  • Introduced: February 9, 2026
  • Prime sponsor: Ms. McDonald Rivet (also a sponsor on behalf of Mr. Bresnahan)
  • Co-sponsors: Ken Calvert, Jim Baird, Salud Carbajal, Frank Mrvan, Jay Obernolte, Gabe Vasquez
  • Committee: Transportation and Infrastructure
  • Purpose: To improve Federal transportation programs, with a focus on bridge strengthening, regional planning, metropolitan planning funding, and related safety and planning reforms.

Main purpose and intent

  • Strengthen and reallocate federal transportation funding to prioritize bridge safety and resilience, bolster metropolitan and regional planning, and enhance consultation with local governments.
  • Create a dedicated Strengthening Bridges Formula Program to fund replacement, rehabilitation, preservation, and protection of bridges.
  • Expand and reform metropolitan and regional planning funding to support faster project delivery, administrative flexibility, and direct planning organization access to federal funds.
  • Improve consultation and coordination between states, local governments, and regional planning organizations, especially in nonmetropolitan areas.
  • Enhance safety funding mechanisms and ensure transparent, competitive processes for fund transfers.

Key provisions and changes

Section 2 – Definitions

  • Establishes defined terms for the act, including Secretary of Transportation, Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), Urbanized Area, Off-System Bridge, and Regional Transportation Planning Organization.

Section 3 – Apportionment (amendments to 23 U.S.C. §104)

  • Reconfigures existing apportionment formulas by:

    • Replacing certain referenced paragraphs (4,5,6) with new paragraphs (9,10) in multiple subsections.
    • Adjusting numeric distribution figures (percent shares) used in apportionments.
    • Adding new subsection (b)(9) to create and fund a nationwide Strengthening Bridges Formula Program with details on total funding and distribution.
    • Adding subsection (b)(10) for Regional Transportation Planning funding framework.

  • Strengthening Bridges Formula Program specifics:

    • Total annual funding: $5.5 billion for each fiscal year 2027–2031.
    • State distribution: Funds allocated to each state proportional to the estimated cost to replace or rehabilitate bridges in poor condition relative to all states.
    • Cost basis: Uses average bridge unit costs from 2021–2024 (as reported to FHWA under 144(b)(5)).
    • Minimum State allocation: $45 million per state per year.
    • Adjustment: After set-asides, remaining funds distributed to states by described formula.

  • Section 3 also provides for program administration guidelines and alignment with planning requirements.

Section 4 – Surface Transportation Block Grant Program

  • Adds requirement for local consultation when obligating funding attributed to areas with populations under 50,000 not represented by an MPO.
  • Encourages partnership with local governments and nonpartisan statewide organizations to facilitate consultation.

Section 5 – Bridge Formula Program

  • Establishes a new federal program: Strengthening Bridges Formula Program (Section 180 of Title 23).
  • Eligible uses: Construction, replacement, rehabilitation, preservation, and protection of highway bridges on public roads.
  • State allocation mechanics:
    • 25% of apportioned funds must be obligated in specified population-based areas before using remaining funds in any area.
    • Project selection: Prioritize MPO-covered areas with TP programs, areas under 50,000 with MPO coverage (in cooperation with MPOs), and areas under 50,000 not covered by MPOs through local government consultation.
    • State may partner with nonpartisan organizations to identify eligible projects.
  • Planning applicability: Funds must be consistent with 134 and 135 planning requirements.

Section 6 – Highway Safety Improvement Program (Local Safety Set-Aside)

  • Adds a 25% population-based obligation rule for funds apportioned under 104(b)(3) (Local Safety Set-Aside) for 2027–2031.
  • Maintains the same project selection and planning alignment as other sections.
  • Includes for inclusion of projects eligible under 24112 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

Section 7 – Transferability

  • Expands transferability rules to allow transfers subject to both subsections (b) and (c) of Section 126.
  • Adds safety fund transfer conditions:
    • Before transferring 104(b)(3) funds to other uses, states must make funds available to local governments and regional planning organizations through competitive processes.
    • Transfers require certification of open and fair competition.

Section 8 – Project Selection (Sense of Congress)

  • Encourages States to obligate all funds to locally selected projects.
  • Secretary should partner with FHWA to ensure local consultation and coordination processes are followed.

Section 9 – Metropolitan Planning

  • a) Eliminates local match for Metropolitan Planning Funds (100% federal share for activities under 134 and 104(b)(6)).
  • b) Expands uses of metropolitan planning funding (administration, design, data procurement, housing/economic development studies linked to transportation, etc.).
  • Allows metropolitan planning organizations to become direct recipients of federal funds, with a defined process and timelines.
  • 100% federal share for activities funded under these provisions.

Section 10 – Rural Transportation Planning

  • Adds a Rural Regional Planning Funding provision:
    • Establishes a program to assist nonmetropolitan regional planning organizations and regional entities.
    • Uses funds to support planning, capacity building, and technical assistance for rural transportation planning.
    • Ensures minimum allocations to federally designated regional planning organizations ($300,000 per year 2027–2031).
    • 100% federal share for activities under this program.
    • Details on distribution within states, with state-developed formulas and grant processes subject to Secretary approval.

Who and what would be affected

  • Federal and state Departments of Transportations, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), regional transportation planning organizations, local governments, and nonmetropolitan regional entities.
  • Bridge projects across the states, particularly those in poor condition needing replacement or rehabilitation.
  • Local safety programs funded under the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) set-aside.
  • Nonmetropolitan regions and rural planning entities through new Rural Regional Planning Fund.
  • Metropolitan planning funding processes, potential direct funding channels, and expanded planning-related uses.

Significant procedural and timeline aspects

  • Funding window for the Strengthening Bridges Formula Program: $5.5 billion per year from 2027 to 2031.
  • Metropolitan planning funds would shift toward 100% federal share for MPO activities; direct recipient status for MPOs would be established not later than 180 days after enactment for direct funding processes.
  • New transferability provisions require open and fair competitive processes before reallocating Safety Funds.
  • Section 4 and 9 introduce enhanced consultation requirements and direct funding pathways, with Secretary-level approvals and oversight on formulas and distributions.
  • Rural planning provisions would be implemented within 180 days of enactment for program establishment.

Potential impact and considerations

  • Accelerated bridge rehabilitation and replacement could improve safety and infrastructure resilience.
  • Increased federal investment in both urban and rural planning could improve project delivery timelines.
  • Local governments would gain greater input and clearer avenues to access funds.
  • States face more prescriptive allocation rules and competitive processes for transfers, potentially affecting flexibility.
  • Overall, BASICS aims to modernize transportation funding, emphasize bridge safety, and strengthen regional and metropolitan planning capacities.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.