link to page 2 
INSIGHTi
INVEST in America Act (H.R. 3684) Would Set
Highway Spending 34% above Baseline and
Bring Back Earmarks
Updated June 11, 2021
On June 10, 2021, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee ordered reported the Investing
in a New Vision for the Environment and Surface Transportation in America Act (INVEST in America
Act; H.R. 3684). The five-year bill, as reported, would authorize roughly $334 billion for federal highway
construction and research programs for FY2022-FY2026. This is a roughly 48% increase, unadjusted for
inflation, over the $223 billion provided for highways in the previous five-year authorization (FY2016-
FY2020), the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act; P.L. 114-94). The total represents
a roughly 34% increase above current spending adjusted for expected inflation (Table 1). H.R. 3684 also
would bring back the designation of projects by Members of Congress for the first time since a
moratorium on earmarking was imposed in 2011.
Under the bill, base spending in FY2022, authorized in Division A, would be the same as in FY2021 (the
one-year extension of the FAST Act, P.L. 116-159), but would be supplemented by an additional $14.7
billion for the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to both boost existing highway programs and
pay for Member-designated projects (earmarks). The distribution among various FHWA programs in
FY2022 would be the same as in FY2021. On its face, this would appear to provide $61.9 billion for
highways in that year. However, some of the items included in the list of Member-designated projects are
transit projects for which money would eventually be transferred to the Federal Transit Administration.
Section 107 of H.R. 3684 lists 1,473 Member-designated projects. They would receive $5.7 billion of the
$14.7 billion in additional amounts provided in Section 103. The remaining $9 billion of additional funds
that would be authorized for FY2022 would be available for other purposes. While much of this added
money would likely be available for use by the states, Puerto Rico, the territories, and federal land
management agencies, it is possible that some could be used to finance earmarks requested by Senators,
should the Senate participate in earmarking.
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN11690
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress
Congressional Research Service
2
Table 1. INVEST Act (H.R. 3684) Highway Spending (Obligations) Compared to CBO’s
Baseline
(Current $ in millions)
Average
FY2022
Annual
-
FY2022-
FY2026
FY2021
FY2022
FY2023
FY2024
FY2025
FY2026
FY2026
Total
INVEST Act
61,882
66,836
67,310
68,441
69,480
66,790
333,949
Obligations
CBO Baseline
47,104
47,991
48,924
49,904
50,978
52,052
49,970
249,849
Obligations
Difference
13,891
17,912
17,406
17,463
17,428
16,820
84,100
% Increase Over
28.9%
36.6%
34.9%
34.3%
33.5%
33.7%
33.7%
Baseline
Source: INVEST Act, Congressional Budget Office, CRS calculations.
Notes: CBO Obligations include CBO projected annual obligation limitations plus annual “exempt” obligations of $739
mil ion. INVEST Act obligations are based on obligation limitations in the text of the bil plus $739 mil ion in annual exempt
obligations. Totals may not add due to rounding.
The subsequent four years of the authorization (FY2023-FY2026) are set forth in Division B. For these
four years, H.R. 3684 would make substantial changes in the programmatic structure of federal highway
programs by adding three new formula programs creating new discretionary highway programs. The
expansion of discretionary programs means that the proportion of FHWA funding authority that goes to
the states via formula would be about 82.5%, down from about 92.5% under the FAST Act. Despite this,
the formula highway programs would receive about $50 billion more over the entire five-year life of the
INVEST for America Act than they did under the FAST Act.
The bill would deemphasize construction of new highway capacity. It would modify the largest formula
highway program, the National Highway Performance Program, to emphasize maintaining a state of good
repair on the National Highway System, and would require that states consider whether an operational
improvement or transit project would be more cost-effective than a project to add road capacity. A new
Reconnecting Neighborhoods Program, which would provide $3 billion in discretionary grants to
remediate the barrier impacts of legacy road construction in disadvantaged and underserved communities,
appears to be a scaled-down version of a program included in the Biden Administration’s larger
infrastructure proposal.
The three new formula programs are meant to help mitigate greenhouse gas emissions from surface
transportation and also support climate adaptation and resilience policies: $6.3 billion for the Predisaster
Mitigation Program, $8.4 billion for the Carbon Pollution Reduction Program, and $4 billion for the
Clean Corridors program, which would be distributed by formula for electric vehicle and hydrogen
fueling infrastructure. The bill also includes eligibility and policy changes across existing formula and
discretionary programs to encourage mitigation and resilience actions in surface transportation and would
fund a new Community Climate Innovation Grants discretionary program.
Although the bill would establish a stand-alone $1 billion program to rebuild rural bridges, other
programmatic changes would likely have a larger impact on bridge spending. The bridge investment
section of the bill would require states to spend no less than 20% of their funds received from the two
largest formula programs on bridge repair and rehabilitation. It also would set aside $4 billion of the $12
billion reserved for projects of National and Regional Significance to fund a handful of particular large
and complex bridge projects.
Congressional Research Service
3
The Tribal Transportation Program and the Federal Lands Transportation program would receive
significant increases beginning in FY2023, and the Puerto Rico and Territorial Transportation Program
would more than double in size. The bill would also provide a large increase in funding for the
Department of Transportation’s Technology and Innovation Program.
H.R. 3684 emphasizes the “complete and context sensitive street design,” mandating that roadway design
standards require consideration of all users of roadways, including pedestrians, bicyclists, children, older
users, and individuals with disabilities. The bill would provide a $500 million set-aside from the Highway
Safety Improvement Program to construct “complete streets” or other safety features for vulnerable road
users.
Author Information
Robert S. Kirk
Specialist in Transportation Policy
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
IN11690 · VERSION 3 · UPDATED