US Federal House Bill HB3572

US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/21/25
• Refer: 5/21/25
• Refer: 5/22/25

Caption

To make projects in certain counties eligible for funding under the rural surface transportation grant program, and for other purposes.

Summary

HB3572 would amend federal highway law to expand eligibility under the Rural Surface Transportation Grant Program to include projects in certain high-agriculture counties, even if those counties are not traditionally classified as rural by population or geography. The bill defines a new category of “covered county” as one with at least $1 billion in annual gross agricultural production value and at least $500,000 in agricultural production per square mile, with the dollar threshold indexed for inflation. It also defines “farm-to-market road” as any road located within a covered county. The bill directs the Secretary of Transportation to reserve 10 percent of annual program funding for eligible projects on farm-to-market roads in covered counties, and it requires the Department of Transportation, in consultation with the Department of Agriculture, to maintain and annually update a list of those counties. The measure is intended to steer transportation investment toward roads that support agricultural production and the movement of farm goods to market.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would amend Section 173 of title 23, United States Code, by adding new definitions and a dedicated funding set-aside within the Rural Surface Transportation Grant Program. It would broaden the pool of eligible projects beyond conventional rural areas to include transportation projects in high-value agricultural counties, and it would require federal agencies to identify and update the list of qualifying counties each year. The practical effect would be to channel a portion of federal transportation grant dollars toward infrastructure serving major agricultural regions and the roads used to move agricultural products.

Sentiment

The available record shows no committee transcript, recorded vote, or formal opposition, so sentiment cannot be measured directly from debate. Based on the bill’s sponsorship and structure, it appears to have been introduced as a targeted infrastructure support measure for agricultural communities, with an emphasis on improving freight mobility and access to market. Its referral to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit indicates it is still in the early committee stage.

Contention

The main potential point of contention is the bill’s use of agricultural production thresholds to determine eligibility, which could be viewed as favoring certain counties over others that are rural but less agriculturally productive. Some stakeholders may question whether a 10 percent set-aside is the best use of rural transportation funds or whether it diverts resources from other eligible rural projects. Another possible issue is the administrative burden of annually calculating and updating covered counties in consultation with USDA, as well as whether the definition of “farm-to-market road” is broad enough to avoid disputes over project eligibility.