A Republican bill with 3 Democratic cosponsors · See all 3 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, known as the "International Bridge and Port of Entry Modernization Act of 2025," aims to amend the International Bridge Act of 1972. The primary goal is to streamline the Presidential permitting process for international bridges and land ports of entry. It specifically addresses bridges and ports of entry located on the borders between the United States and Mexico, as well as the United States and Canada. The legislation modifies how the Secretary handles certain documentation during the permitting process.
Yes· 3 of 9
- Scored +4
Does this repair or build roads and bridges?
Streamlining permits aids in the modernization of international bridges and ports.
- Scored +4
Does this tighten control of the border?
Modernizing and streamlining ports of entry can enhance border infrastructure and management.
- Scored +3
Is this likely to create jobs?
Streamlining infrastructure permits can facilitate economic activity and job creation near borders.
The opposite· 3 of 5
- Scored -6
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
The bill explicitly prohibits the consideration of environmental documents during the permitting process.
- Scored -3
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
Reducing environmental documentation requirements can decrease transparency in the permitting process.
- Scored -3
Would Native Americans be better off under this?
Reducing environmental reviews may negatively impact lands of cultural or ecological significance to Native groups.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Streamlined Permitting: By amending the process, the bill seeks to streamline the Presidential permitting process for international bridges and land ports of entry (Section 2).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Environmental Review Restrictions: The Secretary is prohibited from compiling or taking into consideration any environmental document pursuant to Public Law 91-190 regarding a Presidential permit application (Section 2, subsection (e)(2)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — Streamlining infrastructure permits can facilitate economic activity and job creation near borders. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Modernizing ports of entry may facilitate faster trade and economic growth.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this repair or build roads and bridges? — Streamlining permits aids in the modernization of international bridges and ports. Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The bill explicitly prohibits the consideration of environmental documents during the permitting process. Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — Limiting environmental reviews may impact the thoroughness of land management near borders.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this tighten control of the border? — Modernizing and streamlining ports of entry can enhance border infrastructure and management.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Increases the authority of the Secretary in the permitting process. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Reducing environmental documentation requirements can decrease transparency in the permitting process. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — Removing environmental review steps may limit the procedural opportunities for public input.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this make trade with other countries easier? — Facilitating easier movement across borders supports smoother international trade.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Streamlined infrastructure can aid businesses involved in cross-border trade. Would farmers be better off under this? — Easier border movement can benefit agricultural trade. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Infrastructure upgrades can benefit border communities. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Reducing environmental reviews may negatively impact lands of cultural or ecological significance to Native groups.
- 11/21/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/26/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/29/2025
- Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Henry CuellarDemocrat · Texas
Joaquin CastroDemocrat · Texas
Gabe VasquezDemocrat · New Mexico