A Republican bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
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. It seeks to streamline the Presidential permitting process for international bridges and land ports of entry. The changes specifically target bridges and ports of entry located on the borders between the United States and Mexico, as well as between the United States and Canada. Additionally, the bill instructs the Secretary not to compile or consider certain environmental documents during the permit application process.
Yes· 3 of 13
- Scored +4
Does this repair or build roads and bridges?
The bill aims to streamline the creation and modernization of international bridges.
- Scored +4
Does this make trade with other countries easier?
Streamlining permitting for bridges and ports of entry directly facilitates more efficient international trade.
- Scored +3
Would business owners be better off under this?
Improved trade infrastructure benefits businesses involved in international commerce.
The opposite· 3 of 6
- Scored -5
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
The bill explicitly mandates that the Secretary shall not consider certain environmental documents, weakening protections.
- Scored -3
Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change?
Limiting environmental reviews may lead to less scrutiny of the carbon footprint of new infrastructure projects.
- Scored -2
Would Native Americans be better off under this?
The reduction in environmental review may negatively impact lands adjacent to tribal territories.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Streamlined Permitting Process: By amending the International Bridge Act of 1972, the bill aims to streamline the Presidential permitting process for international bridges and land ports of entry (Section 2).
-
Expanded Scope for Infrastructure: The bill expands the types of infrastructure covered to include ports of entry on the international land borders between the United States and Mexico, as well as the United States and Canada (Section 2, amending subsection (a)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Reduction in Environmental Review: The bill mandates that the Secretary shall not compile or take into consideration any environmental document pursuant to Public Law 91-190 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) regarding a Presidential permit for these applications (Section 2, amending subsection (e)).
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.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Improved trade infrastructure benefits businesses involved in international commerce. Would farmers be better off under this? — Improved international trade channels benefit agricultural exporters. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Modernized border infrastructure may impact economic opportunities in regions with high Hispanic populations. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Improved ports of entry may lead to more efficient movement across the border. Would union members be better off under this? — Infrastructure expansion can lead to construction-related job opportunities. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — The reduction in environmental review may negatively impact lands adjacent to tribal territories.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this repair or build roads and bridges? — The bill aims to streamline the creation and modernization of international bridges. Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The bill explicitly mandates that the Secretary shall not consider certain environmental documents, weakening protections. Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change? — Limiting environmental reviews may lead to less scrutiny of the carbon footprint of new infrastructure projects. Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — Bypassing environmental considerations may impact land management practices.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to grow the economy? — Modernizing ports of entry and bridges facilitates smoother international trade and economic exchange. Is this likely to create jobs? — Streamlined infrastructure development may indirectly support job creation through expanded trade and transit capacity.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this make trade with other countries easier? — Streamlining permitting for bridges and ports of entry directly facilitates more efficient international trade. Does this strengthen ties with allied countries? — Streamlining border infrastructure may slightly improve logistical ease for international cooperation with Canada and Mexico.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this tighten control of the border? — Modernizing and streamlining ports of entry can improve the efficiency of border management.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make it easier to do business across state lines? — Streamlining international crossings facilitates smoother commerce across borders. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill reinforces the Presidential permitting process for specific border infrastructure. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — Streamlining and bypassing environmental reviews may reduce the level of administrative due process. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Limiting environmental documentation may reduce the transparency of the permitting process.
- 5/21/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
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.
Ben LujánDemocrat · New Mexico