This bill would direct the U.S. Transportation Secretary to require states to reserve part of their highway safety improvement funds for projects that reduce injuries and deaths at high-risk pedestrian crossings. It is aimed at making dangerous crossings safer through targeted infrastructure upgrades rather than leaving all spending decisions entirely to state discretion. The main people affected would be pedestrians, local communities near dangerous roads, and state transportation agencies that administer these funds. The bill does not create a new program from scratch; it changes how existing highway safety money must be allocated.
What This Bill Does
- Requires states to reserve part of highway safety improvement funds for pedestrian crossing projects.
- Targets crossings with high numbers of injuries and fatalities.
- Uses existing federal highway safety money rather than creating a new grant program.
- Applies to state transportation agencies that manage highway safety improvement spending.
Who This Bill Affects
If you walk near busy roads, live in a neighborhood with dangerous crossings, or rely on transit and cross streets on foot, this bill could improve safety by steering existing highway safety funds toward crossing upgrades. That could mean better signals, marked crosswalks, refuge islands, lighting, or other changes at locations with high crash risk. For state transportation agencies, it would create a stronger federal requirement to dedicate part of their safety dollars to pedestrian projects rather than using all of those funds elsewhere.
See how this bill affects you — sign in for a personalized analysisWho Supports & Opposes This
- Pedestrians and transit riders They would benefit from safer crossings where walking conditions are currently dangerous. Targeted investment can reduce crashes, shorten crossing distances, and make it easier for people to move around without a car.
- Local governments and community safety advocates Local officials often want federal support for projects that fix known danger spots but struggle to compete against larger road projects. A set-aside would make pedestrian safety a more reliable funding priority.
- Public health and injury-prevention advocates Preventing severe pedestrian injuries and deaths can save medical costs, reduce emergency response burdens, and improve community livability. They would see the bill as a direct response to traffic violence.
- State transportation agencies They may argue that mandatory set-asides reduce flexibility and force states to reserve money even where other roadway hazards are more urgent. States could prefer to decide locally how best to balance pedestrian, vehicle, and system-wide safety needs.
- Motorist-focused road users and freight interests Some may worry that directing more funds toward crossing treatments could divert resources from projects that improve traffic flow, freight movement, or general road maintenance. They may favor a broader safety approach rather than a pedestrian-specific requirement.
- Budget-constrained infrastructure planners They may object that earmarking funds can make it harder to address the most cost-effective projects overall. If states have limited safety money, a set-aside could crowd out other improvements that also prevent crashes.
Key Implications
-
““require States to set aside certain funds””
This would not leave pedestrian safety spending entirely to state discretion. States would have to reserve a portion of existing highway safety money for the specified purpose.
-
““carry out highway safety improvement projects””
The funded work would be tied to safety-oriented infrastructure or operational changes, not general transportation spending. In practice, that points to things like signals, crossings, lighting, and roadway design fixes.
-
““reduce the number of injuries and fatalities””
The standard for the projects is explicitly outcome-based. States would be expected to direct money toward locations and designs that measurably reduce serious crashes.
-
““at high-risk pedestrian crossings””
The bill focuses on the most dangerous locations rather than every crosswalk. That means the benefit would be concentrated where crash risk is highest.
Official Source & Bill Facts
BillBoard checks this page against public Congress.gov metadata, then adds plain-English analysis where available.
- Bill
- HR 9424
- Congress
- 119th Congress
- Official title
- To amend title 23, United States Code, to direct the Secretary of Transportation to require States to set aside certain funds to carry out highway safety improvement projects to reduce the number of injuries and fatalities at high-risk pedestrian crossings.
- Policy area
- Housing & Infrastructure
- Latest action
- Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. (June 24, 2026)
- Last updated
- June 25, 2026
Latest Status
June 24, 2026
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Related Bills
Take Action
Get more from BillBoard
Free tools to understand, respond to, and track this bill.
Ask AI about this billData sourced from api.congress.gov.