http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills info@washingtonwatch.com http://www.pjdoland.com/chai/?v=0.1 http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/111_SN_398.html?rev=43239 <p>S. 398 would permit commercial vehicles at weights up to 129,000 pounds to use certain highways of the Interstate System in the State of Idaho which would provide significant savings in the transportation of goods throughout the United States.</p> <h2 id="toc0"> Detailed Summary </h2> <p>Idaho Efficient Vehicle Demonstration Act of 2009 - Prohibits any reduction of the apportionment of federal-aid highway funds to Idaho if: (1) it permits a commercial combination vehicle weighing up to 129,000 pounds to operate on specified routes of the Interstate System within the state; (2) such vehicle does not exceed state weight limits for operation on state highways; and (3) the vehicle is limited to travel only on certain portions of Interstate Routes 15, 84, and 86.</p> <p>(Under current law, the federal-aid highway funds of a state shall be reduced if it permits a commercial combination vehicle with a weight in excess of federal weight limits to operate on Interstate System highways within the state.)</p> <!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc1"> Status of the Legislation </h2> <p>Latest Major Action: 2/9/2009: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.</p> <!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc2"> Points in Favor </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> <h2 id="toc3"> Points Against </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> 43239@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Mon, 30 Mar 2009 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/111_SN_398.html?rev=38856 <p>S. 398 would permit commercial vehicles at weights up to 129,000 pounds to use certain highways of the Interstate System in the State of Idaho which would provide significant savings in the transportation of goods throughout the United States.</p> <h2 id="toc4"> Detailed Summary </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)</p> <!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc5"> Status of the Legislation </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to update the status of the bill!)</p> <!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc6"> Points in Favor </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> <h2 id="toc7"> Points Against </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> 38856@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Tue, 10 Feb 2009 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/111_SN_398.html?rev=38857 <p>S. 398 would permit commercial vehicles at weights up to 129,000 pounds to use certain highways of the Interstate System in the State of Idaho which would provide significant savings in the transportation of goods throughout the United States.</p> <h2 id="toc8"> Detailed Summary </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)</p> <!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc9"> Status of the Legislation </h2> <p>Latest Major Action: 2/9/2009: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.</p> <!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc10"> Points in Favor </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> <h2 id="toc11"> Points Against </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> 38857@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Tue, 10 Feb 2009 00:00:00 EST http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_SN_398.html 2/9/2009: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. 43269@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Mon, 09 Feb 2009 00:00:00 EST