In Spring 2025, ZETA underwent a collaborative member engagement process to identify and articulate our priorities for Surface Transportation Reauthorization (STR). These priorities were reviewed by members and submitted to portals maintained by the House Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) and Energy and Commerce (E&C), as well as to the Senate Committee on Energy and Public Works (EPW).
ZETA has maintained a consistent line of communication with Committee staff as well as offices down-dais throughout the STR process. We have also coordinated with coalition partners through CHARGE to ensure that electrification is a leading priority for Democrats in the upcoming bill.
ZETA has communicated clearly to T&I minority staff, including Committee Leadership, that we would oppose a bill that contains what we consider to be an unfair, punitive road use fee on EVs to contribute to the Highway Trust Fund (HTF); for instance, we would consider an annual EV road use fee at or near $150 to be punitive. We are working on a press strategy in anticipation that we may see base text in which our priorities are adversely impacted, to serve as a marker of the continued need for a bipartisan bill to include no punitive EV fee levels and dedicated EV infrastructure funding.
Resources:
If you have specific questions about the state of play on a specific policy priority, please do not hesitate to reach out to Rebecca or Ronnie.
Latest intel from staff is that the date being held for the T&I markup is Wednesday, May 20th. If the bill is a negotiated bipartisan product, then we may see text as early as Friday, May 15th. The Committee markup notice requirement is 48-hours in advance, so it is possible we will not see text until Monday, May 18th, in time for a Wednesday markup. Additionally, E&C is planning a Full Committee markup of their own portion of surface transportation-related bills at 10 AM on Wednesday, May 20th, which may indicate increased momentum for the bill. (Note: H.R. 7389 (Guthrie), the Motor Vehicle Modernization Act of 2026, includes a provision on fire rescue working groups for all vehicle fires; while not identical, the ZETA priorities submitted to E&C also included a section on the importance of increased government resources for EV fire safety.)
At this time, we have reason to believe there is a strong likelihood of seeing a road use fee applied to EVs to contribute to the HTF; we do not know the mechanism for such a fee at this time, but a window from $90-150 has been mentioned as a basis for negotiation (and which could potentially go higher). There is also a high likelihood of seeing significant changes and/or cuts to the NEVI and CFI programs.
Chairman Graves of T&I is retiring at the end of this Congress, and thus is motivated to see action on this bill. We understand his goal is to try to move it (either through the Committee or on the House floor) by June. Markup dates have been pushed back a number of times previously, so the May 20th date referenced above is subject to change.
Progression on the Senate side of surface reauthorization legislation is considerably slower; while Committees of jurisdiction are trading paper, it is believed that they will not be able to finish their negotiations in time for a final reauthorization package by the September 2026 deadline. It is widely believed that a temporary extension of existing authorities will be required by the end of this calendar year to prevent lapses in authorizations. However, given pending House action, we still want to minimize whatever iteration of an EV fee and other harmful policies the House bill might contain, in order to be in the best position possible for Senate negotiations.
Bill Text Summary: Forthcoming.
ZETA is in the process of engaging offices ahead of markup to explore the appetite for and political dynamic around introducing amendments to the base text. In particular, since early April of this year (and in addition to conversations during our March fly-in), ZETA has had numerous conversations with Member offices on and off T&I Committee to ensure, to the best of our ability, that any EV fee in this bill would be fair and non-punitive, including: T&I Committee minority leadership, Leader Jeffries, Congressman Beyer (Member-level), Ways and Means Committee minority staff, and the offices of Reps. DeSaulnier, Titus, Stanton, Hoyle, Deluzio, Garcia, Brownley, Carbajal, Garamendi, Panetta, Mike Thompson, Gomez, and Holmes Norton; additional conversations are pending. From this group, ZETA has spoken with at least six offices on T&I actively interested in, or at least open to, leading amendments during markup (under certain circumstances, further discussed below) to address an unfair EV fee and other relevant issues.
On the Senate side, the Minority is more united in opposition to an EV fee on principle, although some Democratic offices are open to the idea of its inclusion in surface transportation. Committee Leadership for both the Environment and Public Works Committee (which oversees most of T&I’s jurisdiction, including NEVI/CFI) and the Finance Committee (which oversees tax issues, very likely including EV fees) are both committed to pushing back on the inclusion of an EV fee in a final surface transportation bill.
If T&I Majority and Minority reach an agreement on text, Committee and down-dais Member staff alike have expressed that the funding numbers will have been heavily negotiated, and thus locked in. While there is no Committee rule against non-budget-neutral amendments, we have been told that changes to funding levels would upend the entire bill as negotiated. Furthermore, Majority and Minority are likely to have an agreement on types of amendments that they will vote against on principle, in the event of a finalized negotiation process. Presumably, this would include any amendments to change pre-negotiated funding levels.
In short, as any amendment to strike or reduce a prospective EV fee or increase funding for programs (i.e. NEVI/CFI, Low or No Emission Grant Program, etc.) would have an impact on funding levels, such amendments would likely be voted down on a bipartisan basis at the Committee Leadership level. Many down-dais Members of Congress would feel it necessary to follow Leadership’s direction in this matter. Amendments that change policy but do not impact funding levels may still fail a vote due to Committee political makeup, but would not have the same hurdles as those with budgetary impacts.
With this in mind, implementing an effective amendment strategy will require careful consideration of the challenges and nuances presented by both bill text and the nature of any agreement that comes together. However, given we have had a number of offices interested in engagement, we do have some options. We have laid out our thought process below, as well as our recommendation on a path forward at this time.
Example scenario: Bill text comes out with an annual EV fee set at $150. (Note: we understand there are many programs that may be affected by this bill that may warrant an amendment, and we are happy to discuss on a case-by-case basis; since the greatest priority for many ZETA members is preventing a punitive EV fee, this is the example being used for planning purposes.)
Ask a MOC to offer and withdraw an amendment to allow the opportunity to message on the issue. Our top recommendations for amendments to the message on EV fees would include 1.) exemptions from the fee for lower-income individuals, senior citizens, and drivers of used EVs to make the point about affordability, and 2.) bringing the fee down to gas car driver parity (we can name a number or not) in order to make the point about fairness.
We feel this approach allows Members of Congress to discuss the unfair nature of a punitive EV fee and its negative impacts on consumers, while avoiding an unfavorable vote that may create negative future precedent on the issue.
Please let the ZETA team know by this Friday, May 15th, if you would be supportive of ZETA taking this general approach in regard to treatment of EV fees during Committee markup of a surface transportation bill. We are very happy to chat through other ideas, and of course, happy to discuss any questions.
