POLISCOPE
Back to feed
FEDERALhearing transcript
High Impact

1966 Congressional Hearings on the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Compact

Original title: D.C. area transit compact: hearings before Subcommittee No. 3 of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Eighty-ninth Congress, second session, on H.J. Res. 1163, H.J. Res. 1164, H.R. 15588, H.R. 15599, H.R. 15600, H.R. 51603, and H.R. 15719, to grant the consent of Congress for the states of Virginia and Maryland and the District of Columbia to amend the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact to establish an organization empowered to provide transit facilities in the National Capital Region, and for other purposes and to enact said amendment for the District of Columbia, July 20 and 27, and August 3, 1966.

July 14, 2026

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

The Frame

What this does

These hearings represent the foundational legislative process that authorized the creation of a unified regional transit authority for the Washington, D.C. area, impacting the development of the modern Metro system.

Who is mentioned in the record

Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.

Residents of the National Capital Region

The proposed transit organization would be empowered to provide transit facilities serving these residents.

State governments of Maryland and Virginia

These states were required to amend their interstate compact to participate in the new regional transit organization.

What changed

Last recorded activity July 14, 2026.

What's next

Next step not available in the current record.

Summary

This document records the 1966 Congressional hearings held to review proposed legislation that would allow Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia to amend their transit agreement. The goal of these amendments was to create a regional organization with the authority to build and operate transit facilities throughout the National Capital Region.

Key Facts

  • The hearings were held on July 20, July 27, and August 3, 1966.
  • The purpose was to grant Congressional consent for Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia to amend the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact.
  • The proposed amendments aimed to establish an organization with the power to provide transit facilities in the National Capital Region.
  • The hearings covered seven specific legislative items: H.J. Res. 1163, H.J. Res. 1164, H.R. 15588, H.R. 15599, H.R. 15600, H.R. 51603, and H.R. 15719.
  • The legislation included provisions to enact the compact amendments specifically for the District of Columbia.

Why It Matters

These hearings represent the foundational legislative process that authorized the creation of a unified regional transit authority for the Washington, D.C. area, impacting the development of the modern Metro system.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the purpose of these 1966 hearings?
The hearings were held to review legislation that would allow D.C., Maryland, and Virginia to amend their existing transit compact to create a new regional transit organization.
Which states were involved in this transit agreement?
The agreement involved the states of Maryland and Virginia, along with the District of Columbia.

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Discoveries

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift100% confidence

Regional Transit Consolidation

The hearings mark the transition from individual transit regulation to the creation of a centralized regional transit authority.

Connected Entities

otherWashington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation CompactThe existing legal agreement between D.C., Maryland, and Virginia being amended.Map →
organizationSubcommittee No. 3 of the Committee on the JudiciaryThe House committee responsible for conducting the hearings.Map →

Sources

Open source document

www.govinfo.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance90
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy10
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment5
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz5
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record