Codify — Article

House resolution backs Motorcycle Safety Awareness Month for May 2025

A nonbinding House resolution spotlights rider training, public awareness, and motorists’ duty to share the road — a signaling move with no funding or regulatory change.

The Brief

H.Res. 367 is a simple, nonbinding House resolution that expresses support for designating May 2025 as "Motorcycle Safety Awareness Month." The preamble cites industry data on the size of the motorcycling population, fuel-efficiency and highway usage, and higher motorcyclist fatality rates; the operative language contains six short "resolved" clauses encouraging public awareness, rider training, and recognition of motorcyclists’ right to the road.

The measure carries symbolic weight rather than legal force. It signals Congressional attention to motorcycle safety and can be used by federal, state, and nonprofit actors to justify outreach and education campaigns, but it contains no appropriations, regulatory mandates, or enforcement mechanisms.

Traffic-safety professionals should treat it as a communications and framing tool rather than a change in legal obligations.

At a Glance

What It Does

The bill adopts a concisely structured resolution with a preamble of factual findings followed by six resolved clauses that endorse awareness, encourage training and proper gear, and affirm motorcyclists’ entitlement to use public roadways. It directs no government agency to act and creates no new statutory duties or funding authorizations.

Who It Affects

The resolution directly touches motorcyclists, rider-training providers, motorcycle advocacy organizations, state and local traffic-safety offices, and federal entities that run public education campaigns. It does not change requirements for drivers, operators, or manufacturers but may influence outreach priorities.

Why It Matters

Because it is a Congressional signal, the text can shape messaging from NHTSA, state DOTs, and safety nonprofits and provide an evidentiary hook for grant proposals or local campaigns. For professionals, the practical takeaway is potential shifts in public education emphasis — not new compliance obligations.

More articles like this one.

A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.

Unsubscribe anytime.

What This Bill Actually Does

H.Res. 367 is organized like most commemorative House resolutions: a series of "whereas" clauses that set out facts and concerns, followed by short "resolved" clauses that state Congressional support for an awareness designation and related goals. The preamble highlights the Motorcycle Industry Council’s estimate of the size of the riding population, points to motorcycles’ fuel-efficiency and role in traffic, notes that most motorcycles operate on highways alongside other vehicles, and flags that motorcyclist fatalities outpace passenger-vehicle motorist fatalities.

The operative portion contains six brief statements. Collectively they: endorse the awareness-month designation; recognize motorcycles’ contribution to the transportation mix; encourage all road users to be mindful of motorcycles; affirm that motorcyclists have a right to the road; urge rider education, licensing, and the use of protective gear; and express support for the broader goals of Motorcycle Safety Awareness Month.

Because the resolution is nonbinding, these are exhortations rather than directives.For agencies and practitioners, the resolution mostly functions as authorization-by-acknowledgment: it gives federal and state safety programs a Congressional statement to cite when promoting training courses, public-service announcements, or collaborative outreach between law enforcement and rider groups. It does not, however, appropriate funds or change legal standards on issues such as helmet laws, licensing requirements, or vehicle design; any downstream programs would have to rely on existing budgets or new appropriations.Finally, the text ties into ongoing NHTSA messaging: the preamble references NHTSA’s existing promotion of Motorcycle Safety Awareness Month and calls for riders to be licensed, trained, and to wear protective equipment.

Practically, the resolution is most relevant to communications directors, traffic-safety grant writers, and advocacy organizations that plan seasonal campaigns and want a Congressional statement to reinforce their outreach.

The Five Things You Need to Know

1

H.Res. 367 was introduced in the House on May 1, 2025 by Representative Tim Walberg with a group of cosponsors.

2

The preamble cites an industry estimate that about 30,000,000 individuals ride motorcycles annually in the U.S.

3

representing roughly 9 percent of the population.

4

The text states that approximately 87 percent of motorcycles are operated on highways in conjunction with other vehicles, a framing the resolution uses to stress shared-road awareness.

5

The resolution explicitly recognizes that motorcyclists "have a right to the road" and urges all motorists to safely share roadways with them.

6

The measure contains no authorizations or appropriations and does not impose legal obligations on federal or state actors; its effect is symbolic and communicative.

Section-by-Section Breakdown

Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections. Expand all ↓

Preamble (Whereas Clauses)

Facts and framing the problem

The preamble collects several factual assertions from sources such as the Motorcycle Industry Council and NHTSA: estimates of rider population size, statements about motorcycles’ fuel efficiency and limited infrastructure impact, the share of motorcycle operation on highways, and the comparative rate of motorcyclist fatalities. These clauses serve to justify why Congress should spotlight motorcycle safety and provide the background that informs the resolved clauses.

Resolved Clause 1

Support for the awareness-month designation

This clause affirms Congressional support for designating May 2025 as Motorcycle Safety Awareness Month. As a standalone clause in a House resolution, it is expressive — intended to motivate public- and private-sector attention — but it carries no statutory force and does not command agency action or funding.

Resolved Clauses 2–4

Recognition of motorcycles and encouragement of shared-road awareness

These clauses recognize motorcycles as a component of the transportation mix, encourage awareness by all road users, and explicitly state that motorcyclists have a right to use public roadways. Practically, that language is a policy signal that can be cited in communications and advocacy; it does not alter traffic law or preempt state-level rules on lane use or helmet requirements.

2 more sections
Resolved Clause 5

Promotion of rider training and protective gear

The resolution urges rider safety education, licensing, and the use of proper protective equipment. This clause supports training providers and safety campaigns rhetorically but contains no mechanism to direct funds toward training programs or to mandate participation by riders.

Resolved Clause 6

Alignment with NHTSA outreach

The final clause endorses the goals of Motorcycle Safety Awareness Month and references NHTSA’s role in promoting licensing, training, and protective equipment. The explicit mention of NHTSA links the resolution to existing federal messaging but stops short of creating new agency duties or metrics for measuring campaign impact.

At scale

This bill is one of many.

Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Transportation across all five countries.

Explore Transportation in Codify Search →

Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost

Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.

Who Benefits

  • Motorcyclists — gain heightened public visibility and an explicit Congressional statement affirming their entitlement to roadway access, which advocacy groups can use to support local awareness efforts.
  • Rider-training providers and safety instructors — can leverage the designation as a marketing and program-recruitment tool, potentially increasing enrollment in training courses.
  • Motorcycle advocacy and safety nonprofits — receive a formal Congressional endorsement that strengthens fundraising appeals and local partnership pitches.
  • State and local traffic-safety offices — obtain a federal-level communication hook to justify seasonal campaigns, press events, and coordination with law enforcement.

Who Bears the Cost

  • Federal agencies such as NHTSA — while not required to act, may face expectations to amplify outreach during the designated month, creating modest demands on communications staff and program budgets if they choose to respond.
  • State and local departments of transportation and law enforcement — may experience incremental costs if they run additional public-awareness campaigns, produce materials, or conduct outreach tied to the designation.
  • Nonprofit and advocacy organizations — may redirect limited resources toward awareness-month activities to capitalize on the Congressional signal, potentially shifting funds away from other longer-term safety initiatives.

Key Issues

The Core Tension

The central dilemma is symbolic recognition versus substantive action: the resolution cheaply raises attention for motorcycle safety but stops short of funding or regulatory changes that many experts consider necessary to materially reduce fatalities, leaving policymakers and practitioners to decide whether awareness alone is an adequate tool.

The resolution’s main limitation is its symbolic character: it signals Congressional concern but does not change legal or financial realities. That means any practical effect depends on downstream choices by NHTSA, state DOTs, advocacy groups, or private partners to use the designation as a platform for outreach.

Those actors may choose to expand campaigns, but they must do so within existing budgets unless additional appropriations are provided separately.

Another tension arises from relying on public-awareness messaging as the primary lever to reduce motorcycle crashes. Evidence on the effectiveness of awareness months is mixed; some interventions change short-term behavior, while others have little measurable impact on crash rates without parallel investments in infrastructure, enforcement, or rider licensing reforms.

The bill’s selective use of statistics in the preamble (industry estimates of rider numbers and highway usage, and a comparative fatality statement) helps frame urgency but does not prescribe how to address underlying causes such as vehicle design, roadway engineering, impaired driving, or inconsistent state helmet laws.

Try it yourself.

Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.