The massive $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure package is poised for a final vote in the Senate on Tuesday morning after clearing the last procedural hurdle following months of furious negotiations.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced Monday evening that Republicans and Democrats have reached an agreement for final passage of the bill on Tuesday at 11 a.m. ET. Once the bill passes the Senate, it will go to the House of Representatives.

"This is a very good day," Schumer said in floor remarks on Monday night. "We have come to an agreement after all the long hard negotiating, the stops and starts, we're here. And it's a good thing, a very good thing for America."

"The Senate can be proud it has passed this," he added. "And as we move forward we're proceeding on both tracks. The track of the bipartisan infrastructure proposal, and the track of the budget resolution with reconciliation instructions. On our side of the aisle, we know we need both tracks: one dealing with traditional infrastructure, one dealing with climate and the problems American families face."

Once the bipartisan bill has passed, the Senate will quickly shift their attention to the budget resolution, which needs to pass both chambers of Congress first before Democrats can move on their separate $3.5 trillion package, which they hope they can pass with Democratic votes.

Democrats unveiled that budget resolution on Monday. The budget resolution summary lays out Democrats' plan to invest in four major buckets: families, climate, health care, and infrastructure and jobs. It notably does not include an expansion of the US national debt, as Republicans have pushed Democrats to do.

As Senate Democrats released text of the budget resolution with reconciliation instructions on Monday morning, Schumer reiterated this "is the first step in unlocking the legislative process for a budget reconciliation bill later this year."

"The Democratic budget will the most significant legislation for American families since the era of the New Deal and the Great Society. It is big, bold change. The kind of change America thirsts for," he said.

Lawmakers have been inching toward a final vote on the bipartisan infrastructure bill for days, considering 22 amendments to the package last week after the legislative text was finalized the previous weekend. On Saturday, the Senate voted to break a filibuster and advance the bill.

"We are within days, possibly within hours of seeing this historic legislation that's going to get us better roads and bridges, better ports and airports, a better future for our economy and creating millions of jobs," Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg told Fox News on Sunday morning.

"We're on the cusp of seeing that move through the Senate."

The massive bipartisan infrastructure package, called the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, is the culmination of drawn-out and painstaking negotiations between a bipartisan group of senators and the Biden administration and will allow both parties to claim a win after extensive work across the aisle.

It features $550 billion in new federal spending over five years. The measure invests $110 billion in funding toward roads, bridges and major projects, $66 billion in passenger and freight rail, $65 billion to rebuild the electric grid, $65 billion to expand broadband Internet access, and $39 billion to modernize and expand transit systems.

Among many other priorities, the bill also includes $55 billion for water infrastructure, $15 billion of which will be directed toward replacing lead pipes.

And while senators are confident the bill will pass, the legislation faces an uncertain future in the House.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has indicated that the chamber won't take up the bipartisan bill until Senate Democrats pass their larger social, environmental infrastructure package -- a position that continues to be met with criticism from Republicans and some moderate Democrats alike.

The GOP senators who support the bipartisan infrastructure bill note that there are major differences between their bill and the Democratic package. They say it's essential for Republicans to show that they're not just a knee-jerk opposition party and can instead find consensus on pressing national problems important to voters.

But a report from the Congressional Budget Office that found the bipartisan package will "add $256 billion to projected deficits" between 2021 and 2031 has complicated deliberations for some GOP senators.

Republican Sen. Todd Young, who initially endorsed the bipartisan deal and had previously voted to cut off debate, announced Sunday evening that he will vote against the bill. The Indiana Republican, who faces reelection next year, pointed to the CBO's scoring of the legislation and said he is not "comfortable with a number of the Democratic priorities contained in this version."

"As I've said many times, while I'm eager for a bill that makes these investments, I'm also committed to doing so in a fiscally responsible way," he said in a statement.

South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the Republican whip who hasn't hadn't yet declared whether he's running for another term next year, hadn't ruled out as of last week supporting the bill on final passage. But he had a warning for the GOP.

"I think the politics work for both sides," Thune, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, said. "I think that if you're a Republican you want to prove that you're not just here to completely block and stop the entire agenda if you find areas that are good for, you know, the country and then you want to be a part of trying to solve those problems."

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The bipartisan infrastructure bill continues to progress in the United States Senate. A final vote could take place this weekend.

For months, you’ve heard politicians and transportation leaders make the case that now is the time to revolutionize train travel.

The bipartisan bill certainly allocates money in the direction of mass transit and Amtrak.

It invests $39 billion over five years into mass transit, like commuter trains and buses. It also allocates $66 billion for passenger rail, mostly Amtrak.

Both represent an unrepresented amount of funds for those transportation sectors.

But just how transformational is this bipartisan infrastructure deal when it comes to train travel? It depends on who you ask.

"If you ask the question, 'Is more needed?' Absolutely more is needed. Public transit has been underfunded for decades," Paul Skoutelas said.

Skoutelas is the President of the American Public Transportation Association. He advocates for more commuter trains and buses in neighborhoods like yours.

He says rough estimates have put the maintenance backlog for mass transit at $105 billion nationwide. This bill provides only $39 billion.

If the bill becomes law, balancing maintenance needs with the desire for new projects to transform commutes will be tricky.

"Is this enough investment? No, it’s not, but we will take it. It’s significantly important to get us in the right direction," Skoutelas said.

Those who lobby on behalf of Amtrak, though, see things a bit differently.

"Before we get to the financial numbers, what’s even more important are the policy changes," John Robert Smith said.

Smith is with Transportation for America and is a past chairman of the board of directors for Amtrak.

He says the infrastructure bill changes the mission of Amtrak dramatically. Instead of being looked at as a business by the government, it’s now considered a service responsible for connecting big cities with small towns.

"It's a fundamental change in what the mission has been over the last 10 years," Smith said.

But what about the Amtrak proposal released earlier this year to create new routes around the country like Las Vegas to Los Angeles or Colorado Springs to Denver?

"I think the funds provided in the Senate bipartisan bill are significant enough to make vast changes," Smith said.

But Smith thinks the Amtrak map proposal will quickly be redrawn if the infrastructure bill becomes law.

That’s because President Joe Biden, under the bill, will have the ability to appoint all new Amtrak board members who will likely reevaluate everything.

While Smith says this bill can create new routes. Don’t expect super-fast bullet trains like the ones in Japan. There just isn’t enough cash for that.

"You aren’t going to accomplish transformational high-speed rail in a five-year bill," Smith said.

The bipartisan bill does include funds to improve Acela speeds in the Northeast corridor.

While some say the bipartisan infrastructure deal could have included more money, many conservatives in Congress are frustrated because they believe the bill has too much government spending in it, raising the risk for inflation.

A recent analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found the bill will contribute $256 billion to the deficit over the next decade.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Will they or won't they pass an infrastructure bill? That is the big question facing Congress as they begin to return from their Fourth of July recess.

The Senate returns Monday. The House of Representatives will be back next week.

WHAT THE MAJOR SIDES WANT

President Joe Biden and moderates: This group believes they have the votes for a $579 billion bipartisan infrastructure deal to fund broadband, roads, and bridges. What's unclear is whether they actually have the votes. Five Republicans appear to be on board, but for this to pass in a bipartisan manner, 60 will be needed to support it so the filibuster is deemed mute.

Conservative leadership: This group has been clear that they want zero tax increases. The bipartisan deal doesn't include any tax increases, however, conservative leadership may still vote against it for other reasons.

Progressives: Progressive Democrats, like Sen. Bernie Sanders, have been clear they won't support the bipartisan deal unless a separate, multi-trillion spending bill is also making its way through Congress. This legislation would include things like child care and education, items left out of the bipartisan deal.

To borrow another transportation analogy, think of Biden as a train conductor or engineer who needs to have two trains leave the station at the exact same time.

Train #1 is the bipartisan deal and train #2 would be the partisan, multi-trillion progressive legislation.

HOW IS IT PAID FOR?

To be clear the partisan, progressive legislation has yet to be written. With the Senate returning, that will soon change. It will likely include tax increases.

The bipartisan bill does have a working framework with no tax increases included.

To come up with the money, lawmakers are asking agencies and government organizations to help.

The plan includes cutting $70 billion from the nation’s unemployment benefits program. Although lawmakers say it won’t impact people out of work.

Supporters of the framework want to redirect $80 billion in COVID-19 relief funds to fund infrastructure while also directing the FCC to generate $65 billion by auctioning 5G airwave access

Not to mention, Democrat and Republican negotiators want the IRS to audit more Americans. In fact, Congress plans on hiring new investigators to collect $140 billion in taxes the federal government believes they are entitled to.

Expect more details on the timing of any votes in the Senate in the coming days.

WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. Rep. Anthony Gonzalez, a former Ohio State football player, reintroduced on Monday a bipartisan bill that would give college athletes the right to earn money through endorsements and sponsorship deals.

Gonzalez, R-Ohio, and Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., co-sponsored the Student Athlete Level Playing Field Act, which would give college athletes the right to be paid for the use of their name, image and likeness.

In a statement, the NCAA said it valued the bipartisanship of the bill.

“Their House bill will strengthen the college athlete experience and support the NCAA and its members to modernize name, image and likeness rules but not pay student-athletes or turn them into employees of their college or university,” the NCAA said.

It is the third bill related to NIL compensation in college sports to be introduced during this Congress, but the first with support from Democrats and Republicans. Six other lawmakers have signed onto the bill, three from each party.

Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., introduced the Amateur Athletes Protection and Compensation Act in February. Earlier that month, Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., and Rep. Lori Trahan, D-Mass., introduced the College Athlete Economic Freedom Act.

Going back to December, Democratic Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut introduced the College Athlete Bill of Rights, which would regulate college sports well beyond NIL compensation and force some schools to share sports-generated revenues with athletes.

Republican Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi also introduced a bill in December that some critics said was too NCAA-friendly.

The NCAA’s attempts to reform its bylaws and permit college athletes to capitalize on their names, images and likenesses have stalled, but several states have NIL laws scheduled to take effect July 1, including Florida and Mississippi.

The NCAA has warned that a patchwork of state laws would create confusion and competitive inequity, and is hoping for help from Congress in the form of a national NIL law.

“We are facing a tight deadline with state laws taking effect just around the corner,” Gonzalez said in a statement. “The time for action on this issue is now. Student-athletes have long deserved the right to profit from their NIL. Our bill would grant this right, while also protecting the integrity of the college sports system.”

Gonzalez, a receiver at Ohio State, was drafted by the Indianapolis Colts in 2007 and played five seasons in the NFL.

Gonzalez and Cleaver’s bill is similar to one they introduced in September. In the new bill, however, athletes would be barred from endorsing certain companies and products, such as tobacco or casinos. But schools, conferences and the NCAA also would be prohibited from entering financial agreements with such companies.