Latest action: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Referred to one or more standing committees for review, hearings, and possible markup.
Specific committees not parsed from action data.
The committee may hold hearings, amend the bill, or let it die without action.
Next: Reported
Full chamber floor — Speaker / Majority Leader controls scheduling
Grants for training internationally educated healthcare workers to fill U.S. job shortages.
The problem
The U.S. healthcare system faces workforce shortages. Many internationally educated healthcare professionals need support to work in America.
The proposal
The Secretary of Health and Human Services can award grants to organizations supporting career development for internationally educated healthcare workers.
The impact
Internationally educated healthcare workers, healthcare employers, and patients benefit from improved access to healthcare services and career opportunities.
The U.S. faces significant healthcare workforce gaps. This program helps fill those gaps by supporting skilled workers already educated abroad. This could reduce patient wait times and improve care access.
International healthcare workers bring different perspectives and training. Supporting their careers strengthens the overall healthcare system. This promotes inclusion in the workforce.
Healthcare employers struggling to hire can benefit from a larger pool of qualified workers. Grant funding reduces costs for training and credentialing these professionals.
Internationally educated workers gain career advancement opportunities. This can increase their earnings and contributions to local economies while meeting workforce needs.
The program requires government funding through grants. This adds to federal spending during budget discussions. The bill doesn't specify funding amounts or sources.
Critics may argue expanding immigrant worker access affects job opportunities for U.S. citizens in healthcare. Labor market effects depend on implementation details not yet specified.
The bill provides limited detail on how grants will work or what success looks like. Vague requirements could lead to inconsistent program results or administrative problems.
Different states have different licensing requirements. The bill doesn't address whether it helps workers meet varying state standards or credential requirements.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.