Latest action: Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
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
Legislation addressing reading education and literacy programs in American schools and communities.
The problem
Students may lack sufficient reading skills and literacy support. Schools need resources to improve reading instruction and help struggling readers succeed.
The proposal
The bill would establish or modify reading education programs, likely funding literacy initiatives, teacher training, or reading intervention strategies in schools.
The impact
Students, teachers, and school districts would be affected. Changes could improve reading instruction quality and literacy outcomes for school-age children.
Enhanced reading programs could help more students develop strong literacy skills early. This foundation supports academic success across all subjects and improves long-term educational outcomes.
The bill may provide funding for professional development in reading instruction. Better-trained teachers can use evidence-based methods to help struggling readers more effectively.
Targeted literacy programs can help disadvantaged students catch up to peers. This reduces educational inequality and gives all children better chances for success.
Improved literacy rates strengthen the future workforce. Better-educated adults earn higher incomes and contribute more to economic growth.
New or expanded literacy programs require significant government spending. This increases federal budget obligations or requires funds redirected from other priorities.
Schools may struggle to implement new programs effectively without adequate support. Inconsistent execution across districts could limit the bill's success.
Federal involvement in reading programs may limit local school board flexibility. Communities prefer deciding their own education priorities and methods.
It may be difficult to prove that specific programs improve literacy outcomes. Without clear success metrics, policymakers cannot verify the bill's effectiveness.
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.