Boosting the Rural STEM Pipeline Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 6366
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Science, Technology, Communications
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-12-02: Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
- Last Updated
- 2026-01-14T09:06:39Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
The Boosting the Rural STEM Pipeline Act (H.R. 6366) aims to remove financial cost-sharing requirements for the Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program. This program provides scholarships to train science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) teachers, with a focus on serving high-need areas like rural schools. By eliminating these requirements, the bill seeks to make the program more accessible and encourage more participants, particularly to strengthen STEM education in underserved rural communities.
Key Provisions Outlined
- Short Title: The act is officially named the "Boosting the Rural STEM Pipeline Act."
- Repeal of Cost-Sharing:
- Amends Section 10A of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 1862n-1a) by removing subsection (i), which required institutions to contribute matching funds (cost-sharing) for scholarships under the Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program.
- Redesignates subsequent subsections (j and k) as (i and j) to maintain the structure of the law.
- Conforming Amendments: Updates Section 10320 of the Research and Development, Competition, and Innovation Act (42 U.S.C. 18998) to reflect the change:
- Adjusts language from plural ("requirements" and "waivers") to singular ("requirement" and "waiver") to align with the repeal of the cost-sharing rule.
- Removes references to multiple cost-sharing obligations, simplifying the text for clarity.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Elimination of Matching Funds: Previously, participating institutions (like universities) had to cover a portion of the scholarship costs from non-federal sources. This bill fully repeals that mandate, allowing the National Science Foundation (NSF) to fund the program without requiring contributions from recipients.
- Streamlined Language: The conforming amendments clean up outdated phrasing in related laws, ensuring consistency without altering other program elements like eligibility or scholarship amounts.
- No new funding or program expansions are introduced; the focus is solely on removing the financial barrier.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: The NSF may see increased administrative efficiency in awarding grants, as it no longer needs to verify or enforce cost-sharing compliance. This could lead to broader distribution of federal funds for STEM teacher training.
- On Citizens: Prospective STEM teachers, especially those committed to rural or high-need schools, may find it easier to access scholarships without institutional funding hurdles. Rural students could benefit from a larger pool of qualified STEM educators, potentially improving educational opportunities in underserved areas.
- On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, as the bill focuses on domestic education policy. Indirectly, a stronger U.S. STEM workforce could enhance the country's global competitiveness in science and innovation.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- National Science Foundation (NSF): Primary administrator of the program; gains flexibility in funding allocation.
- Educational Institutions: Universities and colleges that host the scholarship program; relieved of cost-sharing burdens, potentially increasing their participation.
- Prospective and Current STEM Teachers: Scholarship recipients who teach in high-need areas; easier access to financial support without institutional matching.
- Rural Schools and Students: End beneficiaries, as the program targets STEM education in underserved rural communities, aiming to build a stronger teacher pipeline.
- Congressional Committees: Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology for oversight.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal Implications: The repeal simplifies compliance with federal grant rules under the affected acts, reducing potential disputes over cost-sharing calculations. It does not alter core program goals or eligibility, maintaining continuity with existing NSF authorizations.
- Constitutional Implications: None significant; the bill operates within Congress's enumerated powers to promote education and science under the Spending Clause (Article I, Section 8), without infringing on state or individual rights.
- Political Implications: By targeting rural STEM education, the bill aligns with bipartisan interests in workforce development and addressing educational disparities. It could appeal to rural constituencies but may raise concerns about increased federal spending without matching requirements, potentially influencing future budget debates on education funding. The introduction by representatives from New York and Utah highlights cross-regional support.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (5)
Rep. Kennedy, Mike [R-UT-3], Rep. Obernolte, Jay [R-CA-23], Rep. Ross, Deborah K. [D-NC-2], Rep. Haridopolos, Mike [R-FL-8], Rep. Salinas, Andrea [D-OR-6]
Recent Actions
- 2025-12-02: Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
- 2025-12-02: Introduced in House
- 2025-12-02: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Boosting the Rural STEM Pipeline Act — issued 2025-12-02 — PDF (2 pages)