Referred to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each ca…
This bill directs the Secretary of Agriculture and the Director of the National Science Foundation to carry out coordinated, cross-cutting research and development activities that advance both agencies' missions.
It requires memoranda of understanding or interagency agreements using competitive merit review, lists research focus areas (agriculture biology, food security, AI, sensors, precision agriculture, workforce development, broadband, and more), and authorizes grants, reimbursable agreements, and collaboration with other federal agencies.
The bill requires a report to congressional committees within two years on coordination, capabilities, achievements, and future opportunities, and mandates that activities comply with CHIPS and Science Act research security provisions.
Technocratic, bipartisan-leaning subject increases prospects, but absence of explicit funding and typical legislative bottlenecks lower likelihood.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a substantive interagency R&D authority and coordination framework with a clear high-level purpose, enumerated activity areas, and a required congressional report, but it lacks key implementation and fiscal details.
Liberals stress equity, climate resilience, and public-interest protections
Liberals stress equity, climate resilience, and public-interest protections
Likely broadly supportive because the bill promotes publicly funded research, rural broadband, workforce training, and food security.
They will look for equitable access, public-interest protections, and stronger climate and labor considerations in implementation.
Concerns will focus on ensuring community colleges, Cooperative Extension, and underserved communities benefit.
Likely cautiously supportive as a pragmatic step to reduce duplication and strengthen applied agricultural R&D and workforce pipelines.
They will want clear performance metrics, oversight, and cost transparency to avoid waste and mission creep.
Centrists see potential in rural economic revitalization and broadband, but want guardrails against overlap and unclear budgetary obligations.
Mixed to skeptical: supportive of agricultural research and rural job training, but wary of expanding NSF involvement and new federal coordination mechanisms.
Concerns center on federal overreach, taxpayer costs, regulatory burdens, and protecting research security from foreign influence.
They will press for limits on scope, strict security, and no new spending without offsets.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technocratic, bipartisan-leaning subject increases prospects, but absence of explicit funding and typical legislative bottlenecks lower likelihood.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals stress equity, climate resilience, and public-interest protections
Technocratic, bipartisan-leaning subject increases prospects, but absence of explicit funding and typical legislative bottlenecks lower lik…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a substantive interagency R&D authority and coordination framework with a clear high-level purpose, enumerated activity areas, and a required congressiona…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.