PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Olszewski, Johnny [D-MD-2] · D–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10064 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10064 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10064 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10064 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-08-06 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Foreign Service Language Readiness Act would require State Department language policies to support preserving skills in languages designated as critical. It recommends identifying those languages and incorporating language needs into staff training and assignments. It would also require a report to Congress on the department’s critical-language capabilities.
This Act may be cited as the Foreign Service Language Readiness Act.
the Secretary shall ensure that policies for the instruction, testing, and use of foreign languages explicitly support the preservation of capabilities with respect to critical foreign languages identified pursuant to section 701(h).
The Secretary should incorporate critical foreign language capability planning into the career development, training, and assignment processes under this chapter
Not later than December 31, 2027, the Secretary of State shall submit to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate a report on the Department of State’s critical language capabilities.
The bill recommends that the Secretary designate a critical-language list within 180 days after enactment and at least once every three years afterward, and make it available to the House Foreign Affairs and Senate Foreign Relations committees. This provision uses “should,” rather than mandatory “shall” language.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this subsection, and not less frequently than once every three years thereafter, the Secretary should designate, and make available to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, a list of critical foreign languages for purposes of this Act.
A critical foreign language would have to meet three conditions: importance to U.S. national security, economic prosperity and citizens abroad; a shortage of sufficiently skilled speakers in the U.S. workforce relative to strategic and operational needs; and classification within categories I–IV under the cited Foreign Affairs Manual guidance or its replacement. The Secretary would identify languages in consultation with other federal agency heads, as appropriate.
the term critical foreign language means a foreign language identified by the Secretary, in consultation with the heads of other Federal departments and agencies, as appropriate— (A) as essential to the protection of United States national security interests, United States economic prosperity, and the protection of United States citizens abroad; (B) with respect to which required levels of proficiency are limited in the United States workforce relative to strategic needs and operational demand; and (C) as corresponding to category I, II, III, or IV languages, as specified in section 3911.2 of volume 3 of the Foreign Affairs Manual (3 FAM 3911.2) or successor guidance, encompassing difficult, hard, and super hard languages that are less commonly taught or studied in the United States.
For each designated language, the list would have to state the minimum tested skill level for a Foreign Service member to count as proficient. It would also have to explain how to identify jobs where that language skill is essential to carrying out the mission.
For each critical foreign language designated pursuant to paragraph (1), the Secretary shall include information in the list describing— (A) minimum tested levels at which a member of the Service shall be considered to be proficient in the language; and (B) criteria for determining positions for which such critical foreign language capability is mission essential.
The Secretary would have to coordinate with other federal departments and agencies that maintain foreign-language skills, to the maximum extent practicable. The stated aims are to help agencies work together, avoid duplication and save taxpayer money; the text does not establish that those results would occur.
the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable, coordinate with the heads of other Federal departments and agencies that maintain foreign language capabilities, in order to promote interoperability, avoid duplication, and achieve cost savings to the taxpayer.
The bill recommends incorporating critical-language needs into career development, training and assignments. Suggested measures include National Foreign Affairs Training Center instruction; temporary noncareer appointments and bringing personnel back under existing authorities for temporary or increased staffing needs; and a reserve of rehired officers and other appropriately cleared people with critical-language skills who could be activated quickly during crises.
The Secretary should incorporate critical foreign language capability planning into the career development, training, and assignment processes under this chapter, including through— (A) the use of training at the National Foreign Affairs Training Center; (B) the use of limited noncareer appointments and recall and reappointment authorities under sections 308 and 309 to address temporary or surge requirements; and (C) the development of a surge reserve of rehired officers and other appropriately cleared individuals with critical foreign language capabilities who may be activated rapidly in response to crises.
The bill would amend section 702 of the Foreign Service Act to require policies on language teaching, testing and use to explicitly support preserving capabilities in the designated critical languages.
Section 702 (22 U.S.C. 4022) is amended by adding at the end the following: (c) Critical foreign language requirement In carrying out this section, the Secretary shall ensure that policies for the instruction, testing, and use of foreign languages explicitly support the preservation of capabilities with respect to critical foreign languages identified pursuant to section 701(h).
The Secretary of State would have to submit a report on the department’s critical-language capabilities to the House Foreign Affairs and Senate Foreign Relations committees by December 31, 2027. This is a fixed deadline, unlike the list’s recommended deadline measured from enactment.
Not later than December 31, 2027, the Secretary of State shall submit to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate a report on the Department of State’s critical language capabilities.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this subsection
The report’s suggested contents include staffing needs by regional and functional bureau, numbers of Foreign Service members meeting each critical language’s proficiency standard, criteria for jobs needing those skills, effects of staff shortages, and actions taken or planned to strengthen capabilities. It should also list every overseas Foreign Service job designated as requiring language skills to assess whether that requirement should continue. The contents provision uses “should,” although submitting the report is mandatory.
The report required by this subsection should include the following: (A) An assessment of the Department of State’s critical foreign language staffing requirements, by regional and functional bureau. (B) For each critical language, numbers of the Foreign Service meeting the minimum critical language proficiency standards, as well as the criteria for determining if a critical language is mission essential for a given position. (C) The impact of workforce shortages on the Department’s ability to meet mission-essential critical foreign language requirements. (D) Any actions taken or planned to strengthen critical foreign language capability in the Service. (E) A list of each Service position abroad that is language-designated in order to determine whether or not a continuing requirement for foreign language proficiency for such position is warranted.
The official-actions snapshot updated August 14, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on August 6, 2026. It does not establish the bill’s status after that snapshot.
Source snapshot updated 2026-08-14T14:08:29Z. 2026-08-06: Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. 2026-08-06: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-08-06. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not extend to other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish the absence of earmarks in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption or preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not extend to other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Aug 14, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI