PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Schweikert, David [R-AZ-1] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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: Sep 11, 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.10288 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.10288 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.10288 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.10288 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 · 2026-09-03 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 Rural Broadband Modernization Act would require projects seeking ReConnect loans or grants to offer internet speeds of at least 100 megabits per second for downloads and 20 for uploads. It would also prohibit rejecting or giving lower preference to applications because of the technology used, including satellite delivery, while retaining the speed requirement.
This Act may be cited as the Rural Broadband Modernization Act.
to be eligible for a loan or grant under the program, a project must provide broadband with a transmission capacity of at least 100 Mbps downstream and 20 Mbps upstream
an application for a loan or grant under the program shall not be denied or given lesser preference on the basis of the kind of technology to be used to provide broadband, or on the basis of whether broadband is to be provided through a terrestrial, non-terrestrial, or low-Earth orbit satellite system
Section 2 would add a minimum transmission-capacity requirement to ReConnect loan and grant eligibility: 100 megabits per second downstream, meaning downloads, and 20 upstream, meaning uploads.
Availability of ReConnect program assistance without regard to technology used to provide broadband service
Section 779 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Public Law 115–141) is amended by striking the period at the end and inserting Provided further, That to be eligible for a loan or grant under the program, a project must provide broadband with a transmission capacity of at least 100 Mbps downstream and 20 Mbps upstream
Applications could not be rejected or given lower preference because of their broadband technology or their use of ground-based, non-ground-based, or low-Earth orbit satellite systems. This restriction would not itself guarantee an award.
an application for a loan or grant under the program shall not be denied or given lesser preference on the basis of the kind of technology to be used to provide broadband, or on the basis of whether broadband is to be provided through a terrestrial, non-terrestrial, or low-Earth orbit satellite system
The proposal would also make section 601(e)(3) of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 apply to ReConnect. The supplied text does not reproduce that provision, so its effect cannot be explained from this bundle.
section 601(e)(3) of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 shall apply to the program
Within 30 days after each program award, the Secretary would have to publish a report stating how many locations the award would serve and what broadband technology it would use.
within 30 days after an award is made under the program, the Secretary shall make available to the public a report on the number of locations to be served and the kind of technology to be used to provide broadband, through use of the award
When a project is completed, the Secretary would have to publish the amount of assistance actually paid out and the number of locations where the project made broadband service available.
on completion of a project, the Secretary shall make available to the public a report on the amount of assistance disbursed for the project and the number of locations at which broadband service was made available through the project
The Secretary of Agriculture would have to issue final implementing regulations within 180 days after section 2 is enacted. That deadline depends on enactment; it is not a fixed calendar date.
Within 180 days after the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary of Agriculture shall issue final regulations to implement the amendments made by this section.
The supplied September 11, 2026 source snapshot records introduction in the House on September 3, 2026, and referral that day to the Agriculture and Energy and Commerce Committees for provisions within their respective jurisdictions.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-11T15:48:53Z.
2026-09-03: Introduced in House
2026-09-03: Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-03. 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 rider attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in 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 absence in other versions or accompanying materials, or resolve formal earmark status beyond this source set.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential benefit was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. Equal access to program consideration does not by itself constitute preferential treatment. This conclusion is limited to this version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 11, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI