PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Carter, Troy A. [D-LA-2] · D–LA
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 Science, Space, and Technology.
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: Oct 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.10424 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.10424 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.10424 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.10424 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 · 2026-09-16 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 bill would require the National Science Foundation to create grants that help specified colleges and universities improve their research facilities. Eligible institutions would include historically Black colleges, Hispanic-serving institutions, tribal colleges, and other listed groups. Schools could use the grants for building improvements, research equipment, maintenance, and staff costs directly connected to research activities.
The Director of the National Science Foundation shall establish a grant program to provide financial assistance to institutions of higher education specified in subsection (d) to aid such institutions in the development and enhancement of research facilities in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, medical matters, and other research and development matters.
(1) Historically Black Colleges and Universities. (2) Hispanic-serving institutions. (3) Tribal colleges.
(1) Existing building infrastructure improvements or enhancements. (2) Materials and equipment needed to conduct or produce research. (3) Infrastructure needs to maintain building infrastructure. (4) Personnel costs directly associated with the planning, management, maintenance, or operation of research related activities.
Section 1 would name the legislation the Equity in Research Act.
This Act may be cited as the Equity in Research Act.
Eligibility would cover ten listed categories of colleges and universities: historically Black; Hispanic-serving; tribal; Native Hawaiian-serving; predominantly Black; Native American-serving, nontribal; Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-serving; minority-serving; 1890 land-grant universities; and 1994 land-grant institutions.
(d) Institutions of higher education specified The institutions of higher education specified in this subsection are the following: (1) Historically Black Colleges and Universities. (2) Hispanic-serving institutions. (3) Tribal colleges. (4) Native Hawaiian-serving institutions. (5) Predominantly Black institutions. (6) Native American-serving, nontribal institutions. (7) Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-serving institutions. (8) Minority-serving institutions. (9) 1890’s Land Grant Universities. (10) 1994 Land Grant institutions.
Recipients could spend grants on improvements to existing buildings, research materials and equipment, infrastructure maintenance needs, and personnel directly involved in planning, managing, maintaining, or operating research activities. These uses would have to further the program's research-facility development and enhancement purpose.
to aid such institutions in the development and enhancement of research facilities in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, medical matters, and other research and development matters.
(b) Uses Institutions of higher education specified in subsection (d) that receive grants from the National Science Foundation may use such grants for the following in furtherance of the purpose described in subsection (a): (1) Existing building infrastructure improvements or enhancements. (2) Materials and equipment needed to conduct or produce research. (3) Infrastructure needs to maintain building infrastructure. (4) Personnel costs directly associated with the planning, management, maintenance, or operation of research related activities.
The National Science Foundation Director could award an eligible institution between $1 million and $5 million, choosing the amount the Director considers appropriate. This language would permit awards without guaranteeing one to every eligible institution.
(c) Amounts The Director of the National Science Foundation may make a grant to an institution of higher education specified in subsection (d) in an amount between $1,000,000 and $5,000,000, as determined appropriate by the Director.
The bill would authorize Congress to provide $50 million for fiscal year 2027 and each subsequent fiscal year for the program, with no final funding year specified. An authorization allows funding to be appropriated; it does not itself supply that money.
(e) Authorization of appropriations There is authorized to be appropriated to the Director of the National Science Foundation $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2027 and each subsequent fiscal year to carry out this section.
The supplied action snapshot, updated October 14, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology on September 16, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-14T08:05:34Z. 2026-09-16: Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. 2026-09-16: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-16. 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 was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish what appears 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 earmark was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. A general program authorization is not itself an earmark. This conclusion is limited to that version; formal earmark status cannot be fully assessed without accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No separate narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential exception was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. The program's intended beneficiary categories alone do not warrant a finding. 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: Oct 14, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI