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. Donalds, Byron [R-FL-19] · R–FL
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.
Source last updated: Sep 29, 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.10430 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.10430 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.10430 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.10430 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.
This bill would create a federal undergraduate space academy within NASA to provide technical education, leadership training, and preparation for officer appointments or civil-service careers. Its permanent campus would have to be in Florida. NASA would consider a presidential commission’s recommendations when planning the academy, but those recommendations could not override the required Florida location.
(a) In general There is established, as an academy of the United States within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the United States Space Academy, which shall provide undergraduate technical education, leadership development, and commissioning or civil-service preparation pathways for future leaders of the space domain.
(b) Relationship to Commission The Administrator shall, in developing the governance, curriculum, and implementation plan for the Academy, consider the recommendations of the Commission, except that no recommendation of the Commission may supersede the site-selection requirement of section 5.
(a) In general The permanent campus of the Academy shall be located within the State of Florida.
The proposed law would be called the Securing The Advancement of Rising Spacefarers Act of 2026, or the STARS Act of 2026.
This Act may be cited as the Securing The Advancement of Rising Spacefarers Act of 2026 or the STARS Act of 2026.
The bill’s findings present a trained space workforce as important to national security and economic competitiveness. They argue that a Florida campus would give students access to active launch and military facilities. These are the bill’s stated reasons for the proposal, rather than demonstrated results of establishing the academy.
Congress finds the following: (1) Space is a vital domain for the national security, economic competitiveness, and technological leadership of the United States, and the Nation's continued dominance in space depends on a pipeline of highly trained astronauts, engineers, operators, and civil servants.
(10) Locating the Space Academy in Florida would allow cadets to train in direct proximity to operational launch, range, and Space Force facilities, providing a level of real-world immersion unavailable at any other location in the United States.
The NASA Administrator would develop the academy’s governance, curriculum, and implementation plan while considering recommendations from the presidential commission identified in the bill. The commission’s recommendations could not override the location requirements.
(2) Administrator The term Administrator means the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (3) Commission The term Commission means the Presidential Commission on the United States Space Academy established by Executive Order of August 28, 2026.
(b) Relationship to Commission The Administrator shall, in developing the governance, curriculum, and implementation plan for the Academy, consider the recommendations of the Commission, except that no recommendation of the Commission may supersede the site-selection requirement of section 5.
The permanent campus would have to be in Florida, and the NASA Administrator would have to consult Florida’s governor when carrying out the location requirements.
(a) In general The permanent campus of the Academy shall be located within the State of Florida.
(c) Coordination with State of Florida The Administrator shall consult with the Governor of Florida in carrying out this section.
Within Florida, NASA would have to prioritize sites near Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, or sites with existing or planned reasonable access to them. Priority would also apply to sites allowing or planning direct academic and operational partnerships with Space Launch Delta 45 and Patrick Space Force Base.
(b) Site selection criteria In selecting the specific site within the State of Florida, the Administrator shall give priority to sites that— (1) are in reasonable proximity to, or have or plan to have reasonable access to, the Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral Space Force Station; (2) currently allow for, or plan for, direct academic and operational partnership with Space Launch Delta 45 and Patrick Space Force Base;
Other site priorities would be room for future growth in students, faculty, and supporting facilities, and use of existing federal, state, or university-owned land to minimize acquisition costs.
In selecting the specific site within the State of Florida, the Administrator shall give priority to sites that—
(3) can accommodate the future growth of the Academy's cadet corps, faculty, and supporting infrastructure; and (4) leverage existing Federal, State, or university-owned land to minimize acquisition costs within the State of Florida.
Within 180 days after enactment, the NASA Administrator would have to report to the named Senate and House committees. The report would include a proposed final Florida site, academic and leadership curriculum, graduate service obligations, estimated construction and operating costs, and an implementation timeline. The reporting requirement calls for proposed service obligations; it does not itself specify what service graduates must perform.
Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives a report that includes— (1) a proposed final site for the Academy within the State of Florida; (2) a proposed academic and leadership curriculum; (3) proposed service obligations for graduates; (4) an estimated construction and operational budget; and (5) an implementation timeline.
The bill would authorize Congress to provide as much funding as necessary to carry out the legislation, including campus land acquisition, design, and construction. This is permission for future appropriations, not an appropriation that itself provides money, and it sets no dollar amount.
There is authorized to be appropriated to the Administrator such sums as may be necessary to carry out this Act, including for site acquisition, design, and construction of the Academy's permanent campus.
The proposed law would take effect on the date it is enacted.
This Act shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 29, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology on September 16, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-29T16:46:52Z. 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 provision unrelated to establishing, locating, or implementing the space academy was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not cover 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 directed spending appropriation was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. The funding authorization and geographic requirement do not by themselves establish a formal earmark. This conclusion is limited to this version and does not cover accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The supplied introduced text contains a geographic preference central to the bill’s academy policy. Classification as a targeted benefit does not establish improper purpose or economic results.
Florida would receive exclusive eligibility to host the academy’s permanent campus. This is a state-specific preference within the bill’s main policy, reinforced by preventing commission recommendations from overriding the location requirement.
(a) In general The permanent campus of the Academy shall be located within the State of Florida.
no recommendation of the Commission may supersede the site-selection requirement of section 5.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 29, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI