PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · May 19, 2015
Research and Development Efficiency Act
Requires the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to establish a working group under the authority of the National Science and Technology Council, to include the Office of Management and Budget, to be responsible for reviewing federal regulations affecting research and research universities and making recommendations on how to: (1) harmonize, streamline, and eliminate duplicative federal regulations and reporting requirements; (2) minimize the regulatory burden on U.S. institutions of higher education performing federally funded research while maintaining accountability for federal tax dollars; and (3) identify and update specific regulations to refocus on performance-based goals rather than on process while still meeting the desired outcome.
Instructs the working group to take into account input and recommendations from non-federal stakeholders, including researchers, institutions of higher education, industry, and others with a stake in ensuring effectiveness, efficiency, and accountability in the performance of scientific research.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires OSTP to report to Congress annually on the steps taken to carry out the working group's recommendations.
People & committees
Rep. Comstock, Barbara [R-VA-10] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H3365)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H3365)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1119.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3365-3366)
Mr. Smith (TX) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 86.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. H. Rept. 114-121.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. H. Rept. 114-121.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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 currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 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.1119 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.1119 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.1119 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.1119 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.