PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 19, 2009
High-Quality Education Act of 2009 - Authorizes the Secretary of Education to award matching grants to states, or local educational agencies (LEAs) in states that do not receive such grants, to reduce the size of core curriculum classes in public elementary and secondary schools.
Requires such grants to be provided only to states or LEAs serving schools whose average core curriculum class size is greater than 18 students in kindergarten through grade 3, 22 students in grades 4 through 8, and 25 students in grades 9 through 12.
Requires grant funds to be used for: (1) constructing new classroom space; (2) hiring additional teachers; and (3) purchasing portable structures to replace administrative offices that are converted into classrooms.
Permits the Secretary to give grant priority to states or LEAs serving schools: (1) where over 17% of the students between age 4 and 18 are from impoverished families; or (2) whose average core curriculum class size is higher than the average core curriculum class size of schools served by other applicants.
People & committees
Rep. Meek, Kendrick B. [D-FL-17] · D–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Mar 23, 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.1649 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.1649 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.1649 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.1649 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.