PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 6, 2007
Green Energy Education Act of 2007 - Authorizes the Secretary of Energy to contribute energy research and development funds to the National Science Foundation (NSF) for the Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship program to support graduate education related to such energy projects.
Authorizes the Secretary to contribute funds for advanced energy technology research and development for high performance buildings to the NSF for curriculum development to improve undergraduate or graduate interdisciplinary engineering and architecture education related to the design and construction of such buildings.
People & committees
Rep. McCaul, Michael T. [R-TX-10] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Star Print ordered on the bill.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 416 - 0 (Roll no. 432). (text: CR H6026)
House roll call 432 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 416 - 0 (Roll no. 432).(text: CR H6026)
House roll call 432 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6046)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1716.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6026-6027)
Mr. Lipinski moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 105.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science and Technology. H. Rept. 110-173.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science and Technology. H. Rept. 110-173.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended).
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Science and Technology.
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: 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.1716 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.1716 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.1716 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.1716 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.