PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 29, 2007
Student Protection Act - Requires that by FY2010 states have in effect laws and policies requiring an individual educator who has reason to believe that another educator has committed an act of sexual misconduct against a student to report such act to the state as quickly as possible, within 48 hours whenever possible, or else face discipline.
Requires each state to have a single, statewide commission for receiving such reports that: (1) establishes policies for investigating and reporting such allegations; and (2) has a toll-free number that can be used to make anonymous allegations.
Directs states to report to the Secretary of Education the details of each act of sexual misconduct against a student for which an educator has been punished, including details regarding the educator and the punishment levied.
Authorizes the Secretary to penalize noncompliant states by reducing their funding under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 by up to 5%.
Directs the Secretary to maintain a national database that contains, at a minimum, the details this Act requires each state to report to the Secretary.
People & committees
Rep. Putnam, Adam H. [R-FL-12] · 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 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.
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.1829 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.1829 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.1829 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.1829 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.