PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Commodity Markets, Digital Assets, and Rural Development.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 6, 2025
Strengthening Rural Cooperatives and Communities Act
This bill reauthorizes through FY2029 and modifies the Rural Cooperative Development Grant (RCDG) Program. This Department of Agriculture (USDA) program provides grants to nonprofit institutions to help individuals and businesses start, expand, or improve rural cooperatives and other mutually-owned businesses through Rural Cooperative Development Centers.
USDA must give preference to grants that commit to providing technical assistance and other services to socially vulnerable, underserved, or distressed communities. Under current law, USDA must give preference to underserved and economically distressed areas in rural areas.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
In addition, USDA may give an additional preference to applications that commit to providing a 25% matching contribution for the center with private funds and in-kind contributions. Specifically, USDA may award the maximum points in application scoring criteria to applicants that satisfy this requirement.
Under the bill, cooperative development includes activities (e.g., outreach, education, training, and technical assistance) to support the startup, expansion, or ongoing sustainability of new and existing cooperatives. Current law does not define cooperative development.
The bill directs the RCDG interagency working group to submit an annual report to Congress on its activities.
Finally, the program currently includes cooperative research program requirements to collect data on the effects of all types of cooperatives on the national economy. Under the bill, USDA must analyze the data resulting from the research and include the data and analysis in the annual report to Congress.
People & committees
Rep. Riley, Josh [D-NY-19] · D–NY
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 Commodity Markets, Digital Assets, and Rural Development.
Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 30, 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.1951 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.1951 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.1951 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.1951 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 · 2025-03-06 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.
The proposed Strengthening Rural Cooperatives and Communities Act would update rural cooperative development grants. It defines cooperative development as help to start, expand, or sustain cooperatives through outreach, education, training, and technical assistance. It would change the program’s listed years to 2025–2029 and revise a service-commitment criterion to cover socially vulnerable, underserved, or distressed communities.
This Act may be cited as the Strengthening Rural Cooperatives and Communities Act.
The term cooperative development means activities including outreach, education, training, and technical assistance, to support the startup, expansion, or ongoing sustainability of new and existing cooperatives.
(D) commit to providing technical assistance and other services to socially vulnerable, underserved, or distressed communities;
(7) in paragraph (13), by striking 2014 through 2023 and inserting 2025 through 2029.
The bill would add a definition of cooperative development that covers both new and existing cooperatives. Its examples include outreach, education, training, and technical assistance supporting their startup, expansion, or continued operation.
(C) Cooperative development The term cooperative development means activities including outreach, education, training, and technical assistance, to support the startup, expansion, or ongoing sustainability of new and existing cooperatives.
The bill would require maximum scoring points for applicants satisfying existing paragraph (5)(F). That paragraph is not reproduced, so the supplied text does not identify which applicants qualify or fully explain how this instruction fits the existing scoring rules.
(2) in paragraph (4), by inserting , and award maximum points in scoring criteria to applicants that satisfy the requirements of paragraph (5)(F), before if the plan;
The bill would replace paragraph (5)(D) with a commitment to provide technical assistance and other services to socially vulnerable, underserved, or distressed communities. The previous criterion is not supplied, so the text does not establish how much this changes existing coverage.
(3) in paragraph (5), by striking subparagraph (D) and inserting the following: (D) commit to providing technical assistance and other services to socially vulnerable, underserved, or distressed communities;
The bill would remove an introductory condition requiring the Secretary to determine that an action is in the program’s best interest. The rest of paragraph (6)(B) is not supplied, so the affected action and the amendment’s full practical effect cannot be determined from this text.
(4) in paragraph (6)(B), by striking If the Secretary determines it to be in the best interest of the program, the and inserting The;
The Secretary would have to analyze data from the research addressed in existing paragraph (10) and include both the data and analysis in the interagency working group’s annual report. The underlying research requirements are not reproduced.
(5) in paragraph (10), by adding at the end the following: The Secretary shall analyze the data resulting from the research, and include the data and the analysis in the annual report submitted by the interagency working group under paragraph (12).;
The interagency working group would have to report its activities to Congress within 180 days after enactment of the reporting requirement and annually thereafter.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this sentence and annually thereafter, the interagency working group shall submit to the Congress a report describing the activities carried out by the working group.
The reauthorization section would replace “2014 through 2023” with “2025 through 2029” in existing paragraph (13). The amendment does not reproduce that paragraph’s funding terms, so this change alone does not establish a funding amount, actual spending, or when the program itself would terminate.
2. Reauthorization of rural cooperative development grants
(7) in paragraph (13), by striking 2014 through 2023 and inserting 2025 through 2029.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated June 30, 2026, records introduction and referral to the House Committee on Agriculture on March 6, 2025, followed by referral to the Subcommittee on Commodity Markets, Digital Assets, and Rural Development on March 28, 2025. This snapshot does not establish passage or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2026-06-30T08:06:22Z. 2025-03-28: Referred to the Subcommittee on Commodity Markets, Digital Assets, and Rural Development. 2025-03-06: Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture. 2025-03-06: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-03-06. 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 rural cooperative development grants was identified in the complete supplied introduced version. 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 congressionally directed spending for a particular recipient or place was identified in the complete supplied introduced version. This does not establish the absence of earmarks in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Evidence is limited
The complete introduced text contains a scoring preference whose eligibility requirements are incorporated from an unsupplied statutory provision. The evidence is insufficient to determine whether it creates a materially narrow benefit.
Applicants meeting existing paragraph (5)(F) would receive maximum points in scoring criteria. This is a possible targeted preference within the grant program, but the qualifying requirements are not reproduced, so the beneficiary group and narrowness of the preference cannot be assessed.
(2) in paragraph (4), by inserting , and award maximum points in scoring criteria to applicants that satisfy the requirements of paragraph (5)(F), before if the plan;
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Jun 30, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI