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 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · May 23, 2005
Manufacturing Technology Competitiveness Act of 2005 - (Sec. 2) Directs the President to establish or designate an Interagency Committee (IC) to plan and coordinate federal efforts in manufacturing research and development, with an Advisory Committee from the non-federal sector. Requires the IC to: (1) include representatives from the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the Science and Technology Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, and any other agency that the President may designate; and (2) have its Chair designated by the Director of OSTP.
(Sec. 3) Amends the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act to establish a pilot program of collaborative manufacturing research grants.
(Sec. 4) Requires the NIST Director to establish a program of manufacturing sciences research fellowships at the postdoctoral and the senior, established researcher levels.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 5) Revises requirements for evaluation of Centers under the NIST Manufacturing Extension Partnership program.
Allows acceptance of funds for such Centers from other federal agencies and the private sector, without such funds being considered part of the federal share.
Requires the NIST Director to establish, within the Manufacturing Extension Partnership program, a program of competitive grant awards, among Centers or consortia of Centers, to develop projects to solve new or emerging manufacturing problems.
(Sec. 6) Authorizes appropriations for FY2006-2008 to the Secretary of Commerce for the following NIST programs: (1) scientific and technical research and services laboratory activities; (2) the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (under the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980); and (3) construction and maintenance of facilities.
Reserves specified amounts of such FY 2006 funding for NIST laboratory activities for: (1) electronics and electrical engineering; (2) manufacturing engineering; (3) chemical science and technology; (4) physics; (5) material science and engineering; (6) building and fire research; (7) computer science and applied mathematics; (8) technical assistance; (9) research support activities; (10) the Center for Neutron Research; and (11) the National Nanomanufacturing and Nanometrology Facility.
Directs the Secretary to report to Congress on: (1) impacts of the possible elimination of the Advanced Technology Program on NIST laboratory programs; and (2) how the Department of Commerce plans to absorb the loss of Advanced Technology Program funds to NIST laboratory programs, or otherwise mitigate the effects of this loss on its programs and personnel.
(Sec. 7) Directs the Secretary, as part of Teacher Science and Technology Enhancement Institute program, to carry out a program of standards education grants to develop higher education curricula on the role of standards in engineering, business, science, and economics. Authorizes appropriations for FY2006-2008 to the Secretary for the Teacher Science and Technology Enhancement Institute program of NIST.
(Sec. 8) Authorizes appropriations for FY2006-2008 to the Secretary for the following NIST programs: (1) Manufacturing Extension Partnership (through the Secretary or other appropriate federal agencies); (2) Collaborative Manufacturing Research Pilot Grants; and (3) Manufacturing Fellowships.
(Sec. 9) Authorizes appropriations for FY2006-2008 to the Director of the National Science Foundation for the Advanced Technological Education program under the Scientific and Advanced Technology Act of 1992.
People & committees
Rep. Ehlers, Vernon J. [R-MI-3] · R–MI
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 passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 394 - 24 (Roll no. 485).
House roll call 485 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 394 - 24 (Roll no. 485).
House roll call 485 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by recorded vote: 196 - 226 (Roll no. 484).
House roll call 484 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H8215)
Floor summary: DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Honda motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment which authorizes $140 million for fiscal year 2006 for the Advanced Technology Program. Of that amount, $40 million shall be for new awards.
Mr. Honda moved to recommit with instructions to Science, Space and Technology. (consideration: CR H8214; text: CR H8214)
The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H8214)
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 250.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chair announced that the unfinished business was the question of adoption of amendments which had been debated earlier and on which further proceedings had been postponed.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Udall (CO) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Udall (CO) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 451, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Udall (CO) amendment.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Larson (CT) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Boehlert demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 451, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Larson (CT) amendment.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Jackson-Lee (TX) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Ms. Jackson-Lee (TX) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 451, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson-Lee (TX) amendment.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 451, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Gordon amendment.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 451, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Boehlert amendment.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 250.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Shelley Moore Capito to act as Chairwoman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 451 and Rule XVIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 250 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Science now printed in the bill. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 451. (consideration: CR H8182-8189, H8198-8216; text of measure as report in House: CR H8204-8206)
Rule H. Res. 451 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 451 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 250 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Science now printed in the bill. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 49.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science. H. Rept. 109-92.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science. H. Rept. 109-92.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards.
Referred to the House Committee on Science.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E32)
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.250 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.250 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.250 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.250 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.