PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Oct 6, 1998
TABLE OF CONTENTS: Title I: Reading and Literacy Grants Title II: Amendments to Even Start Family Literacy Programs Title III: Repeals Title IV: Technical and Conforming Amendments Reading Excellence Act - Title I: Reading and Literacy Grants - Amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) to establish a new title II part C Reading and Literacy Grants program. (Sec. 101) Directs the Secretary of Education to make grants to State educational agencies (SEAs) to make subgrants for local reading improvement programs and tutorial assistance programs. Provides for peer review panel evaluation of SEA grant applications. Requires State establishment of a reading and literacy partnership as a condition for an SEA's receiving such a grant. Limits the portions of such grants which may be used for State administrative costs and for tutorial assistance subgrants. Requires SEAs that receive such grants to make competitive two-year local reading improvement subgrants to local educational agencies (LEAs) with: (1) at least one school that is identified for school improvement; (2) the largest, or second largest, number of children in comparison to all other LEAs in the State; or (3) the highest, or second highest, school-age child poverty rate, in comparison to all other LEAs in the State. Allows subgrantees to train, on a fee-for-service basis, personnel from schools or LEAs that are not subgrant recipients or beneficiaries, in the instructional practices based on scientifically-based reading research used by the recipient. Requires each SEA that receives such a grant to make at least one competitive tutorial assistance subgrant to LEAs with: (1) at least one school located in an empowerment zone or an enterprise community; (2) at least one school identified for school improvement; (3) the largest, or second largest, number of children in comparison to all other LEAs in the State; or (4) the highest, or second highest, school-age child poverty rate, in comparison to all other LEAs in the State. Sets forth authorized uses of such subgrants. Directs the Secretary to: (1) conduct a national assessment of programs under this Act; (2) receive recommendations from the peer review panel in developing the criteria for the assessment; and (3) report on the assessment to the appropriate congressional committees. Requires the National Institute for Literacy to disseminate information on reliable, replicable research on reading and on subgrantee projects that have proven effective. Requires each SEA that receives such a grant to: (1) evaluate subgrantees success; and (2) submit the findings of the evaluations and performance reports to the Secretary, who will submit a summary to the appropriate congressional committees. Authorizes appropriations for FY 1999 and 2000. Title II: Amendments to Even Start Family Literacy Programs - Amends ESEA to direct the Secretary to award competitive grants to States for the planning and implementation of statewide family literacy initiatives, including specified services. (Sec. 203) Requires grant recipients to: (1) provide technical assistance for the evaluation of subgrant recipient local programs; and (2) develop indicators of program quality. (Sec. 205) Directs the Secretary to do research through grant or contract into successful family literacy services to improve the quality of existing programs and to develop models for new programs. Revises provisions for the dissemination of information. Title III: Repeals - Repeals certain unfunded education programs under various Federal laws. (Sec. 301) Repeals the Community School Partnership Act (contained in the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994). Repeals specified provisions of the Educational Research, Development, Dissemination, and Improvement Act of 1994 for a teacher research dissemination demonstration program. Repeals provisions of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) for: (1) innovative elementary school transition projects; (2) the De Lugo territorial education improvement program; (3) extended time for learning and longer school year; and (4) territorial assistance. Repeals the Family and Community Endeavor Schools Act. Repeals specified provisions of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act for grants for the study, evaluation, and analysis of education systems in other nations. Title IV: Technical and Conforming Amendments - Makes technical and conforming amendments to various Federal laws.
People & committees
Rep. Goodling, William F. [R-PA-19] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
The committee substitute agreed to by Unanimous Consent.
Amendment SP 3740 agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent.
Amendment SP 3740 proposed by Senator Jeffords.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S11533-11539)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 404.
Committee on Labor and Human Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Jeffords with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 105-208.
Committee on Labor and Human Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Jeffords with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 105-208.
Committee on Labor and Human Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Committee on Labor and Human Resources. Hearings held.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Labor and Human 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 voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10386-10398)
Mr. Goodling moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 202.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and the Workforce. H. Rept. 105-348.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and the Workforce. H. Rept. 105-348.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1945-1946)
Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
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: Jul 21, 2025. 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.2614 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.2614 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.2614 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.2614 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.