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 · Jul 29, 2015
Restructuring Underutilized Resources for Advancing Learning Act or the RURAL Act
This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow a refundable tax credit of: (1) $1,000 for teachers in schools in rural or high-poverty areas; (2) $2,000 for such teachers who are certified by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards; or (3) $2,000 for eligible school administrators in rural schools.
This bill also amends the Department of Education Organization Act to establish the Office of Rural Education Policy to, among other activities: (1) advise the Department of Education (ED) on matters related to the characteristics and needs of rural schools; (2) establish and maintain a clearinghouse for information related to rural schools; and (3) provide technical assistance to support activities related to improving education in rural areas.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
ED must prepare, and make publicly available, impact analyses of rules and regulations significantly affecting rural schools.
In addition, the bill: (1) authorizes ED to award competitive grants to eligible partnerships, with dedicated funding for partnerships serving rural schools, to implement and evaluate the results of technology-based learning practices, strategies, tools, or courses; and (2) amends the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act to establish and authorize through FY2020 a competitive grant program for eligible entities to establish, expand, or improve expanded learning time and after-school programs in rural areas.
The bill amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) to require ED to provide outreach and technical assistance for grant programs under that Act.
Rural agencies may submit consolidated plans under ESEA for covered programs.
People & committees
Rep. Loebsack, David [D-IA-2] · D–IA
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 Committee on Education and the Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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.3369 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.3369 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.3369 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.3369 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.