PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 19, 1998
Air Force Science and Technology Reinvigoration Act - Expresses the sense of the Congress that: (1) not less than two and one-half percent of the funds available for obligation by the Air Force should be dedicated to science and technology; (2) management and funding for science and technology by the Air Force should be separate from management and funding for acquisition; (3) not less than 15 percent of science and technology funds available for obligation by the Air Force should be invested in new technology areas, including critical information technology programs, for the next five years; (4) the Air Force should increase the number of Air Force officers and civilian employees holding doctorate degrees in technical fields and the number and variety of technical degrees at the master's level granted to Air Force officers and civilian employees from both the Air Force Institute of Technology and civilian universities; and (5) a concentrated effort should be made to eliminate five percent of science and technology programs each year, with funds from the discontinued programs used for new science and technology programs. Makes amendments relating to science and technology functions of the Department of the Air Force, including to: (1) make research and development a separate function of the Secretary of the Air Force, (currently included as an equipping function of the Secretary); (2) make the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force solely responsible for research and development functions within the Office of the Secretary and the Air Staff; (3) establish in the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force an Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Science and Technology to be responsible for the overall supervision of science and technology functions of the Department of the Air Force; and (4) establish within the Air Staff a Deputy Chief of Staff for Science and Technology. Directs the Secretary of the Air Force to enter into a contract with the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences to study the technology base of the Air Force. Requires such study to: (1) recommend the minimum requirements to maintain a technology base that is sufficient, based on both historical developments and future projections, to project superiority in air and space weapons systems and information technology; (2) address the effects on national defense and civilian aerospace industries and information technology by reducing funding below the minimum level of two and one- half percent; and (3) recommend the appropriate level of staff holding baccalaureate, masters, and doctorate degrees, and the optimal ratio of civilian and military staff holding such degrees, to ensure that science and technology functions of the Air Force remain vital.
People & committees
Rep. Hall, Tony P. [D-OH-3] · D–OH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Referred to the House Committee on National Security.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E900-903)
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: Aug 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.3894 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.3894 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.3894 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.3894 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.