PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Mar 30, 2004
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on March 23, 2004. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
ROTC and Military Recruiter Equal Access to Campus Act of 2004 - Amends Federal armed forces provisions to direct the Secretary to annually request, from each institution of higher education that has students participating at that institution in a Senior ROTC program during that academic year, a certification that the institution will, during the next academic year: (1) permit the Secretary of each military department to maintain a unit of the Senior ROTC at that institution, should the department Secretary elect to maintain such a unit; and (2) if the department Secretary elects not to maintain such a unit, permit a student of that institution to enroll in a Senior ROTC unit at another institution.
Denies the provision of funds made available for certain Federal departments and agencies to institutions of higher education unless military recruiters are provided access to campuses at such institutions that is at least equal in quality and scope to the access to campuses and students that is provided to any other employer. Adds the Department of Homeland Security, the National Nuclear Security Administration, and the Central Intelligence Agency to the list of Federal departments and agencies whose funds will be denied to postsecondary schools that prevent ROTC access or military recruiting. Codifies under Federal armed forces law a provision of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2000 which excludes from such funding prohibition any amounts provided solely for student financial assistance, related administrative costs, or costs associated with attendance.
People & committees
Rep. Rogers, Mike D. [R-AL-3] · R–AL
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 Armed Services.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 343 - 81 (Roll no. 101). (text: CR H1703-1704)
House roll call 101 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 343 - 81 (Roll no. 101).(text: CR H1703-1704)
House roll call 101 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with five minutes of debate on the Abercrombie motion to recommit with instructions.
Mr. Abercrombie moved to recommit with instructions to Armed Services. (consideration: CR H1710-1711; text: CR H1710)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 3966.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3966 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is closed to amendments.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 580. (consideration: CR H1702-1712; text as reported in House: CR H1702-1703)
Rule H. Res. 580 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 580 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3966 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is closed to amendments.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 256.
Committee on Education and the Workforce discharged. (consideration: CR 3/24/2004 H1483)
Committee on Education and the Workforce discharged.(consideration: CR 3/24/2004 H1483)
House Committee on Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than March 23, 2004.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Armed Services. H. Rept. 108-443, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Armed Services. H. Rept. 108-443, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, 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 Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, 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 Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, 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: 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.3966 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.3966 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.3966 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.3966 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.