Learning Opportunities With Creation of Open Source Textbooks (LOW COST) Act of 2014
Referred to the Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 10, 2014
Learning Opportunities With Creation of Open Source Textbooks (LOW COST) Act of 2014 - Requires the Director of the National Science Foundation (NSF) to develop high quality, college freshman-level, open source materials that: (1) contain, at minimum, a comprehensive set of textbooks or other educational materials covering topics in physics, chemistry, and calculus; (2) are posted on the Federal Open Source Material Website (Website); and (3) are free of copyright violations.
Requires the Director to establish and maintain the Website.
Requires materials on the Website to be made available free of charge. Allows those materials to be downloaded, redistributed, or revised by the public.
Directs the head of each federal agency that spends more than a specified amount in a fiscal year on scientific education or research to use at least 2% of those funds to collaborate with the heads of other such agencies or any federally funded research and development center to develop and implement procedures for checking the veracity, accuracy, and educational effectiveness of open source materials that are posted on the Website.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Research and Technology.
Referred to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, 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 Science, Space, and Technology, 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
Bill text & related measures
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: Mar 23, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.4455 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.4455 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.4455 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.4455 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.