PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Research and Development.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 6, 1998
Federal Research Investment Act - Calls for Federal funding levels for fundamental, scientific, and pre-competitive engineering research to be increased to equal approximately 2.6 percent of the total annual Federal budget. Authorizes appropriations for civilian research and development (R&D) within specified agencies for FY 1999 through 2010. Directs the President to include with the annual budget request a report concerning Federal R&D program funding, future R&D strategies and targets, and an analysis of funding levels across Federal agencies by funding methodology. Requires the Director of the Office of Science Technology Policy (OSTP) to enter in an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a comprehensive study to develop methods for evaluating federally-funded R&D programs. Requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), based on study results, to promulgate one or more alternative forms for Federal R&D performance goals. Permits an agency head to apply such an alternative form without further authorization by OMB. Requires agency heads carrying out R&D activities, upon updating a strategic plan, to describe the current and future use of methods for determining an acceptable level of R&D success as recommended by the study. Authorizes appropriations for the study. Requires: (1) the OMB Director, based upon program performance reports, to identify the civilian R&D program activities or components which do not meet an acceptable level of success; (2) an agency head to submit to the appropriate congressional committees a concise statement of the steps needed to terminate a program activity or component identified as being below the acceptable level of success for two consecutive fiscal years; (3) such a program to be terminated unless the Directors of OSTP and OMB and the agency head determine that it should be continued; and (4) the statement of termination to recommend disposition of unexpended and unobligated funds from terminated programs.
People & committees
Rep. Wilson, Heather [R-NM-1] · R–NM
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 Military Research and Development.
Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer Protection.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Finance and Hazardous Materials.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Power.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Forestry, Resource Conservation and Research.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans.
Referred to House Agriculture
Referred to House Resources
Referred to House National Security
Referred to House Commerce
Referred to the Committee on Science, and in addition to the Committees on Commerce, National Security, Resources, and Agriculture, 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 House Science
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jun 3, 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.4514 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.4514 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.4514 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.4514 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.