PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Jul 14, 2014
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
International Science and Technology Cooperation Act of 2014 - Requires the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to establish a body under the National Science and Technology Council that has the responsibility of identifying and coordinating international science and technology cooperation that can strengthen U.S. science and technology enterprise, improve economic and national security, and support U.S. foreign policy goals.
Requires the body to be co-chaired by senior level officials from OSTP and the Department of State.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the body to: (1) coordinate interagency international science and technology cooperative research and training activities and partnerships supported or managed by federal agencies, (2) establish federal priorities and policies for aligning such international science and technology cooperative research and training activities and partnerships with the foreign policy goals of the United States, (3) identify opportunities for new international science and technology cooperative research and training partnerships that advance science and technology and U.S. foreign policy priorities, (4) solicit recommendations from non-federal science and technology stakeholders, and (5) identify broad issues that influence the ability of U.S. scientists and engineers to collaborate with foreign counterparts.
Requires the Director to report annually on the body's activities.
People & committees
Rep. Lipinski, Daniel [D-IL-3] · D–IL
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 Foreign Relations.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 346 - 41 (Roll no. 406). (text: CR H6149)
House roll call 406 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 346 - 41 (Roll no. 406).(text: CR H6149)
House roll call 406 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6168-6169)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5029.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6149-6150)
Mr. Smith (TX) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.5029 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.5029 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.5029 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.5029 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.