PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Research and Technology.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 24, 2016
University Regulation Streamlining and Harmonization Act of 2016
This bill directs the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to establish a Research Policy Board to review proposed federal regulations, as well as major policies and guidance governing the conduct of scientific and engineering research, at specified research institutions.
The President shall appoint an Associate Administrator for the Academic Research Enterprise from within the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, who shall serve as a liaison between such office and the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
OMB shall exempt prime grant-receiving institutions from the monitoring of a subrecipient's single audit of institutional systems and business practices if certain circumstances exist. A single audit is an audit of a non-federal entity that includes its financial statements and federal awards.
The threshold for purchases by research institutions using federal grant funds without requiring competitive quotations shall be at least $10,000.
The OSTP shall establish a working group within the National Science and Technology Council to coordinate federal research funding agency policies in developing a central database of researcher information for research institutions to use when applying for research grants from federal scientific funding agencies.
OMB shall periodically review estimates of the hours spent by research institutions in meeting the burdens imposed by federal research funding agencies under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
The America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 is amended to require the interagency public access committee to examine the procedures of federal science agencies in furnishing public access to the results of federally funded research and identify methods for reducing the burdens of compliance placed on those affected by agency public access policies.
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.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Research and Technology.
Referred to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 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 Oversight and Government Reform, 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 Oversight and Government Reform, 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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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.5583 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.5583 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.5583 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.5583 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.