PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 15, 2016
Partnerships for the Future Act of 2016
This bill directs the Department of Labor to establish a competitive grant pilot program to award grants to eligible entities for developing, offering, improving, or providing science, technology, education, and mathematics (STEM) education or career training programs for workers.
"Eligible entity" means one of the following in partnership with employers or an association of employers:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
a junior or community college;
a postsecondary vocational institution;
a four-year public institution of higher education that offers two-year degrees, will use provided funds for activities at the certificate and associate degree levels, and is not reasonably close to a community college;
a tribal college or university;
at Labor's discretion, a private, not-for-profit, two-year institution of higher education in a specified U.S. territory or possession; or
a consortium of any such entities.
An eligible entity may partner with an adult education provider or institution of higher education, an entity with a demonstrated record of successfully meeting student and family needs, or a joint labor-management partnership.
The bill sets forth criteria and priorities for awarding grants.
Grants shall be used for:
the development, offering, improvement, or provision of STEM academic programs or training programs that provide relevant job training for skilled occupations that will meet the needs of employers in in-demand industry sectors;
the development and implementation of policies and programs to expand opportunities for students to earn a recognized postsecondary STEM credential or degree in such sectors and in-demand occupations;
the creation of workforce programs that provide a sequence of education and occupational training that leads to a recognized postsecondary STEM credential or degree; and/or
the support of regional or national in-demand industry sectors to develop skills consortia that will identify pressing workforce needs and develop solutions.
People & committees
Rep. Veasey, Marc A. [D-TX-33] · D–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.6064 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.6064 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.6064 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.6064 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.