PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.House Committee on Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Dec. 8, 2006.
Congressional Research Service
Version 28 · Reported to House without amendment, Part I · Jul 28, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Minority Serving Institution Digital and Wireless Technology Opportunity Act of 2005 - Amends the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 to direct the Secretary of Commerce to establish a Minority Serving Institution Digital and Wireless Technology Opportunity Program to assist eligible educational institutions in acquiring, and augmenting use of, digital and wireless networking technologies to improve the quality and delivery of educational services at such institutions. Defines as eligible institutions: (1) historically Black colleges or universities, (2) a Hispanic-, Alaskan Native-, or Native Hawaiian-serving institution; (3) a tribally controlled college or university; or (4) an institution with a sufficient enrollment of needy students as defined under the Higher Education Act of 1965. Outlines authorized assistance activities. Directs the Under Secretary of Commerce for Technology to: (1) establish an advisory council to advise on the best approaches toward maximum Program participation by eligible institutions; and (2) ensure that grant awards are made to all types of eligible institutions.
Provides a matching funds requirement. Limits grant awards to $2.5 million per institution. Requires: (1) each grant recipient to report annually to the Under Secretary on grant uses; (2) the National Academy of Public Administration to conduct periodic assessments (every three years) of the grant program; and (3) the Under Secretary to transmit such assessments to Congress, along with plans to implement any recommendations of the Academy.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes appropriations for FY2006-FY2010.
People & committees
Rep. Forbes, J. Randy [R-VA-4] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
House Committee on Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Dec. 8, 2006.
House Committee on Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Nov. 17, 2006.
House Committee on Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Sept. 29, 2006.
House Committee on Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Sept. 11, 2006.
House Committee on Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than June 30, 2006.
House Committee on Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than May 26, 2006.
House Committee on Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than March 31, 2006.
House Committee on Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than March 3, 2006.
House Committee on Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Feb. 3, 2006.
House Committee on Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Dec. 31, 2005.
House Committee on Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Dec. 17, 2005.
House Committee on Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Nov. 18, 2005.
House Committee on Education and the Workforce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Sept. 30, 2005.
Reported by the Committee on Science. H. Rept. 109-211, Part I.
Reported by the Committee on Science. H. Rept. 109-211, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness.
Referred to the Committee on Science, 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, 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, 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
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Mar 23, 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.921 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.921 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.921 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.921 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.