PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 767.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 9, 2026
Less Bureaucracy, Better Foreign Medical Accreditation Act
This bill transfers specified functions relating to accreditation for foreign medical schools from the Department of Education (ED) to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Specifically, the bill transfers to HHS all the functions and authorities exercised by ED before the bill's effective date related to the National Committee on Foreign Medical Education and Accreditation. (This committee evaluates the standards of accreditation applied to foreign medical schools and determines the comparability of those standards to standards applied to U.S. medical schools. On November 18, 2025, ED announced an interagency agreement with HHS for HHS to provide subject matter expertise, coordinate meetings, and manage technology systems to assist ED in managing and overseeing this committee.)
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Additionally, the bill transfers to HHS all personnel and appropriations related to the functions that are transferred under this bill.
The bill outlines the authority of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) related to the functions that are transferred under this bill, including that OMB must ensure that this bill does not create a net increase in full-time equivalent employees at HHS or ED. Further, OMB must certify compliance with the bill to specified congressional committees.
The transfer of these functions does not affect any suits, proceedings, or applications for benefits, services, licenses, permits, certificates, or financial assistance that are pending on the date of this bill's enactment.
People & committees
Rep. Grothman, Glenn [R-WI-6] · R–WI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 767.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and Workforce. H. Rept. 119-870.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and Workforce. H. Rept. 119-870.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 20 - 16.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
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: Nov 6, 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.9605 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.9605 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.9605 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.9605 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.