PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 7, 1997
Teacher Investment Act - Amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to establish the Education Scholars Block Grant Program. Authorizes appropriations. Authorizes the Secretary of Education to award such grants to States according to an allotment formula. Requires the use of such grant funds to provide scholarships to individuals who: (1) have completed at least half of the academic credit requirements for graduation from an institution of higher education with a bachelor's degree, or with a graduate degree that prepares the individual for licensure or certification as an elementary school or secondary school teacher; (2) are admitted to or enrolled in an institution of higher education; (3) have demonstrated outstanding academic achievement while enrolled in an institution of higher education; and (4) are committed to becoming or remaining elementary school or secondary school teachers. Requires States to determine the scholarship period, but prohibits a scholarship recipient from receiving a scholarship award for more than two years of study at any institution of higher education. Sets forth requirements for: (1) agreements between the Secretary and State educational agencies (SEAs) desiring to participate in the scholarship program; and (2) SEA establishment of criteria for selection of education scholars. Requires an SEA to provide at least 75 percent of the scholarships to undergraduates and not more than 25 percent to graduate students. Limits individual scholarship awards to not more than $5,000 for an academic year of study. Requires each scholarship recipient to agree to: (1) teach for a period of two years as an elementary school or secondary school teacher in the State, within the two-year period after completing the education for which the scholarship was awarded; or (2) repay all or part of the scholarship award in the event of noncompliance, with specified exceptions. Excludes such scholarships from any needs analysis relating to other Federal education assistance.
People & committees
Sen. Frist, William H. [R-TN] · R–TN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S10477-10478)
Introduced in Senate
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 21, 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 S.1261 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 S.1261 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 S.1261 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 S.1261 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.