PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S4194-4195)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 25, 2017
DEPSCoR Reauthorization Act of 2017
This bill amends the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 to rename the Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research as the Defense Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research. It modifies program objectives and activities to increase the number of researchers capable of performing science and engineering research responsive to Department of Defense (DOD) needs and to provide assistance to science and engineering researchers at institutions of higher education through collaboration between DOD and such researchers.
People & committees
Sen. Reed, Jack [D-RI] · D–RI
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 Armed Services. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S4194-4195)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 11, 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.1629 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.1629 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.1629 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.1629 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.