PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S11665-11667)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 18, 2007
Nurse Training and Retention Act of 2007 - Directs the Secretary of Labor to establish a partnership grant program to award grants to eligible entities to carry out comprehensive programs to provide education to nurses and create a pipeline to nursing for incumbent ancillary healthcare workers who wish to advance their careers.
Includes as eligible to receive a grant: (1) a healthcare entity that is jointly administered by a healthcare employer and a labor union representing its employees and that carries out activities using labor management training funds; (2) an entity that operates a training program that is jointly administered by one or more healthcare providers or facilities, or a trade association of healthcare providers, and one or more organizations that represent the interests of direct care healthcare workers or staff nurses who have direct input as to the organization's leadership; or (3) a state training partnership program that consists of nonprofit organizations that include equal participation from industry and labor organizations including joint labor-management training programs.
Requires a healthcare employer, to be eligible for a grant, to demonstrate that it: (1) has an established program within its facility to encourage the retention of existing nurses; (2) provides wages and benefits to its nurses that are competitive for its market or that have been collectively bargained with a labor organization; and (3) provides support for programs funded under this Act through specified mechanisms.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Sets forth requirements for matching funds, collaboration with nursing schools, types of programs funded, types to be provided preference, and program evaluations.
People & committees
Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL] · D–IL
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 Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S11665-11667)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S11665)
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 14, 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.2064 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.2064 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.2064 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.2064 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.