PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 18, 2007
Amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) to establish the National Park Ranger School Partnerships program authorizing the Secretary of Education to award competitive, three-year grants to local educational agencies (LEAs) to enter into partnerships that include the National Park Service (NPS), and may include nonprofit NPS partners, to provide kindergarten through grade 12 (K-12) students with educational programs and K-12 teachers with professional development emphasizing science, the environment, natural resources, mathematics, civics, and history.
Deems LEAs to be eligible for such a grant only if they: (1) have, are capable of, or will develop certain connections to the NPS; (2) have been identified as needing improvement under title I of the ESEA; and (3) are a high-need LEA.
Permits: (1) the NPS to participate in the Mathematics and Science Partnerships program that provides training to teachers of such subjects under title II of the ESEA; and (2) educational service agencies, including federal agencies that serve as educational service providers, to partner with LEAs under such title's Teaching American History Grant Program.
People & committees
Sen. Salazar, Ken [D-CO] · D–CO
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.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 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.2194 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.2194 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.2194 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.2194 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.