PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 111-200.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Jul 7, 2010
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The expanded summary of the Senate reported version is repeated here.)
Congressional Award Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 - (Sec. 2) Amends the Congressional Award Act to revise requirements for appointment and reappointment of members of the Congressional Award Board, especially the limitation of service on the Board to two consecutive terms.
Exempts a member from the two-term limit during a period of service as Board Chairman. Permits reappointment of such individual to an additional full term after termination of such Chairmanship.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires a Board member's term to begin on October 1 of the even numbered year, with one-half of the Board positions having terms which begin in each even numbered year.
Changes from calendar to fiscal year the annual period for which the Director is required to ensure that the Board's liabilities do not exceed its assets.
Requires the Board, if the Comptroller General finds that the Director has not substantially complied with such duty, to: (1) instruct the Director to take such necessary actions to correct any deficiencies (as under current law); and (2) remove and replace the Director if they are not promptly corrected. Repeals the requirement that, upon a Director's failure to correct such deficiencies, the Board take necessary action to prepare for the orderly cessation of Board activities.
Allows the Board to accept funds to carry out its functions and make expenditures that are awarded in any grant program administered by a federal agency. (Currently the Board is prohibited from using federal resources.)
Repeals the limitation on contributions to Statewide Congressional Award Councils to public monetary and in-kind contributions for Program purposes (thus allowing private contributions as well).
Allows the donation of funds or other resources to restrict their use to scholarships.
Names the nonprofit corporation the Board is required to establish to assist it in carrying out the Program the Congressional Award Foundation. Repeals the requirement that the corporation be private. Treats the Foundation together with any subsidiary nonprofit corporations as the collective Corporation to which appropriate duties shall be delegated, including the employment of personnel, expenditure of funds, and the incurrence of financial or other contractual obligations.
Allows the Congressional Award Board (which as under current law shall be members of the Board of Directors of the Foundation) to appoint up to 24 additional voting members to the Foundation Board. Makes the Congressional Award Program Director serve as a nonvoting member of the Foundation Board.
Extends the Congressional Award Board until October 1, 2013.
People & committees
Sen. Lieberman, Joseph I. [ID-CT] · ID–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 111-200.
Became Public Law No: 111-200.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Cleared for White House.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H4690-4691)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H4690-4691)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 2865.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4690-4692)
Mr. Payne moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S1680; text as passed Senate: CR S1680)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S1680; text as passed Senate: CR S1680)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 317.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman without amendment. With written report No. 111-163.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman without amendment. With written report No. 111-163.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
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: Jul 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.2865 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.2865 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.2865 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.2865 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.