PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on HELP.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 2, 1999
Education for the 21st Century (e-21) Act - Establishes assistance programs for middle school computer literacy and for high-quality educational software for all schools. (Sec. 4) Authorizes the Secretary of Education to award grants to States that integrate into the State curriculum the goal of making all middle school graduates in the State technology literate. Requires such grants to be used for teacher training in technology, with an emphasis on programs that prepare one or more teachers in each middle school in the State to become technology leaders who then serve as experts and train other teachers. Directs States to encourage schools that receive such assistance to provide matching funds. Authorizes appropriations. (Sec. 5) Authorizes the Secretary to award competitive grants to secondary school and college students working with university faculty, software developers, and experts in educational technology for the development of high-quality educational software and Internet web sites by such students, faculty, developers, and experts. Directs the Secretary to: (1) recognize outstanding educational software and Internet web sites developed with such assistance that focus on core curriculum areas; and (2) issue certificates to each student and faculty member who develops such recognized software or sites. Requires grant award priority to be given for developing such software or sites in the following core curriculum areas: (1) for the first year of awards, in mathematics, science, and reading; and (2) for the second and third years of awards, again in mathematics, science, and reading, but also in social studies, the humanities, and the arts. Requires: (1) such recognized educational software to be made available to local educational agencies for free downloading from the Department of Education's Internet web site; and (2) such recognized Internet web sites to be accessible to any World Wide Web user. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Sen. Lautenberg, Frank R. [D-NJ] · D–NJ
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 HELP.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2096)
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 20, 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.491 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.491 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.491 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.491 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.