PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.

Rural Education Achievement Program Reauthorization Act of 2011

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1604-1605)

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 14, 2011

Rural Education Achievement Program Reauthorization Act of 2011 - Amends part B (Rural Education Initiative) of title VI of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to revise the Small, Rural School Achievement program, which gives rural local educational agencies (LEAs) federal formula grants and greater flexibility in the use of state educational funds.

Limits eligibility to LEAs whose schools are all designated with a school locale code of Fringe Rural, Distant Rural, or Remote Rural, unless located in an area the state defines as rural.

Raises federal grant limits when funds available to implement the program equal or exceed $100 million.

Alters LEA eligibility for federal funds under the Rural and Low-Income School program by requiring that: (1) at least 40% of the children ages 5 through 17 that LEAs serve be eligible for a free or reduced price lunch under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act; and (2) all of their schools be designated with a school locale code of Distant Town, Remote Town, Fringe Rural, Distant Rural, or Remote Rural.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Sen. Conrad, Kent [D-ND] · D–ND

Committees

  • Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee
11 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1604-1605)

  2. Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1603-1604)

  3. Introduced in Senate

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

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.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze S.567 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine S.567 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine S.567 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine S.567 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.

View full prompt & sources