A Democratic bill with 3 Republican cosponsors · See all 7 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The READ Act aims to improve literacy outcomes by aligning instruction with the science of reading. It amends the comprehensive literacy State development grant program to prioritize evidence-based practices and teacher preparation. The bill introduces new definitions for terms like high-impact tutoring, the science of reading, and universal early literacy screening. It establishes priorities for grant awards, giving absolute priority to eligible low-performing States. Additionally, the act mandates specific uses of grant funds and requires states to conduct reviews of teacher preparation programs. Finally, it expands research and development efforts through the Institute of Education Sciences.
Yes· 3 of 12
- Scored +7
Would children be better off under this?
The bill provides targeted literacy support, screenings, and tutoring for children.
- Scored +7
Would students be better off under this?
The bill provides various supports including high-impact tutoring and early screenings to improve student outcomes.
- Scored +5
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
The bill prioritizes entities serving greater numbers of children from low-income families.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this give the federal government more power?
The bill includes provisions that restrict the Secretary's authority to mandate specific instructional content.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Improved Literacy Instruction: The bill mandates that instruction be aligned with the "science of reading," which includes explicit and systematic use of phonemic awareness, decoding, and fluency (Section 2.a.3).
-
Targeted Support for At-Risk Students: States are required to implement universal early literacy screenings to identify students at risk of reading difficulties and provide timely interventions (Section s.3.d.2.A.i).
-
Increased Access to Tutoring: The bill promotes "high-impact tutoring," which involves small group or 1-on-1 instruction with trained personnel to complement classroom learning (Section 2.a.4).
-
Better Teacher Preparation: Grant funds are used to ensure pre-service and in-service training are aligned with the science of reading and help educators understand how students learn to read (Section 3.f.1.A.i).
-
Support for Specific Student Groups: The bill includes provisions for effective language instruction for English learners and children with disabilities (Section 2.b.2.N), as well as support for students at risk of dyslexia (Section 3.f.1.A.iv).
-
Parental Communication: The bill requires local educational agencies to provide parents with timely notification regarding their child's reading progress, including strategies to support learning at home (Section 3.d.2.F).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Exclusion of Certain Instructional Methods: The bill explicitly excludes "three-cueing models" or approaches that rely on context, pictures, or syntax for word recognition from the definition of comprehensive literacy instruction (Section 2.b.2.M).
-
Restrictions on Federal Authority: The Secretary is prohibited from issuing regulations that control a State or local educational agency's specific instructional content, academic standards, or curricula (Section 4.b).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would children be better off under this? — The bill provides targeted literacy support, screenings, and tutoring for children. Would students be better off under this? — The bill provides various supports including high-impact tutoring and early screenings to improve student outcomes. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The bill prioritizes entities serving greater numbers of children from low-income families. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — The bill mandates specific support for children with disabilities and protects their legal rights. Would immigrants be better off under this? — The bill emphasizes effective language instruction to support English learners. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — The bill includes specific funding for schools operated by the Bureau of Indian Education.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into public schools? — The bill reauthorizes and directs funds toward comprehensive literacy instruction and teacher training. Does this put more money into scientific research? — The bill expands research and development efforts through the Institute of Education Sciences.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill requires states to publish annual public reports on literacy outcomes and data. Does this protect people from being watched or searched? — The bill includes limitations on the use of personally identifiable data in reports. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The bill prevents the federal government from controlling specific state academic standards or curricula. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill includes provisions that restrict the Secretary's authority to mandate specific instructional content.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities? — The bill includes protections ensuring literacy instruction does not alter the rights of children with disabilities.
- 10/5/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 8/3/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
- 5 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Suzanne BonamiciDemocrat · Oregon
Josh HarderDemocrat · California
Erin HouchinRepublican · Indiana
Young KimRepublican · California
Kevin KileyIndependent · California
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Burgess OwensRepublican · Utah