A Democratic bill with 4 Republican cosponsors · See all 30 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 Alice Cogswell and Anne Sullivan Macy Act amends the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act to improve special education and related services for children and youth who are blind, visually impaired, deaf, hard of hearing, deafdisabled, or deafblind. It focuses on ensuring proper identification, specialized instructional methodologies, and qualified personnel for these students. The bill requires states to file specific addendums to their state plans detailing how they will evaluate and serve these populations. It also establishes the Anne Sullivan Macy Center on Visual Disability and Educational Excellence within the Department of Education. Additionally, the legislation mandates enhanced monitoring, reporting, and regular updates to federal policy guidance regarding sensory disabilities.
Yes· 3 of 16
- Scored +10
Would people with disabilities be better off under this?
The bill is specifically tailored to drastically improve special education outcomes, rights, and services for individuals with sensory disabilities.
- Scored +9
Would children be better off under this?
Directly improves educational services, evaluations, and individualized support for children with visual and hearing disabilities.
- Scored +9
Would students be better off under this?
Expands specialized educational support, instructional materials, and trained personnel for students with sensory impairments.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?
The bill authorizes new appropriations and center establishment, slightly increasing federal and state administrative spending.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Better Identification and Services for Students with Sensory Disabilities: Section 101, Section 201, and Section 301 require States that classify children by disability to properly identify, locate, and evaluate children who are deaf, hard of hearing, deafdisabled, blind, visually impaired, or deafblind—even if those children are classified under a different disability category. This ensures they receive appropriate special education and related services without prejudice from their general classification.
-
Specialized Instructional Support and Placements: Section 105, Section 204, and Section 305 require Individualized Education Program (IEP) teams to consider unique linguistic and learning needs, such as American Sign Language, Braille instruction, or tactile sign language. Furthermore, Section 107 protects students by establishing that the closure or consolidation of a specialized school serving children who are blind or deaf constitutes a reduction of a State's financial support, preserving specialized physical placement options.
-
Creation of the Anne Sullivan Macy Center: Section 211 establishes a national program within the Department of Education to support students with visual disabilities. This center will develop curricula, support higher education preparation programs, offer student enrichment projects, and conduct research into valid assessments and effective interventions.
-
Inclusion of Qualified Interveners for Deafblind Children: Section 302 and Section 321 explicitly add intervener services as a related service and prepare personnel to be qualified interveners. These individuals work one-to-one with children who are deafblind to provide critical access to information, facilitate communication, and promote social and emotional well-being.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Increased Administrative and Bureaucratic Burdens: Section 102, Section 202, and Section 303 require every State to file comprehensive written addendums to their state plans within two years of enactment to detail how they meet the evaluation, personnel, and service requirements for sensory-impaired children. This heavy reporting mandate could strain state educational agencies and divert resources away from direct classroom instruction.
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 people with disabilities be better off under this? — The bill is specifically tailored to drastically improve special education outcomes, rights, and services for individuals with sensory disabilities. Would children be better off under this? — Directly improves educational services, evaluations, and individualized support for children with visual and hearing disabilities. Would students be better off under this? — Expands specialized educational support, instructional materials, and trained personnel for students with sensory impairments. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Enhances early intervention services for infants and toddlers with sensory disabilities and supports transition planning. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Provides vital specialized educational support and resources to lower-income families of children with sensory disabilities. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Helps middle-class families secure appropriate specialized educational placements and services for children with sensory impairments. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Addresses systemic disparities by supporting diverse student populations, noting high percentages of children of color among deaf youth. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Benefits minority children by ensuring culturally and linguistically appropriate identification and support services.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into public schools? — The bill enhances educational resources, training, and specialized support programs for sensory-impaired students under IDEA. Does this put more money into scientific research? — The bill establishes the Anne Sullivan Macy Center to conduct research on valid assessments and effective interventions.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The bill improves procedural safeguards and specialized evaluation standards for students with sensory disabilities. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill enhances federal oversight and regular reporting to Congress concerning services for students with sensory disabilities. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill places additional compliance, monitoring, and state plan addendum requirements on state educational agencies.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities? — The legislation significantly strengthens special education rights and tailored services for children with sensory disabilities.
- Healthcare
- Does this put more money into medical research? — The bill supports specialized research and development into valid assessments and interventions for children with visual disabilities.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — The bill creates demand for specialized personnel such as teachers of the deaf, visual impairment specialists, and interveners. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — The bill authorizes new appropriations and center establishment, slightly increasing federal and state administrative spending.
- 10/1/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/8/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
- 29 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
4 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.
Sean CastenDemocrat · Illinois
Angie CraigDemocrat · Minnesota
Lloyd DoggettDemocrat · Texas
Dwight EvansDemocrat · Pennsylvania
Brian FitzpatrickRepublican · Pennsylvania
Josh GottheimerDemocrat · New Jersey
Andrew GarbarinoRepublican · New York
Adelita GrijalvaDemocrat · Arizona
Jahana HayesDemocrat · Connecticut
Henry JohnsonDemocrat · Georgia
Raja KrishnamoorthiDemocrat · Illinois
Ted LieuDemocrat · California
Summer LeeDemocrat · Pennsylvania
Nicole MalliotakisRepublican · New York
Gwen MooreDemocrat · Wisconsin
Seth MoultonDemocrat · Massachusetts
Joseph MorelleDemocrat · New York
Kevin MullinDemocrat · California
John MannionDemocrat · New York
April McClain DelaneyDemocrat · Maryland
Alexandria Ocasio-CortezDemocrat · New York
Scott PetersDemocrat · California
Jamie RaskinDemocrat · Maryland
John RutherfordRepublican · Florida
Josh RileyDemocrat · New York
Janice SchakowskyDemocrat · Illinois
Terri SewellDemocrat · Alabama
Paul TonkoDemocrat · New York
Mark TakanoDemocrat · California
George WhitesidesDemocrat · California