HR-2910-119
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Sponsored by Josh Harder (D-CA)
What it does
This bill would create a competitive federal grant program, administered by the Secretary of Labor, to fund out-of-school-time workforce readiness programs for youth ages 6–19. Grants of 3–5 years would be awarded to national youth-serving organizations operating in at least 35 states, which would deliver or subgrant services including career exploration, mentoring, apprenticeships, internships, financial literacy, and occupational skills training. The bill would also reestablish Youth Councils as formal subgroups within local workforce boards under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), giving them advisory and representational duties. It authorizes $100 million per year from fiscal years 2026 through 2030 ($500 million total).
Who benefits
Eligible youth ages 6–19, particularly those from underserved communities, low-income households, foster care, or communities with high unemployment. National youth-serving nonprofits (e.g., Boys & Girls Clubs, 4-H, Scouts) that meet the 35-state threshold and would receive grant funding. Community-based organizations and faith-based groups that serve as subgrantees. Employers and industry sectors seeking a more workforce-ready pipeline of young workers. Apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship programs that would gain new participants. Rural communities, which the bill explicitly requires to receive equitable geographic distribution of funds. Youth with disabilities and minority youth, who are specifically named as populations to be served.
Who is hurt
Smaller or regional youth-serving organizations that cannot meet the 35-state presence requirement and are therefore ineligible to receive grants directly. Taxpayers who bear the cost of the $500 million authorization. Competing federal youth programs that may face indirect resource competition or administrative overlap. State and local governments that may face new reporting and planning obligations under the WIOA amendments without dedicated administrative funding. Organizations already operating youth workforce programs that do not qualify under the bill's definitions may find themselves disadvantaged relative to larger national organizations receiving federal support.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that youth unemployment and underemployment remain persistently high, particularly for low-income and minority youth, and that out-of-school hours represent an underutilized window for workforce development. They contend that the bill's evidence-based program requirements, multi-year grant structure, and mandatory performance measurement would ensure accountability and measurable outcomes — such as improved graduation rates, credential attainment, and employment — rather than simply funding activities. Supporters also argue that reestablishing Youth Councils restores a proven local governance mechanism that was eliminated in the 2014 WIOA reauthorization, giving communities a structured voice in shaping youth workforce policy.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that restricting grants to organizations with chapters in at least 35 states effectively excludes the many effective local and regional nonprofits that serve high-need communities, concentrating federal dollars in large national organizations regardless of local fit or effectiveness. They contend that the $500 million authorization duplicates existing federal youth workforce programs under WIOA Title I and the 21st Century Community Learning Centers program, adding administrative complexity without evidence that a new parallel structure would produce better outcomes than strengthening existing ones. Opponents may also argue that the Youth Council mandate imposes unfunded governance requirements on local workforce boards already managing complex compliance obligations.
Constitutional context
Congress has broad authority to establish spending programs under the Commerce Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 3) and the Necessary and Proper Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 18), and the grant structure here is a straightforward exercise of the spending power. No significant constitutional tension is present: the bill does not delegate broad rulemaking authority to an agency in a way that would trigger the major questions doctrine under West Virginia v. EPA (2022), and the Secretary of Labor's role is limited to administering a competitive grant program with defined criteria.
Checks and balances
The executive branch (Secretary of Labor) gains authority to award and renew competitive grants and conduct periodic program evaluations; Congress retains oversight through required reporting to congressional committees, annual authorization of appropriations, and the supplement-not-supplant requirement that limits how funds may be used.
Historical precedent
Youth Councils were previously established under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 and were eliminated when Congress replaced that law with the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act in 2014; this bill would restore that structure while adding a new grant program alongside existing WIOA Title I youth funding.