HR-7327-119
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Sponsored by Valerie Foushee (D-NC)
What it does
This bill would require the Secretary of Education to establish a two-year pilot grant program, funded at up to $10 million, that awards competitive grants of up to $200,000 each to nonprofit and nongovernmental organizations. Grant recipients would use the funds to purchase and distribute books to children, donate books to public libraries, or host literacy-related events such as book fairs and story times. The Secretary would be required to submit a report to Congress after the program ends, including data on books distributed and any measurable changes in child literacy rates.
Who benefits
Children under 19 years old, particularly those in communities with limited access to books or reading materials. Nonprofit and nongovernmental organizations focused on literacy, which would receive direct funding. Public libraries that could receive donated books. Families in underserved or low-income communities where book access is limited. Publishers and booksellers who may see increased demand for new books purchased with grant funds.
Who is hurt
Taxpayers who bear the cost of the $10 million appropriation. Organizations that apply for grants but are not selected in the competitive process. For-profit literacy or book-access organizations, which are explicitly excluded from eligibility. Existing federal literacy programs that may compete for congressional attention or future funding. States and localities that currently fund similar programs and may face pressure to defer to federal efforts.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that book access is a measurable barrier to childhood literacy, with research from groups like the American Academy of Pediatrics showing that children in low-income households own far fewer books than their higher-income peers, directly affecting reading development. They contend that a modest, time-limited pilot program — capped at $10 million with a built-in congressional report — is a low-risk, evidence-gathering approach that allows the federal government to identify what works before committing to larger spending.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that education is constitutionally a state and local function under the Tenth Amendment, and that even a small federal pilot program sets a precedent for expanding federal involvement in an area where states and communities are better positioned to identify local needs. They contend that $10 million spread across competitive grants of up to $200,000 is too diffuse to produce statistically meaningful literacy data, making the program an inefficient use of federal funds compared to directing resources through existing, established literacy programs.
Constitutional context
Congress would fund this program through its Spending Clause authority (Art. I, §8, cl. 1), which permits federal spending for the general welfare. Under South Dakota v. Dole (1987), conditional federal spending is permissible as long as it meets a five-part test; because this bill awards grants to private organizations rather than imposing conditions on states, the coercion concerns from Dole are less directly applicable. The Tenth Amendment is relevant as a background principle, since education is traditionally a state function, but voluntary grant programs to private organizations generally do not raise commandeering concerns.
Checks and balances
The Executive Branch (Secretary of Education) gains authority to design the grant program and select recipients; Congress retains oversight through a mandatory post-program report and controls funding through the appropriations process.
Historical precedent
The federal government has previously funded book access and literacy programs through initiatives such as the Reading Is Fundamental program, which has received federal appropriations since the 1970s to distribute books to children in underserved communities.