Loading bill breakdown…
Loading bill breakdown…
Sponsored by Rep. Erin Houchin (R-IN) · 3 active : 1 Republican, 1 Democrat, 1 Independent
Latest action: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Science of Reading Act of 2026
This bill revises the Comprehensive Literacy State Development (CLSD) grant program to prioritize literacy instruction that is aligned to the science of reading.
Under the bill,
science of reading
is defined as an interdisciplinary body of evidence-based research about reading and issues related to reading and writing that (1) identifies instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, comprehension, and writing as essential components to skilled reading; (2) demonstrates the importance of background knowledge, oral language, the connection between reading and writing, and strong writing instruction; (3) explains why some students have difficulty with reading and writing; and (4) does not use a three-cueing model.
Three-cueing model
means an instructional approach or model that (1) uses meaning drawn from context, pictures, or syntax as the primary basis for teaching word recognition; or (2) teaches visual memory as the primary basis for word recognition.
Current law authorizes competitive CLSD grants to state educational agencies (SEAs) and, through them, competitive subgrants to local educational agencies for the development and implementation of a comprehensive literacy instruction plan, professional development, and other activities. Eligible early childhood education programs may also receive subgrants for early literacy services.
The bill (1) specifies that comprehensive literacy instruction for CLSD grants does not include the use of a three-cueing model, and (2) requires the Department of Education and SEAs to prioritize awarding CLSD grants and subgrants for evidence-based activities that are aligned to the science of reading.
Each member’s recorded vote compared with their swing projection from before the vote. A member by voting against most of their own party.
Passed by voice vote or unanimous consent: no individual votes recorded.
Members fall into . 2 representatives don’t have enough data yet and are marked “insufficient data”. Non-voting delegates are not counted. The bill is not before the House right now; these scores show where members would stand.
Bars show each input from 0 to 100: ideology gap, scorecard gap, . is the seat’s partisan lean, and shows how much of the input data a score has.
Loading similar votes
These members have less than half of the model’s inputs, so their scores are not banded or ranked.
Ideology is each member’s score. The cluster low on the chart includes the bill’s 4 sponsor and cosponsors in the House: they have already committed, so they score as entrenched. 2 representatives without a DW-NOMINATE score or with insufficient data are not plotted.
Similar votes count toward swing-v3 in the House: total similarity weight 21.0 (needs 5.0).
