H.R. 8975

H.R. 8975: To amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to require that annual State report cards reflect the same race groups as the decennial census of population.

Introduced Pramila Jayapal (D) HOUSE_BILL — 119th Congress
Plain English Summary

H.R. 8975 aims to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 by requiring that annual State report cards on education reflect the same racial categories as those used in the decennial census. This means that states would need to report educational data using the same racial classifications that are recognized by the Census Bureau, potentially enhancing the consistency and clarity of demographic information in educational reporting.

Positive Media Summary

Supporters of H.R. 8975 have praised the bill for promoting transparency and accountability in education. They argue that aligning educational data with census categories will help identify and address disparities in educational outcomes among different racial groups, ultimately leading to more equitable education policies.

Negative Media Summary

Opponents of H.R. 8975 have raised concerns that the bill may oversimplify complex social issues by focusing solely on race categories. Critics argue that it could divert attention from other important factors affecting educational outcomes and may not effectively address the root causes of inequality in the education system.

Conflict of Interest Analysis Deep Analysis
2/10
Risk Level
Low
Total Donations
$157,500,000
PAC Percentage
0%
Policy Area
Education

The analysis of H.R. 8975, sponsored by Pramila Jayapal, reveals no direct industry overlaps between the bill's subject matter and the sponsor's top donor industries. The bill focuses on amending the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to ensure that state report cards reflect demographic data consistent with the decennial census. The top donor industries for Jayapal include Health Professionals, contributing $120,000,000, and Retired individuals, contributing $37,500,000. Given that these industries do not have a direct connection to education policy or the specific provisions of the bill, the potential for conflicts of interest appears minimal. Voters should be aware that while large donations can raise questions about influence, in this case, the lack of overlap suggests that the bill is unlikely to be swayed by donor interests in these sectors.

Industry Overlap — Follow the Money

These industries are both affected by this bill and among the sponsor's top donors.

Industry Match Type Related Subject Donations
Retired (W06) Sector Education $37,500,000
Total from overlapping industries $37,500,000
Lobbying Activity — Who's Pushing?

Organizations that lobbied on issues related to this bill's policy area.

Client Lobbying Firm Amount
VERDEGO AERO THE JACKSON GROUP, LLC $200,000
PELION VENTURE PARTNERS THE JACKSON GROUP, LLC $38,000
REFORMING AMERICA'S TAXES EQUITABLY (RATE) SURROUND SOUND STRATEGIES, LLC $30,000
ANELLO PHOTONICS THE JACKSON GROUP, LLC $30,000
SKYFRONT THE JACKSON GROUP, LLC $15,000
47G THE JACKSON GROUP, LLC $15,000
GRAIN CHAIN THE JACKSON GROUP, LLC $5,000
SKYFRONT THE JACKSON GROUP, LLC undisclosed
ADNEURIS THERAPEUTICS, INC. MAD GLOBAL STRATEGY undisclosed
ALUCHEM INC. MAD GLOBAL STRATEGY undisclosed
JOHN BRIAN LEDBETTER MISSIONS JOHN BRIAN LEDBETTER MISSIONS CORPORATION undisclosed
JOHN BRIAN LEDBETTER MISSIONS CORPORATION JOHN BRIAN LEDBETTER MISSIONS CORPORATION undisclosed
GPA MIDSTREAM ASSOCIATION SHUMAKER ADVISORS, LLC undisclosed
WESTLANDS WATER DISTRICT DENNIS CARDOZA CONSULTING SERVICES undisclosed
INDUSTRIOUS GROUP INC. THORN RUN PARTNERS undisclosed

Source: Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) filings, 2026

Sponsor's Top Donor Industries

Top industries funding Pramila Jayapal, ranked by total contributions.

Health Professionals $120,000,000
Individuals: $120,000,000 PACs: $0
Retired $37,500,000
Individuals: $37,500,000 PACs: $0

Source: OpenSecrets.org (Center for Responsive Politics)

TheBillRoom is free and independent. No ads, no subscriptions, no political funding. If this analysis was useful, reader support keeps it running.
Support Us