HR-8834-119
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Sponsored by Bradley Schneider (D-IL)
What it does
This bill would rename and expand an existing State Department program — the IDEAS Program — as the "Senator Paul Simon Study Abroad Program." It would direct the Secretary of State to award competitive grants to colleges and universities, individually or in consortia, to expand study abroad participation. The bill sets a 10-year goal of at least 1 million U.S. undergraduate students studying abroad annually, with emphasis on underrepresented student groups and nontraditional destinations, particularly in developing countries. Funding is authorized at "such sums as may be necessary" beginning in fiscal year 2027, subject to annual appropriations.
Who benefits
Low-income students, first-generation college students, students of color, community college students, and students with disabilities — groups the bill explicitly targets as underrepresented in study abroad. Minority-serving institutions and historically underserved colleges that receive grant priority. Nongovernmental organizations that partner with colleges on study abroad programs. Host communities and economies in developing countries that would receive more U.S. students. Language programs and world language instructors at U.S. institutions. Employers seeking graduates with international experience and language skills. U.S. diplomatic and national security interests that benefit from globally experienced citizens.
Who is hurt
Institutions that do not qualify for grant priority — such as well-resourced research universities — may be disadvantaged in the competitive grant process. Study abroad programs in traditional, high-demand destinations (Western Europe) may see reduced relative emphasis as funding steers students toward nontraditional destinations. Taxpayers would bear the cost of an open-ended appropriation with no specified dollar ceiling. Domestic experiential learning programs (internships, service learning within the U.S.) compete for student time and institutional attention that this bill redirects abroad. Students ineligible under the bill's definition — such as certain visa categories of noncitizens — would not benefit.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that only 10% of U.S. college students currently study abroad, and that participation remains 14% below pre-pandemic levels according to the State Department's own Open Doors 2025 data — leaving the vast majority of graduates without international experience increasingly demanded by employers. They contend the program directly addresses documented inequities: minority students, first-generation students, and community college students are significantly underrepresented in study abroad, and targeted grants to minority-serving institutions would help close that gap. Supporters further argue that expanding globally competent graduates strengthens U.S. national security and economic competitiveness at a time when international engagement is critical.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the bill authorizes an open-ended appropriation — "such sums as may be necessary" — with no spending cap, creating an undefined fiscal commitment at a time of significant federal budget pressure. They contend that study abroad primarily benefits students who are already college-enrolled and relatively advantaged, and that federal dollars could more efficiently address educational equity through domestic programs serving students who never reach college. Opponents also argue that the 10-year goal of 1 million annual study abroad participants is aspirational rather than enforceable, and that the bill lacks accountability mechanisms to ensure grant funds produce measurable outcomes rather than subsidizing programs that would have operated anyway.