S. 2273Senate bill · 119th CongressIn the SenatePublic Lands and Natural Resources

Wyoming Education Trust Modernization Act

Sponsored byCynthia M. LummisR-WYIntroduced Jul 14, 2025Full text on congress.gov ↗

Latest action (Oct 5, 2026) — Held at the desk.

What it does

Congressional Research Service, Jul 14, 2025

This bill provides Wyoming with more flexibility to invest the principal of its permanent school fund by allowing the state to use earnings generated from investment of the fund rather than only interest.

By way of background, Congress created the fund when Wyoming became a state by granting certain federal lands to be held in a trust for the state. Proceeds from school trust land sales, exchanges, or disposals are deposited into the fund to support public schools.

Face Value

as reported to the Senate
100Narrow

How much of this bill its name accounts for.

  • Every bill starts at100
  • Nothing counted against it: one area of law, and short enough that length doesn't register.

Face Value measures reach, not honesty. A big bill can be accurately named, and a low score is not an accusation — it means the contents reach further than any short title could describe. Count it yourself ↗ How this is worked out

Who lobbied on this

1 organization

These organizations told Congress, in their own quarterly disclosures, that they were lobbying on this bill.

Most filings say only that an organization lobbied on a bill, not which side it took — where that's the case we say so rather than guessing. Quotes are verbatim from the filing. How this is built.

Discussion

5 comments

Sign in to join the discussion and put your vote on the record.

Sort
9
JMTanakaDemoTX-1voted Nay1d ago
I keep going back and forth on this one. The problem is real; I'm not convinced this is the instrument for it.
5
river_readerDemoIL-10voted Nay2d ago
Against, and not because the goal is wrong. It stacks a new process on top of two that already don't talk to each other. That's a drafting question rather than a political one.
3
kwame.abadiDemoFL-13voted Nay1d ago
I'd support this and still say the effective date is optimistic. Everything downstream of it assumes agencies move faster than they do. Whether that matters depends entirely on the implementation date.
1
nadia.hartleyDemoNV-2voted Yea2d ago
Honest question, not a trap: what would change your mind?
1
nadia.hartleyDemoNV-2voted Yea2d ago
Support, without enthusiasm. A narrow fix now beats a comprehensive one that never arrives. Happy to be told I've read it wrong.
Your position on S. 2273No positions yet