H. Res. 678 is a non‑binding House resolution that expresses support for designating September as “Founding Fathers’ Month.” The resolution recites a list of prominent Founders, notes September 17 (Constitution Day), cites a perceived decline in civic knowledge and patriotism, and urges Americans, educational institutions, public organizations, and the Department of Education to promote awareness and resources related to the Founders and founding principles.
The measure does not appropriate funds or create legally enforceable duties. Its practical effect would be rhetorical and programmatic: it gives political cover for civic‑education initiatives, signals congressional interest in raising civic literacy, and invites the Department of Education and local institutions to prioritize programming — but it relies on those actors to use existing authorities and budgets if they choose to act.
At a Glance
What It Does
The resolution formally supports establishing September as a month to honor the Founding Fathers, encourages participation by citizens and institutions, and calls on the Department of Education to support programs and resources that bolster civic education. It is an expression of sentiment (a House resolution) and contains no appropriation or regulatory mandate.
Who It Affects
Primary audiences are K–12 and higher‑education administrators and teachers, civic and historical nonprofits, state and local education agencies, and the Department of Education, which the text explicitly invites to provide support. Publishers and curriculum vendors may see demand for new materials tied to the observance.
Why It Matters
Symbolic congressional endorsements can shift priorities and create demand for curricular content without changing law. For professionals who design education policy or materials, the resolution signals a federal policy interest in civic‑education activities timed to the school year and Constitution Day.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The resolution opens with a set of recitals that name a number of well‑known Founding Fathers and frame September as historically appropriate because it includes the Constitution’s signing on September 17, 1787. Those recitals establish the sponsors’ rationale: a perceived erosion of civic knowledge and patriotism and the timing of the school year as an opportunity for civic instruction.
The operative text then does five things: it declares support for a Founding Fathers’ Month; it encourages all Americans to honor the Founders; it urges educational institutions and public organizations to take part in awareness and education efforts; it calls upon the Department of Education to support relevant programs and resources; and it frames the month as a time to reflect and recommit to preserving the Republic. Each directive is hortatory — that is, it urges or calls upon actors to act rather than imposing requirements or creating funding streams.In practice, the resolution functions as political and programmatic signaling.
School districts could add special units or events tied to September; civic nonprofits could align campaigns or grant applications around the observance; publishers could market new lesson plans; and the Department of Education could choose to amplify the observance through guidance, existing grant competitions, or resource repositories. None of those responses are compelled by the text; they depend on discretionary choices by agencies and institutions and on available funding within existing programs.The resolution’s text also creates practical implementation questions. ‘‘Support’’ and ‘‘encourage’’ are broad terms that leave open what the Department of Education might do: publish guidance, host webinars, reorient grant priorities, or do little if funds and political will are absent.
Because education policy is primarily state and local, the resolution mainly operates as federal encouragement rather than a change in curricular authority. The resolution will matter most where local leaders and nonprofits treat it as a cue to act, or where federal actors decide to use existing tools to promote aligned programming.
The Five Things You Need to Know
H. Res. 678 is a House resolution — an expression of the chamber’s view — and does not create binding law or authorize new federal spending.
The text explicitly lists specific Founding Fathers (for example, Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, Madison, Hamilton) and ties the observance to the September 17 signing of the Constitution.
The resolution urges K–12 and higher‑education institutions, public organizations, and all Americans to participate in activities that promote awareness of the Founders and founding principles.
It ‘‘calls upon’’ the Department of Education to support programs and resources; that language invites but does not obligate the Department to act and provides no appropriation mechanism.
Timing is explicit: the observance is tied to September and to the start of the academic year, signaling an intent to align events and materials with school calendars.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Rationale and historical framing
The recitals enumerate a set of Founders and recount their contributions, then assert two rationales for the observance: the historical tie to Constitution Day (September 17) and a perceived decline in civic knowledge and patriotism. Functionally, these clauses set the political justification for the resolution and indicate the sponsor’s intended audience (students and the general public). They matter because the named examples shape the cultural frame — the list of founders and the emphasis on Constitution Day steer the type of content institutions are likely to emphasize.
Formal support for Founding Fathers’ Month
This single line declares the House’s support for the month. As a standalone provision it creates no obligations; its power is symbolic. For implementers, the practical consequence is legitimacy: local organizers and federal actors can cite congressional support when planning events or allocating discretionary attention to civic‑education projects.
Encouragement to citizens and institutions
These clauses urge ‘‘all Americans’’ and specifically urge educational institutions, public organizations, and government entities to take part in activities that promote awareness and appreciation of the Founders. The operative verbs are hortatory — they encourage action but do not mandate curricula changes. The language deliberately targets both public and private actors, which broadens the sphere of potential activity but also raises questions about how content will be framed across diverse institutions.
Call upon the Department of Education
The resolution asks the Department of Education to support programs, resources, and activities that deepen understanding of founding principles. That request may translate into guidance, communications, existing grant emphasis, or website resources, but the resolution does not direct funds or create new statutory authority. Legally and administratively, the Department would have to use existing authorities and appropriations to respond, making any follow‑through contingent on budget priorities and political will.
Concluding exhortation to reflection and preservation
The final clause frames the month as a period for reflection on sacrifices and a commitment to preserving freedoms. It reinforces the civic mission behind the observance and signals intent to connect historical commemoration with contemporary civic responsibility. Practically, it is an encouragement to pair commemorations with civic learning outcomes, though it offers no metrics or accountability mechanisms for measuring impact.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Education across all five countries.
Explore Education in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Civic‑education nonprofits: The resolution provides political cover and a promotional hook for programming, fundraising, and partnerships tied to a nationally recognized observance.
- History teachers and curriculum developers: The alignment with the academic calendar and Constitution Day can justify lesson units, new materials, and professional development focused on the Founders.
- Publishers and ed‑tech vendors: Increased demand for themed curricula, lesson plans, and classroom resources can create a market opportunity tied to September observances.
- Department of Education (programmatic visibility): The Department can use the resolution to highlight existing civic‑education efforts or to pilot resource hubs without needing new legislation.
- Local historical societies and patriotic organizations: They gain a federally endorsed platform to host events and engage communities.
Who Bears the Cost
- Local school districts and teachers: Implementing special units, assemblies, or events consumes instructional time and teacher preparation resources, which are absorbed at the local level unless externally funded.
- Department of Education: If the Department responds, it will have to deploy staff time and possibly redirect discretionary grant emphasis or communications resources without additional appropriation.
- State and local education agencies: They may face requests from schools or communities to approve or support materials, complicating already contested curriculum decisions.
- Publishers and content creators: To meet demand, vendors may invest in new products that risk being quickly politicized or unevenly adopted.
- Marginalized communities and stakeholders omitted from the recitals: Costs are reputational and pedagogical if the observance promotes a narrow or sanitized narrative that sidelines other historical actors and perspectives.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between promoting a unified civic observance to boost civic knowledge and the risk that a federally endorsed, symbolic month will either be ineffectual without funding or will encourage one‑sided, politicized portrayals of history; improving civic literacy requires resources and careful curricular design, but the resolution offers only encouragement, not the means to ensure high‑quality, inclusive education.
The resolution balances symbolism against substantive change. Because it contains no appropriation and uses hortatory language (‘‘supports,’’ ‘‘encourages,’’ ‘‘calls upon’’), its implementation depends entirely on discretionary action by the Department of Education, state and local education authorities, nonprofits, and publishers.
That raises an implementation risk: the observance could produce widely varying programming — from robust, balanced civic‑education units to superficial or partisan events — depending on local choices and available resources.
Content selection is a second tension. The recitals single out a roster of prominent Founders but omit others and do not address contentious aspects of their legacies, such as slavery and Indigenous displacement.
That omission creates a real curricular risk: institutions might emphasize celebratory narratives without integrating critical context, which could deepen debates over historical accuracy and inclusion. Finally, federalism matters: Congress can urge action, but K–12 curriculum authority rests with states and local districts, so the resolution functions as encouragement rather than policy change, leaving unresolved questions about equity, funding, and measurable outcomes.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.