Assembly Concurrent Resolution 19 is a nonbinding commemorative resolution that designates February 20, 2025, as “Introduce a Girl to Engineering Day” in California. The resolution recites findings about the historical and continuing underrepresentation of women in engineering and related STEM fields, citing participation and degree-attainment statistics to support the need for outreach and encouragement.
The measure does not create a new program, mandate, or regulatory requirement. Instead, it expresses the Legislature’s support for efforts to encourage girls and young women to explore engineering and STEM careers, and it directs the Chief Clerk to transmit copies of the resolution to the author for distribution. It was chaptered as Resolution Chapter 19, Statutes of 2025.
Impact
ACR 19 has no direct fiscal or regulatory effect on state law and does not amend the Education Code, Labor Code, or other statutes. Its legal impact is limited to an official legislative commemoration recognizing a specific day and signaling state support for gender diversity in engineering and STEM education and careers. The practical effect is symbolic and promotional, aimed at public awareness rather than enforceable policy changes.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been received very positively and without controversy. It passed the Assembly committee stage 9-0 and later passed on the floor by a unanimous 36-0 vote under special consent, indicating broad bipartisan agreement. The absence of committee transcripts or recorded opposition suggests the resolution was viewed as a straightforward recognition of an educational and workforce equity issue.
Contention
There is little to no recorded contention around the measure. Because the resolution is commemorative only, it does not appear to have raised disputes over spending, mandates, or legal changes. The only substantive policy theme in the text is the gender gap in engineering and STEM participation, but the bill itself does not propose a remedy beyond recognition and encouragement, which likely contributed to the lack of opposition.
Relating to the amount and allocation of the annual constitutional appropriation to certain agencies and institutions of higher education and to the permissible uses of that money.