PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 25, 2008
Heart Disease Education, Analysis Research, and Treatment for Women Act or the HEART for Women Act - (Sec. 2) Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to allow the Secretary of Health and Human Services to deny a new drug application if the application fails to include required information on clinical investigations.
Directs the Secretary to require that a new drug application include any clinical data possessed by the applicant that relates to the safety and effectiveness of the drug involved by gender, age, and racial subgroup. (Currently, this is required by regulation.)
Requires the Secretary to develop guidance for the staff of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ensure that new drug applications are adequately reviewed to determine whether they include the required clinical data.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes the Secretary to place a clinical hold on an investigation under an investigational new drug application if the sponsor of the investigation fails to meet the requirements of an annual report on the status of each study in progress.
Applies provisions relating to clinical data submission for new drug applications to an investigational new drug application, an application for a biologics license for a biological product, an application for premarket approval for a class III device, and an application for investigational use of a device.
(Sec. 3) Amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Secretary to provide that all nonidentifiable patient safety work product reported to and among the network of patient safety databases be identified by sex.
Directs that analyses of national and regional statistics of information reported to and among the network of patient safety databases take into account data that specifically relates to women and any disparities between treatment and the quality of care between males and females.
(Sec. 4) Requires the Director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to conduct and support research and support demonstrations to identify and evaluate clinical and organizational strategies to improve the quality of and access to care for women with heart disease, stroke, and other cardiovascular diseases.
(Sec. 5) Requires the Secretary to develop and distribute to females who are age 65 or older, physicians, and other appropriate health care professionals educational materials relating to the prevention diagnosis and treatment of heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular diseases in women.
Requires the Secretary, acting through the Bureau of Health Professions of the Health Resources and Services Administration, to conduct an education and awareness campaign for physicians and other health care professionals relating to the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of heart disease, stroke, and other cardiovascular diseases in women.
(Sec. 6) Expands the grant program authorizing the Secretary, acting through the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), to award grants for preventive health services to all states. (Currently, only three grants may be awarded). Authorizes appropriations for FY2009-FY2013.
People & committees
Rep. Capps, Lois [D-CA-23] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 418 - 4 (Roll no. 642). (text: CR 9/23/2008 H8689)
House roll call 642 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 418 - 4 (Roll no. 642).(text: CR 9/23/2008 H8689)
House roll call 642 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H9927)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Burgess objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1014.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8688-8691)
Mr. Pallone moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 570.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 110-874.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 110-874.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1014 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1014 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1014 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1014 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.