PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 2, 2005
Methamphetamine Precursor Control Act of 2005 - Amends the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act to place limitations on the importation of ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine. Authorizes the Attorney General to: (1) request a distributor of a chemical in the chain of distribution to provide information on such distribution, including sales; and (2) issue an order, upon determining that a foreign-chain distributor is refusing to cooperate, prohibiting the importation of such substances.
Directs the Attorney General, acting through the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration, to carry out a MethWatch program to provide information to retailers regarding the purchase of precursor products by individuals who may intend to use them in illicit methamphetamine production.
Amends the Controlled Substances Act to require the Attorney General to revoke the authority of a person whose registration includes authority regarding ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or phenylpropanolamine, if such person has received four written notifications that the Attorney General considers the person to be in violation of the Act.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires a registration that includes authority for the sale of ephedrine or pseudoephedrine at retail to provide that the registration does not permit such a sale in which more than nine grams is sold in a single transaction. Prohibits knowingly or intentionally possessing more than 24 grams of pseudoephedrine unless specified conditions apply, such as the chemical is possessed for a legitimate medical purpose.
Authorizes additional funding to support research through the National Institutes of Health toward developing drug alternatives to pseudoephedrine.
People & committees
Rep. Hooley, Darlene [D-OR-5] · D–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 15, 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.1056 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.1056 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.1056 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.1056 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.