PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Letlow, Julia [R-LA-5] · R–LA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Oct 14, 2026. 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.10763 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.10763 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.10763 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.10763 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.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-10-06 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Know Your Risk Act would add breast cancer risk assessments, education, and research to an existing public health grant program. States receiving grants would report assessment results, referrals, and differences in access. It would also require a federal report on existing assessment tools and planning for a single publicly accessible tool; the report requirement would not itself require creating that tool.
This Act may be cited as the Know Your Risk Act.
by inserting conduct evidence-based breast cancer risk assessments and to before screen women
(7) to develop and disseminate public information and education programs regarding breast cancer risk factors, individualized risk assessment, genetic predisposition, and available risk-reduction strategies; (8) to support research, validation, and improvement of existing breast cancer risk assessment models to improve accuracy across racial, ethnic, geographic, and age populations;
A State receiving a grant under section 1501 shall submit to the Secretary, at such time and in such manner as the Secretary may require, information on—
(B) the number and percentage of individuals receiving breast cancer risk assessments under such programs identified as being at elevated risk; (C) the number of referrals made for enhanced screening, genetic counseling, preventive therapy, or other breast cancer risk-reduction services through such programs; and (D) disparities in access to breast cancer risk assessments and follow-up services among geographic regions, medically underserved populations, and other populations, as determined relevant by the Secretary.
The report under subsection (a) shall include— (1) an outline of the planning needed to create a single breast cancer risk assessment tool that is comprehensive and publicly accessible;
The findings present Congress's rationale: risk assessment tools help providers estimate breast cancer risk and guide care, but Congress describes the available tools as lacking a single centralized or widely recognized option. These are legislative findings, not demonstrated effects of the proposed bill.
Congress finds the following:
(7) Breast cancer risk assessment tools support health care providers in estimating the risk that a woman will develop breast cancer and informing appropriate screening, detection, treatment, and prevention strategies.
(9) Despite the availability of such tools, there is no single, centralized, or widely recognized breast cancer risk assessment tool for patients, providers, and health systems.
Within 180 days after enactment, the Secretary of Health and Human Services would have to report to Congress on inaccuracies in existing breast cancer risk assessment tools, gaps in their use among populations, and contributing factors.
Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall submit to Congress a report that includes— (1) identification of inaccuracies resulting from the use of existing breast cancer risk assessment tools; (2) gaps in use of existing breast cancer risk assessment tools among different populations; and (3) factors that contribute to such inaccuracies and gaps in use.
The report would outline planning for one comprehensive, publicly accessible assessment tool and strategies to raise public awareness. It would recommend how to build agreement among patients, providers, colleges and universities, businesses, nonprofits, health care entities, and other entities the Secretary considers relevant.
The report under subsection (a) shall include— (1) an outline of the planning needed to create a single breast cancer risk assessment tool that is comprehensive and publicly accessible; (2) strategies to provide for public awareness of such a breast cancer risk assessment tool; and (3) recommendations on how to build consensus on the development of such a breast cancer risk assessment tool among— (A) patients; (B) medical providers; (C) institutions of higher education; (D) for-profit and nonprofit entities; (E) health care entities (as defined in section 60.3 of title 45, Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor regulation)); and (F) other entities, as the Secretary determines relevant.
The bill would amend the Public Health Service Act's grant requirements to add evidence-based breast cancer risk assessments before the existing reference to screening women. It would also add training on, and clinical use of, validated risk assessment models.
Section 1501(a) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300k) is amended— (A) in paragraph (1), by inserting conduct evidence-based breast cancer risk assessments and to before screen women; (B) in paragraph (4), by inserting , including training on and clinical application of validated breast cancer risk assessment models before the semicolon at the end;
The grant requirements would include implementing standardized, evidence-based breast cancer risk assessment tools in appropriate clinical settings, including integration into electronic health records.
(6) to implement standardized, evidence-based breast cancer risk assessment tools in appropriate clinical settings, including through integration into electronic health record systems;
The grant requirements would include developing and distributing public education about breast cancer risk factors, individual risk assessments, inherited susceptibility, and available ways to reduce risk.
(7) to develop and disseminate public information and education programs regarding breast cancer risk factors, individualized risk assessment, genetic predisposition, and available risk-reduction strategies;
The grant requirements would include supporting research, testing the validity of existing assessment models, and improving those models. The stated aim is better accuracy across racial, ethnic, geographic, and age groups; the text does not establish that these improvements would occur.
(8) to support research, validation, and improvement of existing breast cancer risk assessment models to improve accuracy across racial, ethnic, geographic, and age populations;
The Secretary could not award a grant under section 1501 unless the state agreed to submit the specified risk assessment information and any other grant reports the Secretary required.
The Secretary may not make a grant under section 1501 unless the State involved agrees to submit to the Secretary the report required under paragraph (2) and such other reports as the Secretary may require with respect to the grant.
States receiving grants would report how many people received breast cancer risk assessments through funded programs, and the number and percentage of assessed people identified as having elevated risk. The Secretary would determine when and how states submitted this information.
A State receiving a grant under section 1501 shall submit to the Secretary, at such time and in such manner as the Secretary may require, information on— (A) the number of individuals receiving breast cancer risk assessments under the programs of the State funded through such grant; (B) the number and percentage of individuals receiving breast cancer risk assessments under such programs identified as being at elevated risk;
State reports would count referrals made through funded programs for enhanced screening, genetic counseling, preventive therapy, and other breast cancer risk-reduction services. This measures referrals, not whether people ultimately received those services.
(C) the number of referrals made for enhanced screening, genetic counseling, preventive therapy, or other breast cancer risk-reduction services through such programs;
State reports would also describe differences in access to risk assessments and follow-up services across geographic regions, populations with limited access to medical care, and other populations the Secretary considered relevant.
(D) disparities in access to breast cancer risk assessments and follow-up services among geographic regions, medically underserved populations, and other populations, as determined relevant by the Secretary.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated October 14, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on October 6, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-14T15:08:21Z. 2026-10-06: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. 2026-10-06: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-10-06. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish attachment history or the contents of other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for a particular recipient or place was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; it does not establish formal earmark status or the contents of other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. Ordinary program coverage and access-related requirements do not alone establish such a benefit. This conclusion does not extend to other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 14, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI