PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, and Science and Technology.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 15, 2007
Project Bioshield Material Threats Act of 2007 - Amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Secretary of Homeland Security (the Secretary) to utilize existing risk assessments to assess current and emerging threats of chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear agents and determine which of such agents present a material threat against the U.S. population sufficient to affect national security. Requires the Secretary to group such assessments to facilitate assessments by the Secretary of Health and Human Services on the availability and appropriateness of specific countermeasures to address more than one such agent or address adverse health consequences that are common to exposure to different agents. Requires the Secretary to complete assessments by December 31, 2007, for those agents known to the Secretary by the date of enactment of this Act that are capable of significantly affecting national security and to submit the results to Congress.
Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to reauthorize appropriations through FY2009 for the Secretary to carry out such terror threat assessments. Authorizes additional appropriations to enable the Secretary to meet the deadlines established under this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Langevin, James R. [D-RI-2] · D–RI
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 Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, and Science and Technology.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E363-364)
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 14, 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.1089 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.1089 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.1089 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.1089 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.