PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Apr 8, 2008
Cytology Proficiency Improvement Act of 2008 - Amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to revise national quality assurance standards to assure consistent performance by laboratories of valid and reliable cytology services in order to include requirements that each clinical laboratory: (1) ensure that all individuals involved in screening and interpreting cytological preparations participate annually in an approved continuing medical education program in gynecologic cytology that provides each participant with gynecologic cytological preparations designed to improve locator, recognition, and interpretive skills; (2) maintain a record of program results; (3) require the laboratory director to consider such results and other performance metrics in reviewing the performance of individuals involved in screening and interpreting cytological preparations; and (4) submit the continuing education program results for each individual and plans for corrective action or remedial training in a timely manner to the laboratory's accrediting organization for purposes of review and ongoing monitoring.
Requires the Secretary to terminate individual proficiency testing that was in effect before enactment of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Gordon, Bart [D-TN-6] · D–TN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
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 voice vote. (text: CR H2029-2030)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H2029-2030)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1237.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2029-2034)
Mrs. Capps moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 348.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 110-566.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 110-566.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session 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.1237 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.1237 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.1237 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.1237 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.