PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.See H.R.3643.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 27, 1995
Makes a veteran exposed to herbicides in Vietnam during the Vietnam era eligible for hospital and nursing home care for any disease for which the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), in a report issued under the Agent Orange Act of 1991, has determined that: (1) there is sufficient evidence to conclude a positive association between the occurrence of the disease and exposure to a herbicide; (2) there is evidence suggestive of such an association, though the evidence is limited; or (3) available studies are insufficient to permit such a conclusion. Makes such veterans eligible for such care also for a disease for which the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, pursuant to a recommendation of the Under Secretary for Health based on peer-reviewed research studies published after the most recent NAS report, determines that there is credible evidence suggestive of an association between disease occurrence and herbicide exposure. Makes a veteran exposed to radiation during a period of active duty for training or inactive duty training eligible for hospital and nursing home care for: (1) any diseases currently listed in Federal provisions which presume a relation between such disease and a veteran's disability; or (2) any disease for which the Secretary determines there is credible evidence of a positive association between the occurrence of such disease and exposure to ionizing radiation. Extends through December 31, 1997, the authorized period for the provision of hospital, nursing home, and outpatient care for certain veterans, including those herbicide- or radiation-exposed veterans described in this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Hutchinson, Tim [R-AR-3] · R–AR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
See H.R.3643.
See H.R.2353.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
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.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6319-6323)
Mr. Stump moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 75.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. H. Rept. 104-158.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. H. Rept. 104-158.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 29 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Veterans' Affairs.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Hospitals and Health Care.
Referred to the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.1565 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.1565 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.1565 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.1565 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.