PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H2878-2879)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 8, 1995
Equitable Health Care for Neurobiological Disorders Act of 1995 - States that the standards for the nondiscriminatory and equitable treatment by employer health benefit plans of individuals with neurobiological disorders require that such plans provide for coverage of services essential to the effective treatment of such disorders in a specified manner. Sets forth the criteria under which an employer plan may meet such standards. Amends the Internal Revenue Code to impose a tax of up to 25 percent of the amounts received by the carrier or under the plan for coverage if a carrier or an employer health benefit plan fails to comply with the standards relating to the nondiscriminatory treatment of neurobiological disorders under this Act.
People & committees
Rep. DeLauro, Rosa L. [D-CT-3] · D–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H2878-2879)
Referred to the Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1215)
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Economic and Educational Opportunities, 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 Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Economic and Educational Opportunities, 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 Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Economic and Educational Opportunities, 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 Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Economic and Educational Opportunities, 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.
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: Jun 3, 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.1797 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.1797 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.1797 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.1797 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.