PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 566.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Oct 27, 1999
Pain Relief Promotion Act of 1999 - Title I: Use of Controlled Substances Consistent With the Controlled Substances Act - Amends the Controlled Substances Act to provide that, for purposes of such Act, alleviating pain or discomfort in the usual course of professional practice is a legitimate medical purpose for the dispensing, distributing, or administering of a controlled substance consistent with public health and safety even if the use of such a substance may increase the risk of death. Declares that nothing in this Act authorizes intentionally dispensing or administering a controlled substance for purposes of causing death or assisting another person in causing death.Prohibits the Attorney General, in determining whether a controlled substance manufacturer, distributor, or dispenser registration is consistent with the public interest under the Act, from giving force and effect to State law permitting assisted suicide or euthanasia.Authorizes certain educational and research programs carried out by the Attorney General under the Act to include educational and training programs for local, State, and Federal personnel on the necessary and legitimate use of controlled substances in pain management and palliative care and means by which investigation and enforcement actions by law enforcement personnel may accommodate such use.Title II: Promoting Palliative Care - Amends the Public Health Service Act to mandate a program to: (1) develop and advance scientific understanding of palliative care; and (2) collect and disseminate protocols and evidence-based practices regarding such care, with priority given to pain management for terminally ill patients, and make such information publicly available.Defines "palliative care" as: (1) the active, total care of patients whose disease or medical condition is not responsive to curative treatment or whose prognosis is limited due to progressive, far-advanced disease; and (2) having the purpose of alleviating pain and other distressing symptoms and of enhancing life quality, not of hastening or postponing death.Authorizes grants, cooperative agreements, and contracts for programs to provide education and training to health care professionals in palliative care. Makes funds available for such grants and contracts.
People & committees
Rep. Hyde, Henry J. [R-IL-6] · R–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 566.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 106-299. Minority views filed.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 106-299. Minority views filed.
Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Committee on the Judiciary. Hearings held.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 271 - 156 (Roll no. 544).
House roll call 544 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 271 - 156 (Roll no. 544).
House roll call 544 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by voice vote. (consideration: CR H10903)
The previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection.
DEBATE - The House is debating the motion to recommit with instructions offered by Mr. Blumennauer for 10 minutes.
Mr. Blumenauer moved to recommit with instructions to Commerce.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 2260.
ORDER OF PROCEEDINGS - The Chair announced that proceedings will resume on amendments postponed earlier in the following order: Amendment no. 1 offered by Mr. Scott and amendment no. 2 offered by Mrs. Johnson of Connecticut.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - The Chair put the question on agreeing to the amendment offered by Mrs. Johnson of Connecticut by voice vote and announced that the noes had prevailed. Mrs. Johnson demanded a recorded vote and pursuant to H. Res. 339 further proceedings were postponed.
DEBATE - The Committee has resumed debate on the amendment offered by Mrs. Johnson of Connecticut.
On motion to strike the enacting clause Failed by voice vote.
DEBATE - The Committee is debating the motion to strike the enacting clause offered by Mr. Obey.
Mr. Obey moved to strike the enacting clause.
DEBATE - The Committee is debating the amendment offered by Mrs. Johnson of Connecticut for forty minutes.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - The Chair put the question on agreeing to the amendment offered by Mr. Scott by voice vote and announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. DeFazio demanded a recorded vote and pursuant to H. Res. 339 further proceedings were postponed.
DEBATE - The Committee is debating the amendment offered by Mr. Scott for 10 minutes.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 2260.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 339 and Rule XXIII.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Thomas E. Petri to act as Chairman of the Committee.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2260 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Makes in order as an original bill the amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the bill as modified by the amendments recommended by the Committee on Commerce and printed in the bill. Makes in order only those amendments printed in H. Rept. 106-409.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 339. (consideration: CR H10876-10903)
Rule H. Res. 339 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 339 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2260 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Makes in order as an original bill the amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the bill as modified by the amendments recommended by the Committee on Commerce and printed in the bill. Makes in order only those amendments printed in H. Rept. 106-409.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 229.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Commerce. H. Rept. 106-378, Part II.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Commerce. H. Rept. 106-378, Part II.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 106-378, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 106-378, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Full Committee Proceeded to Immediate Consideration.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 16 - 8.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
Referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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 Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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 Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 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.2260 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.2260 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.2260 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.2260 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.