PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Education Reform.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 24, 2005
Office of National Drug Control Reauthorization Act - Amends the Official of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998 to repeal provisions providing for termination of the Office.
Clean Sports Act of 2005 - Prohibits a major professional league from arranging, promoting, organizing, or producing a professional game without meeting the requirements established by this Act for testing for the use of prohibited substances by professional athletes and for public disclosure of the names of athletes who test positive.
Requires a suspension of an athlete for a minimum of two years for the first violation and a lifetime ban for the second violation.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Allows a league to impose a lesser penalty if the athlete: (1) establishes that he did not know or suspect, and could not reasonably have known or suspected even with the exercise of utmost caution, that he had used the prohibited substance; or (2) provides substantial assistance to the league in identifying violations of the league's drug testing policy by other athletes or by any personnel working with or treating athletes.
Authorizes the Director of National Control Policy to modify standards for a league under exceptional circumstances or for good cause with limitations.
Require the Director to include additional professional sporting leagues or colleges if such additions would prevent the use of such substances by high school, college, or professional athletes.
Treats violations of this Act as unfair or deceptive acts or practices under the Federal Trade Commission Act.
Requires the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to study the use of performance-enhancing substances by college athletes.
Requires the Director to establish a commission on high school and college athletics.
People & committees
Rep. Davis, Tom [R-VA-11] · R–VA
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 Education Reform.
Referred to the Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Committee on Government Reform, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Education and the Workforce, 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 Government Reform, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Education and the Workforce, 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 Government Reform, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Education and the Workforce, 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 Government Reform, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Education and the Workforce, 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: Mar 23, 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.2565 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.2565 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.2565 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.2565 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.