PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.3010 / 106th Congress

Restraint Safety Act of 1999

Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 4, 1999

Restraint Safety Act of 1999 - Amends part D (Miscellaneous) of title XVIII (Medicare) and of title XIX (Medicaid) of the Social Security Act to specify Medicare and Medicaid program beneficiaries' rights to freedom from restraint and other abuse while in a psychiatric hospital or other care facility or treatment center. Requires a service provider to report sentinel events (when a program beneficiary under psychiatric care dies unexpectedly or suffers serious injury unrelated to his or her illness or underlying condition) to the appropriate agencies or entities with oversight authority.Allows the imposition of restraints only for the following: (1) to ensure the physical safety of the individual or others in the provider's care or custody; and (2) upon the written order of a physician specifying the duration and circumstances of restraint use (except in emergency circumstances specified by the Secretary of Health and Human Services until such an order could reasonably be obtained).Requires the service provider to investigate the sentinel event reported and the appropriate agencies or entities to review and approve the provider's root cause analysis before reporting on the matter to the Secretary for use in the Sentinel Events Database.Directs the Secretary to establish such Database for use on the Internet, with appropriate privacy safeguards for individuals whose treatment is the subject of a report under this Act.Requires additional reporting in certain cases, including to the following: (1) the Secretary about a provider identified as having a pattern of poor performance; and (2) the State Attorney General or the appropriate State law enforcement agency in sentinel events involving death. Mandates sanctions for failure to report.Bars disclosure or discovery of a root cause analysis in a civil action.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Shays, Christopher [R-CT-4] · R–CT

Committees

  • Energy and Commerce Committee
  • Ways and Means Committee
10 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.

  2. Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.

  3. Referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, 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.

  4. Referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, 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.

  5. Referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, 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.

  6. Introduced in House

  7. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

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.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.3010 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.3010 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.3010 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.3010 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.

View full prompt & sources