PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H8106)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 9, 2009
Healthy Communities Act of 2009 - Amends the Public Health Service Act to direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to make five-year grants to community partnerships for programs to combat obesity. Sets forth eligibility requirements. Provides for an executive council and a steering committee.
Requires a community obesity prevention program to address all the different components of fighting obesity and to include: (1) physical exercise and a physical activity environment; (2) nutritional counseling and nutritional environment activities; (3) education to provide to the community information about the importance of eating healthily and maintaining a balanced diet and of being physically fit and to provide strategies for addressing varying individual capabilities to attain physical fitness; and (4) an evidence-based curriculum using the National Institutes of Health's (NIH's) Ways to Enhance Children's Activity and Nutrition (We Can) program and curriculum to guide the program.
Requires a program to: (1) make use of evidence-based practices, strategies, programs, and policies in designing program guidelines; (2) develop a communications plan that involves the entire community; (3) have both in-school and workplace wellness programs; and (4) identify a Wellness Coordinator. Requires the executive council and the steering committee to: (1) perform an assessment of the obesity problem in each respective community; and (2) work with the Wellness Coordinator to lay out achievable short- and long-term goals for reducing childhood obesity.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) prohibit a community partnership from using the grant to pay for administrative expenses, with exceptions; and (2) give preference in selecting grant recipients to communities with high levels of obesity and related chronic diseases.
People & committees
Rep. Dahlkemper, Kathleen A. [D-PA-3] · D–PA
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 H8106)
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
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: Aug 14, 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.3144 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.3144 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.3144 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.3144 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.