PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.3528 / 113th Congress

National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting Reauthorization Act of 2013

Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 18, 2013

National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting Reauthorization Act of 2013 - Amends the National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting Act of 2005 to include as a purpose of such Act to foster the establishment of state-administered controlled substance monitoring systems in order to ensure that appropriate law enforcement, regulatory, and state professional licensing authorities have access to prescription history information for the purposes of investigating drug diversion and prescribing and dispensing practices of errant prescribers or pharmacists.

Amends the Public Health Service Act to revise and update the controlled substance monitoring program, including to: (1) allow grants to be used to maintain and operate existing state controlled substance monitoring programs, (2) require the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to redistribute any funds that are returned among the remaining grantees, (3) require a state to provide the Secretary with aggregate data and other information to enable the Secretary to evaluate the success of the state's program and to submit a progress report to Congress, and (4) expand the program to include any commonwealth or territory of the United States.

Authorizes the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) or a state Medicaid program or state health department receiving nonidentifiable information from a controlled substance monitoring database to make such information available to other entities for research purposes.

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

Requires a state receiving a grant to: (1) facilitate prescriber use of the state's controlled substance monitoring system, and (2) educate prescribers on the benefits of the system both to them and society.

Revises preferences for grants related to drug abuse to authorize the Secretary to give preference to eligible states or tribes that put forth a good faith effort to meet minimum requirements under the controlled substance monitoring program.

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. Whitfield, Ed [R-KY-1] · R–KY

Committees

  • Energy and Commerce Committee
3 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.

  2. Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

  3. Introduced in House

  4. 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

Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. 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.3528 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.3528 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.3528 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.3528 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