PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 5, 1996
Clinical Research Enhancement Act of 1996 - Amends the Public Health Service Act to direct the President to establish the President's Clinical Research Panel, as part of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), to evaluate the status of the U.S. clinical research environment. Authorizes appropriations. Requires the Advisory Committee to the Director (of the National Institutes of Health (NIH)) on Clinical Research to report to the Director and to the Panel and to implement recommendations as the Committee determines necessary to remedy NIH clinical research deficiencies. Terminates the Committee five years after enactment of this Act. Requires the OSTP to review the compositions, functions, and outcomes of study section activities at all Federal agencies as such activities relate to clinical research proposals for investigator-initiated support. Authorizes appropriations. Requires the Director to undertake activities to: (1) support and expand NIH's clinical research involvement; (2) support and expand available resources; and (3) establish certain peer review mechanisms. Mandates grants for: (1) the establishment of general clinical research centers to provide the infrastructure for clinical research training and career enhancement; (2) clinical research career enhancement awards; and (3) innovative medical science awards to support individual clinical research projects. Authorizes appropriations. Increases the maximum aggregate number of contracts that may be made under existing provisions relating to: (1) undergraduate scholarships regarding professions needed by NIH; and (2) loan repayments regarding clinical researchers (currently, clinical researchers from disadvantaged backgrounds). Authorizes appropriations for the loan repayment program. Requires a health plan to cover the participation of individuals in investigational therapy in specified circumstances.
People & committees
Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-8] · D–NY
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 Health and Environment.
Referred to the House Committee on Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jun 3, 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.3587 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.3587 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.3587 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.3587 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.