PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Nutrition and Foreign Agriculture.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 13, 2025
Drug Testing for Welfare Recipients Act
This bill requires states participating in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and specified public housing programs to subject applicants to substance abuse testing or screening and to deny benefits for individuals who test positive for a controlled substance.
Specifically, states administering these programs must determine whether an adult applicant for benefits has been arrested for a drug-related offense within the past five years. Applicants who have been arrested for such an offense must be tested for at least one controlled substance and must test negative to receive benefits. Applicants who have not been arrested for such an offense must be screened (via an interview, questionnaire, or other instrument) for risk of substance abuse. Applicants determined to be at high risk for substance abuse must be tested for at least one controlled substance and must test negative to receive benefits. Applicants who are determined not to be at high risk do not have to undergo testing.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Applicants who test positive for a controlled substance at any point during this process are ineligible for benefits for one year, until they complete a treatment program, or until they test negative for the substance, whichever is later.
Family members and households of individuals disqualified from receiving benefits under these provisions may generally continue to receive support.
States that fail to enforce these provisions are subject to reduced federal funding for these programs the following fiscal year.
People & committees
Rep. Rouzer, David [R-NC-7] · R–NC
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 Nutrition and Foreign Agriculture.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Agriculture, and Financial Services, 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 Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Agriculture, and Financial Services, 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 Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Agriculture, and Financial Services, 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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Mar 21, 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.372 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.372 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.372 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.372 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.