PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 108-362.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 25, 2004
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The expanded summary of the House passed version is repeated here.)
Pancreatic Islet Cell Transplantation Act of 2004 - Amends the Public Health Service Act to allow pancreata procured for use in islet cell transplantation or research to be counted for certification purposes for qualified organ procurement organization grants.
Requires the Diabetes Mellitus Interagency Coordinating Committee to include in its annual report an assessment of the Federal activities and programs related to pancreatic islet cell transplantation, which shall address: (1) the adequacy of funding; (2) policies and regulations affecting the supply of pancreata; (3) the effect of xenotransplantation; (4) the effect of the United Network for Organ Sharing policies; (5) the existing mechanisms to collect and coordinate outcome data from trials; (6) implementation of multi-agency clinical investigations; and (7) recommendations for legislation and administrative actions to increase the supply of pancreata.
People & committees
Rep. Nethercutt, George R., Jr. [R-WA-5] · R–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 108-362.
Became Public Law No: 108-362.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S10880)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S10880)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H8073)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H8073)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3858.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8073-8074)
Mr. Barton (TX) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 446.
Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 108-726.
Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 108-726.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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.
Source last updated: Feb 10, 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.3858 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.3858 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.3858 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.3858 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.