PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 28, 2012
Interstate Drug Monitoring Efficiency and Data Sharing Act of 2012 or the ID MEDS Act - Directs the Attorney General to establish national interoperability standards to facilitate the exchange of prescription information by states receiving grant funds under the Harold Rogers Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (Rogers Program) and the Controlled Substance Monitoring Program (CS Program).
Directs the Attorney General to ensure that such standards: (1) implement open standards that are freely available to promote broad implementation; (2) provide for the use of exchange intermediaries to facilitate interstate interoperability; (3) support transmissions that are fully secured, using industry standard methods of encryption, to ensure that protected health information and personally identifiable information are not compromised during transmission; and (4) employ access control methodologies to share protected information solely in accordance with state laws and regulations.
Requires a grant recipient under the Rogers Program to ensure that the state databases comply with the national interoperability standards. Allows a recipient of an enhancement grant under such Program to use grant funds to standardize the technology architecture used by the recipient to comply with such standards.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Amends the Public Health Service Act to require states to ensure that databases established under the CS Program comply with such standards.
Directs the Attorney General to report on enhancing the interoperability of state prescription monitoring programs with other technologies and databases used for detecting and reducing fraud, diversion, and abuse of prescription drugs.
People & committees
Rep. Rogers, Harold [R-KY-5] · R–KY
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.
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: Dec 5, 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.4292 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.4292 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.4292 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.4292 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.