PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 9, 2014
Tick-Borne Disease Research Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 - Amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to conduct or support epidemiological, basic, translational, and clinical research regarding Lyme disease and other tick-borne diseases.
Directs the Secretary to establish the Interagency Lyme and Tick-Borne Disease Working Group to review all HHS efforts concerning tick-borne diseases to ensure interagency coordination and examine research priorities. Requires the Working Group to: (1) provide a summary of tick-borne disease research, advances, and scientific viewpoints every two years; (2) make recommendations to HHS regarding tick-borne disease activities; and (3) hold annual public meetings.
Requires HHS to submit a strategic plan for tick-borne disease research within three years of enactment and every five years thereafter that includes: (1) budgetary requirements; (2) benchmarks for improving tick-borne disease diagnosis, treatment, outcomes, and prevention; and (3) a plan to disseminate Working Group summaries and other relevant information on tick-borne disease to health professionals and the public.
People & committees
Rep. Gibson, Christopher P. [R-NY-19] · R–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H7344-7345)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7344-7345)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4701.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7344-7347)
Mr. Burgess moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 424.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 113-573.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 113-573.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Unanimous Consent .
Subcommittee 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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 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.4701 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.4701 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.4701 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.4701 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.