PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Apr 21, 2015
Ensuring Patient Access and Effective Drug Enforcement Act of 2015
(Sec. 2) Amends the Controlled Substances Act to define: (1) "factors as may be relevant to and consistent with the public health and safety," for purposes of the Attorney General's determination of whether registering an applicant to manufacture or distribute a controlled substance in schedule I or II is in the public interest, as factors that are relevant to and consistent with the findings of such Act; and (2) "imminent danger to the public health or safety," for purposes of the suspension of such a registration, to mean that in the absence of an immediate suspension order, controlled substances will continue to be distributed or dispensed by a registrant who knows or should know through fulfilling the obligations of the registrant under this Act that the dispensing is outside the usual course of professional practice, the distribution or dispensing poses a present or foreseeable risk of adverse health consequences or death due to the abuse or misuse of the controlled substances, or the controlled substances will continue to be diverted outside of legitimate distribution channels.
Requires an order to show cause as to why such a registration should not be denied, revoked, or suspended to: (1) contain a statement of the basis for the denial, revocation, or suspension, including specific citations to any laws or regulations alleged to be violated; (2) direct the applicant or registrant to appear before the Attorney General at a specific place and time within 30 days after receipt of the order; and (3) notify the applicant or registrant of the opportunity to submit a corrective action plan on or before such appearance. Requires the Attorney General, upon review of any such plan, to determine whether denial, revocation, or suspension proceedings should be discontinued or deferred for purposes of modifications to such plan. Makes such requirements inapplicable to the issuance of an immediate suspension order.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 3) Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services, acting through the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to submit a report identifying: (1) obstacles to legitimate patient access to controlled substances; (2) issues with diversion of controlled substances; and (3) how collaboration between federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies and the pharmaceutical industry can benefit patients and prevent diversion and abuse of controlled substances.
People & committees
Rep. Marino, Tom [R-PA-10] · R–PA
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 the Judiciary.
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 H2329)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H2329)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 471.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2329-2332)
Mrs. Blackburn moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 63.
Committee on the Judiciary discharged.
Committee on the Judiciary discharged.
Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 114-85, Part I.
Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 114-85, Part I.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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 Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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 Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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.
Source last updated: Aug 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.471 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.471 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.471 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.471 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.