PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 22, 2004
Post 9/11 Health Protection Act of 2004 - Establishes in the Treasury the September 11 Emergency Personnel Trust Fund. Amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase by one percent the tax imposed on adjusted gross income that exceeds $1,000,000 for married individuals filing jointly or that exceeds $500,000 in any other case. Appropriates amounts equal to the taxes received because of such increase to the Fund.
Amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services, acting through the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to award from such Fund grants or cooperative agreements to specified programs, including one established by the New York City Fire Department, to carry out screening and clinical examinations and long-term health monitoring for covered individuals, including emergency service personnel, clean up workers, and residents affected by the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, in New York City. Limits such monitoring to 20 years and 40,000 individuals. Allows the Secretary to establish a similar program for those affected by the September 11, 2001, Pentagon attack.
Requires the Director of the National Institutes of Health to conduct or support diagnostic or treatment research for certain adverse health conditions considered to be associated with the terrorist attacks.
People & committees
Rep. Meeks, Gregory W. [D-NY-6] · D–NY
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 Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, 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 Ways and Means, 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 Ways and Means, 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: Aug 18, 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.4974 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.4974 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.4974 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.4974 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.