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 53 · Passed House · Mar 5, 2024
9-8-8 Lifeline Cybersecurity Responsibility Act
This bill requires the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) to undertake efforts to protect the 9-8-8 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline from cybersecurity threats. (The lifeline is a three-digit number that connects callers in suicidal crisis or mental health distress to a national network of crisis centers.)
The bill also expands related reporting requirements. Specifically, the network administrator for the lifeline must report identified cybersecurity incidents and vulnerabilities to SAMHSA, and local and regional crisis centers that participate in the lifeline must report identified cybersecurity incidents and vulnerabilities to the administrator.
Additionally, the Government Accountability Office must conduct a study that evaluates cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities associated with the lifeline and report the findings to Congress.
People & committees
Rep. Obernolte, Jay [R-CA-23] · R–CA
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.
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 H797)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H797)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 498.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H797-798)
Mr. Guthrie moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 35.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 118-52.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 118-52.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 46 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 27 - 0 .
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.
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.498 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.498 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.498 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.498 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.