PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 18, 2000
Requires the President to appoint a Deputy Administrator for Science and Technology of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to have overall responsibility for the scientific and technical foundation of EPA decisions.Redesignates the EPA Deputy Administrator as the Deputy Administrator for Policy and Management.Designates one of the EPA Assistant Administrators as the Assistant Administrator for Research and Development and Chief Scientist.Expresses the sense of Congress concerning: (1) EPA Office of Research and Development flexibility and accountability, balance between types of research, application of research conducted by others, and documentation and transparency of decisionmaking; and (2) EPA research dissemination and application, expansion of a science inventory, and peer review policy.
People & committees
Rep. Ehlers, Vernon J. [R-MI-3] · R–MI
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 Energy and Environment.
Referred to the House Committee on Science.
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: Jan 2, 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.5195 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.5195 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.5195 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.5195 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.