PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Consumer Protection and Competitiveness.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 6, 1994
Consumer Products Safe Testing Act - Requires each Federal department or agency (department) head to: (1) evaluate any regulation, guideline, or recommendation issued by that department which requires, recommends, or encourages the use of the Draize or other animal acute toxicity test (animal test) to evaluate the safety of a regulated product; (2) evaluate nonanimal alternatives with the potential for partial or full replacement of such test; and (3) promulgate regulations, guidelines, or recommendations that specify a nonanimal acute toxicity test or battery of tests that should be used instead of an animal test unless the nonanimal test is less likely to predict the acute health effects of a product on humans. Directs the appropriate Federal department, if a determination is made that no nonanimal test is as likely to predict the human reaction to the regulated product as the animal test, to publish in the Federal Register an explanation of all options considered and the justification for continuing the animal test, which shall be subject to public comment. Requires each Federal department head, at least every two years (beginning three years after this Act's enactment date), after considering the most recent technological advances available, to determine whether continued use of any animal test is justified (and if the department head determines that such use is justified, such head shall publish an explanation and justification for such continued use in the Federal Register, which shall be subject to public comment). Makes this Act inapplicable to regulations, guidelines, or recommendations related to medical research.
People & committees
Rep. Lantos, Tom [D-CA-12] · D–CA
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 Commerce, Consumer Protection and Competitiveness.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2210)
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: Aug 26, 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.5222 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.5222 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.5222 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.5222 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.