PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 29, 2010
Community Mental Health and Addiction Safety Net Equity Act of 2010 - Amends the Public Health Service Act to replace community mental health centers with federally qualified behavioral health centers which treat substance abuse in addition to mental illness and other conditions.
Amends title XIX (Medicaid) of the Social Security Act to extend Medicaid coverage to federally qualified behavioral health center services.
Directs the Institute of Medicine to: (1) evaluate for Congress the combined paperwork burden of federally qualified behavioral health centers; and (2) analyze and report to Congress on the compensation structure of professional and paraprofessional personnel employed by federally qualified behavioral health centers nationwide as compared with the compensation structure of comparable health safety net providers and relevant private sector health care employers.
People & committees
Rep. Matsui, Doris O. [D-CA-5] · 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 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: Aug 14, 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.5636 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.5636 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.5636 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.5636 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.