PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 28, 2010
Methamphetamine Prevention Campaign Grant Program Act of 2010 - Authorizes the Attorney General to make one-year matching grants to states, local governments, or private nonprofit organizations (eligible entities) to establish a methamphetamine prevention campaign which shall be aimed at teenagers. Authorizes the use of grant funds to: (1) produce and develop television, radio, Internet, and print advertisements and educational materials; (2) provide for community outreach to motivate community involvement in methamphetamine education; (3) produce a benchmark survey and periodic studies of attitudes and behaviors related to methamphetamine; and (4) conduct qualitative research to assist in the development and testing of the messaging of a methamphetamine prevention campaign and the effectiveness of methamphetamine education.
Requires the Attorney General to give priority in making grants to eligible entities that: (1) are addressing widespread methamphetamine use or an emerging threat of such use; (2) have dedicated personnel to oversee a methamphetamine prevention campaign; and (3) demonstrate an ability to provide quality-tested television and print copy for advertising and educational purposes.
People & committees
Rep. Salazar, John T. [D-CO-3] · D–CO
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.5916 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.5916 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.5916 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.5916 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.