PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Sep 25, 2008
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Meth Free Families and Communities Act - (Sec. 2) Amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Director of the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment to collaborate with professionals in the addiction field and primary health care providers to raise awareness about how to: (1) recognize the signs of a substance abuse disorder; and (2) apply evidence-based practices for screening and treating individuals with, or at-risk for developing, an addiction.
(Sec. 3) Revises provisions governing a grant program for substance abuse residential treatment for pregnant and parenting women (currently, for postpartum women) to: (1) include treatment for addiction to methamphetamine, outpatient treatment services, and referrals for dental services; and (2) require programs to be accessible to pregnant and parenting women in low-income households and in health disparity populations.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Director to give grant priority to a program serving an area that: (1) is a rural area, an area with a shortage of mental health professionals, or an area with a shortage of family-based substance abuse treatment options; and (2) has high rates of addiction to methamphetamine or other drugs.
Requires the Director to: (1) include in biennial reports to Congress data on the number of pregnant and parenting women in need of, but not receiving, treatment for substance abuse and on recovery and relapse rates of women receiving such treatment; and (2) expand, intensify, and coordinate efforts to provide pregnant and parenting women treatment for addiction to methamphetamine or other drugs.
Reauthorizes appropriations for FY2009-FY2013 for the substance abuse program.
(Sec. 4) Requires the Director of the Office for Substance Abuse Prevention to develop a clearinghouse that provides information and educational materials to employers and employees about drug testing policies and programs.
(Sec. 5) Authorizes amounts made available for methamphetamine or inhalant prevention programs in schools and communities to be used to develop a student-driven methamphetamine awareness project.
People & committees
Rep. Hooley, Darlene [D-OR-5] · D–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR 9/23/2008 H8678-8679)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR 9/23/2008 H8678-8679)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H9913)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Burgess objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6901.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8678-8681)
Mr. Pallone moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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: Apr 7, 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.6901 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.6901 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.6901 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.6901 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.