PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 12, 2003
Reducing Americans' Vulnerability to Ecstasy Act of 2003 or RAVE Act - Amends the Controlled Substances Act to prohibit knowingly leasing, renting, or using, or intentionally profiting from, any place (as well as opening, maintaining, leasing, or renting any place, as provided under current law), whether permanently or temporarily, for the purpose of manufacturing, storing, distributing, or using a controlled substance. Subjects violators to: (1) a civil penalty of the greater of $250,000 or twice the gross receipts derived from each violation; and (2) declaratory and injunctive remedies.Authorizes the court to apportion the penalty between multiple violators, but makes each violator jointly and severally liable.Directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to review and consider amending the Federal sentencing guidelines for offenses involving gamma hydroxybutyric acid to provide for increased penalties.Authorizes appropriations to the Drug Enforcement Administration for: (1) a Demand Reduction Coordinator in each State; and (2) educating youth, parents, and other interested adults regarding drugs associated with raves.
People & committees
Rep. Coble, Howard [R-NC-6] · R–NC
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 Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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 18, 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.718 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.718 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.718 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.718 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.