PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 15, 2013
Methamphetamine Education, Treatment, and Hope Act of 2010 - 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.
Revises requirements governing a grant program for substance abuse residential treatment for pregnant and parenting women (currently, for postpartum women), to include treatment for addiction to methamphetamine, outpatient treatment services, and referrals for dental services.
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.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Revises requirements for biennial reports to Congress to require such reports to include: (1) data on the number of pregnant and parenting women in need of, but not receiving, treatment for substance abuse; and (2) data on recovery and relapse rates of women receiving treatment for substance abuse under the grant program.
Requires the Director to expand, intensify, and coordinate efforts to provide pregnant and parenting women treatment for addiction to methamphetamine or other drugs.
Requires the Director of the Office for Substance Abuse Prevention to: (1) maintain a clearinghouse that provides information and educational materials to employers and employees about comprehensive drug-free workplace programs and substance abuse prevention and treatment resources; and (2) support the involvement of youth in the development and implementation of prevention strategies focused on youth.
People & committees
Rep. McNerney, Jerry [D-CA-9] · 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 Health.
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 12, 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.752 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.752 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.752 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.752 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.