PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 12, 2010
Recognizes: (1) that the public deserves the safest, most effective, and efficient processes to save the lives of people living in the United States with infectious and chronic diseases; and (2) the need to coordinate existing public funding to help small business biotechnology firms whose products may be lost due to domestic economic conditions, and to fund critical paths for small biotechnology drug development and for regulatory review and commercial approval.
Expresses support for: (1) the domestic development and commercialization of biotechnology research by firms meeting small business size standards and collaborations with university-based biotechnology research facilities; and (2) the advancement of U.S.-based commercialization of point of care therapeutics and diagnostics by emerging and small business biotechnology firms for domestic and global use.
Encourages: (1) the development of a national strategic framework to facilitate technological advancements in improving the commercialization processes for small business biotechnology firms; (2) the creation of incentives for small business biotechnology companies that perform basic and applied research through the development and commercialization of biotechnology products and processes and their diffusion into national and local economies; (3) the development of a comprehensive approach to describing disease populations and the production of comprehensive research programs that are current with evolving biotechnology and the unmet needs of diverse patient populations; and (4) the Office of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to develop a Federal Biotechnology Coordinating Council representative of small business biotechnology companies, research facilities, and federal agencies with a strategic initiative to facilitate development and preserve these small business biotechnology firms and coordinate resources and funding mechanisms.
People & committees
Rep. Davis, Danny K. [D-IL-7] · D–IL
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 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.Res.1179 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.Res.1179 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.Res.1179 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.Res.1179 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.