PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 14, 2010
Declares that the House of Representatives: (1) identifies the need for actions to improve the diagnosis and treatment of peripheral arterial disease (PAD); and (2) resolves to promote efforts to increase public and clinician awareness of PAD.
Encourages: (1) the Administrator of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services to examine ways to increase the number of persons that are aware of and screened for PAD; and (2) the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), acting through the National Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention Program, to examine ways to educate medical professionals about the benefits of PAD screening and assess and reduce regional disparities in the diagnosis and treatment of PAD.
Calls for the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to continue NIH's leadership role in the fight against PAD by: (1) continuing and increasing the support of its respective Institutes for basic and clinical PAD research, for PAD comparative effectiveness studies, and for assessing and improving public awareness of PAD; (2) encouraging the funding for biomedical research and education with respect to PAD through the co-sponsorship of workshops and seminars with respected patient organizations; (3) exploring collaborative opportunities for PAD research using the multidisciplinary approach; and (4) exploring collaborative opportunities with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to expand access to proven diagnostic methods and therapeutic interventions via sponsorship of annual PAD strategic planning meetings.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Calls for the Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality to include PAD in its strategic vision to improve health outcomes, strengthen quality measurement and improvement, and improve health care access for individuals with PAD, through offering support to research centers that specialize in PAD health care research.
People & committees
Rep. Paulsen, Erik [R-MN-3] · R–MN
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.1438 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.1438 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.1438 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.1438 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.