Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that illicit fentanyl-related substances are a weapon of mass destruction and should be classified as such.

Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.

Congressional Research Service

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 17, 2023

This resolution expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that (1) the President should classify synthetic illicit fentanyl-related substances as weapons of mass destruction; and (2) illicit fentanyl, and illicit fentanyl-related substances, should be permanently placed in schedule I (i.e., as drugs, substances, or chemicals with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse).

Read the summary on Congress.gov

PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

People & committees

Who introduced it

Rep. Dunn, Neal P. [R-FL-2] · R–FL

Committees

Energy and Commerce Committee
Judiciary Committee

12 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Legislative record

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

Jan 27, 2023
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Jan 17, 2023
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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.
Jan 17, 2023
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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.
Jan 17, 2023
Introduced in House
Jan 17, 2023
Introduced in House

Primary sources

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Introduced in House · Jan 17, 2023 Formatted Text PDF Formatted XML

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Jun 12, 2024. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

AI Conversation Starters

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.Res.39 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.39, 118th Congress: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that illicit fentanyl-related substances are a weapon of mass destruction and should be classified as such.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/39

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 2023-01-17.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hres39/BILLS-118hres39ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2024-06-12T18:20:53Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Analyze H.Res.39 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.

Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.Res.39 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.39, 118th Congress: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that illicit fentanyl-related substances are a weapon of mass destruction and should be classified as such.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/39

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 2023-01-17.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hres39/BILLS-118hres39ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2024-06-12T18:20:53Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.Res.39 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.

Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.Res.39 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.39, 118th Congress: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that illicit fentanyl-related substances are a weapon of mass destruction and should be classified as such.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/39

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 2023-01-17.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hres39/BILLS-118hres39ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2024-06-12T18:20:53Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.Res.39 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.

Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.Res.39 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.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss H.Res.39, 118th Congress: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that illicit fentanyl-related substances are a weapon of mass destruction and should be classified as such.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/39

Text version to examine: Introduced in House · 2023-01-17.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hres39/BILLS-118hres39ih.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2024-06-12T18:20:53Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.Res.39 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.