PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S5849-5850)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 21, 2009
Informed Health Care Decision Making Act - Requires the Commissioner of Food and Drugs (FDA) to: (1) determine whether standardized, quantitative summaries of the benefits and risks of drugs in a tabular or drug facts box format would improve health care decisionmaking by clinicians, patients, and consumers; and (2) establish and update standards for comparative clinical effectiveness information in the labeling and advertising of drugs and devices under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Defines "comparative clinical effectiveness" as the clinical outcomes, effectiveness, safety, and clinical appropriateness of a drug or device in comparison to one or more drugs or devices approved to prevent, diagnose, or treat the same health condition in the same patient demographic subpopulation.
Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require information on comparative clinical effectiveness for drugs and devices in labeling and advertising.
People & committees
Sen. Reed, Jack [D-RI] · D–RI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S5849-5850)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S5848-5849)
Introduced in Senate
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 14, 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 S.1142 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 S.1142 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 S.1142 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 S.1142 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.