Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 18, 1995
TABLE OF CONTENTS: Title I: National Fund for Health Research Title II: Financing Provisions National Fund for Health Research Act - Title I: National Fund for Health Research - Establishes the National Fund for Health Research. Transfers to the fund amounts received as a result of Internal Revenue Code amendments made by this Act plus any overpayment designations or contributions as provided for in this Act. Mandates distributions from the Fund to the National Institutes of Health, to the National Center for Research Resources, and for carrying out specified Public Health Service Act provisions relating to health information communications. Excludes amounts in the Fund from consideration or enforcement with regard to the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985. Title II: Financing Provisions - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to increase the excise tax on tobacco products and cigarette papers and tubes. (Sec. 203) Requires such materials exported without tax payment to be marked as regulations require. Imposes, for related violations, a monetary penalty and requires forfeiture of the materials and any vessels, vehicles, and aircraft used. Regulates reimportation. Adds references to importers to provisions relating to permits, inventories, reports, and certain criminal penalties and forfeitures. Ends: (1) tax-free consumption by manufacturers' employees; and (2) tax-free removal for the use of the United States. Subjects to taxation all books or sets of cigarette papers regardless of the number of papers. Allows denial of a permit to operate as a manufacturer, importer, or export warehouse proprietor if minimum capacity or activity requirements are not met. (Sec. 204) Imposes an excise tax on roll-your-own tobacco manufactured in or imported to the United States. (Sec. 205) Allows an individual to designate that a portion of any tax overpayment and a cash contribution be paid over to the Fund. Terminates the designation provisions when the sum of all designations for the second and third preceding years is less than $5 million.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. 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 S.1251 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
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.1251 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
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.1251 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
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.1251 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.