PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 30, 2005
Restore Scientific Integrity to Federal Research and Policymaking Act - Prohibits a federal employee from engaging in: (1) tampering with the conduct of federally funded scientific research or analysis; (2) censorship of findings of such research or analysis; or (3) directing the dissemination of scientific information known by the directing employee to be false or misleading. Sets forth a penalty for violations of such prohibition.
Includes under prohibited personnel practices the taking or failing to take, or threatening to take or failing to take, a personnel action with respect to any employee because of: (1) the development or dissemination, within the scope of employment, of scientific research or analysis that the employee reasonably believes to be accurate and valid; (2) any disclosure of information by an employee or applicant which the employee or applicant reasonably believes evidences an abuse of authority, including but not limited to, tampering with the conduct of federally funded scientific research or analysis, censoring the findings of such research or analysis, or directing the dissemination of scientific information known by the directing employee to be false or misleading.
Sets forth requirements relating to federal scientific advisory committees. States that all appointments to such committees shall be made without regard to political affiliation, unless required by federal statute.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs each federal agency to determine a peer review process that is appropriate for the agency's functions and needs. Prohibits "The Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review", issued on December 16, 2004, from applying to any agency that has established its own peer review process. Prohibits the Office of Management and Budget from taking any action to discourage an agency from determining and establishing a peer-review process appropriate for its needs.
Requires the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy to provide annual reports regarding scientific integrity.
People & committees
Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL] · D–IL
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 Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR 7/1/2005 S7851-7852)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 15, 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.1358 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.1358 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.1358 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.1358 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.