PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services. (text of measure as introduced: CR S6303)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 17, 2007
Amends the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 relating to the defense nanotechnology research and development program (program) to: (1) revise program purposes; (2) replace the Director of Defense Research and Engineering with the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics as program administrator; (3) outline program activities, including the development of a strategic plan for defense nanotechnology research and development that is integrated with the strategic plan for the National Nanotechnology Initiative; and (4) extend through 2011 program report requirements.
Requires a report from the Comptroller General to the congressional defense and appropriations committees on progress made by the Department of Defense (DOD) in achieving program purposes.
People & committees
Sen. Pryor, Mark L. [D-AR] · D–AR
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 Armed Services. (text of measure as introduced: CR S6303)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6302-6303)
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: Jan 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.1425 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.1425 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.1425 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.1425 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.