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 S1211-1212)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 26, 2002
Health Professionals Substance Abuse Education Act - Authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services to enter into interagency agreements with the Health Resources Services Administration (Association for Medical Education and Research in Substance Abuse Interdisciplinary Project) or the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (Addiction Technology Transfer Centers counselor training programs) to carry out training activities for health professionals concerning the diagnosis, intervention, treatment, treatment referral, and prevention program advocacy with respect to substance abuse.Directs the Secretary to establish and administer a substance abuse faculty fellowship program to provide assistance to enable eligible institutions to employ individuals to serve as faculty and provide substance abuse training in a multi-disciplinary manner.Requires the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy to convene an interagency oversight committee to coordinate Federal activities concerning substance abuse training for health professionals.
People & committees
Sen. Biden, Joseph R., Jr. [D-DE] · D–DE
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 S1211-1212)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1210-1211)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 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.1966 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.1966 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.1966 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.1966 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.