PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Aug 3, 2007
Directs the Secretary of Defense (Secretary) to establish within the Department of Defense (DOD) the Center of Excellence in Prevention, Diagnosis, Mitigation, Treatment, and Rehabilitation of Military Eye Injuries to: (1) develop, implement, and oversee a registry for tracking the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up for each case of eye injury incurred by a member of the Armed Forces in combat that requires surgery or other operative intervention; and (2) ensure the electronic exchange of registry information with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
Requires the Secretary to: (1) include in the registry records of members who incurred eye injuries in combat in Operations Iraqi Freedom or Enduring Freedom before the registry's establishment; and (2) report to Congress on the Center's establishment.
Directs the Secretary and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to conduct a cooperative study on neuro-optometric screening and diagnosis of members with traumatic brain injury (TBI) by military medical treatment facilities and VA medical centers for purposes of vision screening, diagnosis, rehabilitative management, and vision research on visual dysfunction related to TBI.
People & committees
Sen. Kerry, John F. [D-MA] · D–MA
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.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.1999 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.1999 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.1999 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.1999 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.