PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 30, 1998
New Drugs of the 1990's Control Act - Amends Controlled Substances Act provisions regarding the temporary scheduling of a substance in schedule I to avoid an imminent public safety hazard. Authorizes the Attorney General, upon determining that the scheduling or rescheduling of a substance on a temporary basis is necessary to avoid such imminent hazard, to schedule the substance (by order and without regard to specified requirements relating to the Secretary of Health and Human Services) in schedule I if no exemption or approval is in effect for the substance, or in schedule II if the substance is not listed in schedule I. Authorizes the Attorney General to extend the temporary scheduling or rescheduling of a substance until a final order becomes effective. Directs the Attorney General to: (1) transfer flunitrazepam from schedule IV to schedule I; and (2) add ketamine hydrochloride to schedule III.
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 Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3931-3932)
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: Aug 10, 2026. 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.2014 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.2014 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.2014 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.2014 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.