PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 14, 2006
Heart Disease Education, Analysis, and Research, and Treatment for Women Act or the HEART for Women Act - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the Public Health Service Act to require an application for approval or for investigation of a drug, device, or biological product to include information stratified by gender, race, and ethnicity, including any differences in safety and effectiveness. Requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to: (1) withhold approval of such an application or place a clinical hold on an investigation if such information is not included; and (2) report to the scientific community and make information available to the public on such stratified data upon approval of an application.
Requires the Comptroller General to study the drug approval process to ensure compliance with this Act.
Requires the Secretary to require that all nonidentifiable patient safety work product reported to a patient safety database be stratified by gender.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Amends title XVIII (Medicare) the Social Security Act (SSA) to require the Secretary to make hospital quality data relating to the quality of care in inpatient settings available to the public stratified by gender.
Requires the Secretary, acting through the Director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), to report to Congress concerning the quality of and access to care for women with heart disease, stroke, and other cardiovascular diseases.
Requires utilization and quality control peer review organizations to offer quality improvement assistance aimed at eliminating gender disparities.
Amends title IX (employment security provisions) of SSA to require that data be stratified by gender when collected and used in surveys evaluating whether Medicare providers meet applicable conditions of participation or coverage.
Provides for an educational campaign relating to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular diseases in women.
People & committees
Sen. Stabenow, Debbie [D-MI] · D–MI
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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1176-1177)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.2278 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.2278 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.2278 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.2278 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.