PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.

FREED of Opioids Act

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 7, 2023

FDA Review of Efficacy of EERW Double-Blinds of Opioids Act or the FREED of Opioids Act

This bill requires the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to take certain actions to determine whether to permit the use of a certain methodology for drug clinical trials.

Specifically, the FDA must seek to contract with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) for the NAS to conduct a study on the effectiveness of using enriched enrollment randomized withdrawal methodology in demonstrating the efficacy of opioid drugs in treating chronic pain.

The FDA must also convene a meeting of two specified FDA advisory committees to review the NAS study, vote on whether to permit the use of this methodology in drug clinical trials, and review the appropriateness of labeling on approved opioid drugs in relation to this methodology.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Sen. Manchin, Joe, III [D-WV] · D–WV

Committees

  • Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee
1 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

  2. Introduced in Senate

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Apr 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze S.2737 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine S.2737 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine S.2737 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine S.2737 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.

View full prompt & sources