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 · Jan 28, 2015
Collaborative Academic Research Efforts for Tourette Syndrome Act of 2015
Amends the Public Health Service Act to require the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to expand, intensify, and coordinate NIH research on Tourette syndrome.
Requires the NIH to develop a system to collect data on Tourette syndrome, including epidemiological information, primary data, and data on the availability of medical and social services for individuals with Tourette syndrome and their families.
Requires the NIH to award grants and contracts to public or nonprofit private entities to support four to six Collaborative Research Centers for Tourette Syndrome in different regions to conduct basic and clinical research on Tourette syndrome.
Requires the NIH to award grants for research on the full range of symptoms within the Tourette syndrome clinical spectrum and the efficacy of treatment options for particular patient subpopulations.
Requires the NIH to designate a portion of the amounts made available to carry out NIH programs and activities for a fiscal year to carry out programs and activities with respect to Tourette syndrome.
People & committees
Sen. Menendez, Robert [D-NJ] · D–NJ
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.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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.276 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.276 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.276 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.276 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.