PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Jul 26, 2005
Children's Hospitals Educational Equity and Research Act or the CHEER Act - Amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to make payments through FY2010 (currently, through FY2005) to children's hospitals for expenses associated with operating approved graduate medical residency training programs.
Excludes reductions for unused resident positions when calculating the number of full-time residents in a children's hospital's approved training program for purposes of reimbursing direct expenses.
Requires the Secretary to adjust the proportion of such a hospital's costs attributable to wages for differences in hospital wage levels by geographic area.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes appropriations through FY2010 for direct and indirect expenses associated with operating such programs.
Expresses the sense of the Senate that: (1) perinatal hospitals play an important role in providing quality care and ensuring the best possible outcomes for thousands of seriously ill newborns each year; and (2) medical training programs at perinatal hospitals give providers essential training in treating healthy mothers and babies as well as patients in neonatal intensive care units.
People & committees
Sen. Bond, Christopher S. [R-MO] · R–MO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S9056; text as passed Senate: CR S9056)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S9056; text as passed Senate: CR S9056)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 98.
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Reported by Senator Enzi with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 109-66.
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Reported by Senator Enzi with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 109-66.
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
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: Apr 21, 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.285 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.285 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.285 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.285 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.