PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 20, 2014
Critical Care Assessment and Improvement Act of 2014 - Requires studies on critical care health services by the Institute of Medicine and the Health Resources and Services Administration of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Directs HHS to establish the Critical Care Coordinating Working Group within the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to: (1) advance research and research training in the critical care setting across NIH and HHS; (2) coordinate funding opportunities that involve multiple components of HHS; (3) catalyze the development of new funding opportunities; (4) inform investigators about funding opportunities; (5) represent NIH in government-wide efforts to improve the critical care system; (6) coordinate the collection and analysis of information on NIH research relating to critical care and identify gaps in this research; (7) report annually to the Director of NIH on NIH research efforts relating to critical care; and (8) make recommendations on how to strengthen partnerships within NIH and HHS and public and private entities to expand collaborative, cross-cutting research.
Requires HHS to carry out a demonstration project to improve the quality and efficiency of critical care in acute care hospitals.
People & committees
Sen. Baldwin, Tammy [D-WI] · D–WI
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 Finance.
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.2966 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.2966 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.2966 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.2966 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.