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 · Oct 4, 2002
Research Revitalization Act of 2002 - Amends the Public Health Service Act to require research involving human subjects conducted in America, funded by the U.S. Government, or subject to Federal regulatory review to meet certain criteria. Establishes within the Department of Health and Human Services an Office of Human Research Protections, with a Director to be appointed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.Declares that, effective June 1, 2005, certain provisions of the Code of Federal Regulations shall supersede prior Federal laws and regulations relating to the protection of human research subjects.Prohibits investigators from conducting covered research unless it is approved by an Institutional Review Board, effective six years after the enactment of this Act.Allows the Secretary to award demonstration grants to modify the functioning of Institutional Review Boards.Requires the Director, in consultation with the Secretary of State, to periodically publish a list of foreign countries in which protections for human research participants are substantially equivalent to those of the United States.Requires the Director, after appropriate consultation, to promulgate regulations regarding payments for the recruitment or participation of human participants in covered research.Sets forth rules with respect to financial conflicts of interest regarding covered research, and requires the Director to promulgate regulations to cover certain cases of such conflicts of interest involving not-for-profit institutions.Allows the Secretary to bring an action in U.S. District Court to enjoin continuation of covered research deemed harmful to a human participant.Protects individuals who report violations of certain provisions of this Act from being fired or disciplined. Establishes a civil penalty of up to $250,000 for violation of certain provisions of this Act (including of related regulations).
People & committees
Sen. Kennedy, Edward M. [D-MA] · D–MA
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 S9993-9994)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 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.3060 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.3060 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.3060 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.3060 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.