PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 21, 2020
VA Research Approval Efficiency Act of 2020
This bill addresses clinical research procedures within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
Specifically, the bill requires the VA to complete policy revisions within the internal directive titled Requirements for the Protection of Human Subjects in Research to allow sponsored clinical research of the VA to use accredited commercial institutional review boards to review VA research proposal protocols.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The VA must identify accredited commercial institutional review boards for use in connection with sponsored clinical research of the VA and establish a process to modify existing approvals if a board loses its accreditation during an ongoing clinical trial.
The bill also requires the VA to establish an Office of Research Reviews within the VA's Office of Information and Technology. The office shall (1) perform centralized security reviews and complete security processes for approved research sponsored outside the VA, (2) develop and maintain a list of commercially available software preferred for use in sponsored clinical trials of the VA, (3) ensure such software list is maintained as part of the official approved software products list, and (4) develop benchmarks for time lines for security reviews.
People & committees
Sen. Cassidy, Bill [R-LA] · R–LA
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 Veterans' Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 6, 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.3224 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.3224 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.3224 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.3224 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.