PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 9, 2022
Restoring Confidence to the World Anti-Doping Agency Act of 2022
This bill modifies the authority of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) and the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) with respect to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).
Specifically, the ONDCP, in conjunction with USADA, must
use all available tools to ensure that WADA maintains a proper conflict-of-interest policy and that independent athletes from the United States and other democratic countries, or representatives of such athletes, have voting positions on the Executive Committee and governing bodies of WADA;
demonstrate leadership within the global community;
have strict standards that work toward countering the state-sponsored doping system of the Russian Federation and other state-sponsored, systemic fraud through doping; and
work collaboratively with democratic countries.
The bill requires the United States to have at least one seat on the Executive Committee of WADA as a condition of its participation in WADA.
People & committees
Sen. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN] · R–TN
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 Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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.3617 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.3617 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.3617 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.3617 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.