PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (text of measure as introduced: CR S7518-7519)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 13, 2006
HIV Prevention for Youth Act - Expresses the sense of Congress that sexually active young people who live in a country where HIV infection is spreading through the general population, rather than being confined to specific populations should be: (1) considered at high risk of contracting HIV infection; and (2) provided with the knowledge, skill-building programs, and tools to protect themselves from HIV infection.
Amends the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 to define "abstinence-until-marriage programs" as programs that place the highest priority on encouraging unmarried individuals to abstain from sexual activity, which if practiced 100% correctly and consistently is the only certain way to protect against exposure to HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. (Such programs include information on the health benefits of delayed sexual debut in reducing HIV transmission and may be used to support approaches that promote skill-building strategies for practicing abstinence.) Reserves at least 33% of the Act's appropriations for FY2006-FY2008 for prevention of the sexual transmission of HIV (currently, for HIV/AIDS prevention).
Amends the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to include within the activities for which HIV/AIDS assistance is available preventive intervention education for sexually active young people who live in a country experiencing a generalized HIV epidemic.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Defines " generalized epidemic" as a country where: (1) HIV infection is spreading through the general population, rather than being confined to specific populations, such as sex workers and their clients, injecting drug users, and men who have sex with men; and (2) the HIV infection rate among people between the ages of 15 and 49 exceeds 1%.
People & committees
Sen. Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] · D–CA
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 Foreign Relations. (text of measure as introduced: CR S7518-7519)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S7517-7518)
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 15, 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.3656 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.3656 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.3656 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.3656 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.