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 · Aug 2, 2010
Cavernous Angioma CARE Center Act of 2010 - Amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to establish the Cavernous Angioma Clinical Care, Advocacy, Research, and Education Center of Excellence at the University of New Mexico to: (1) provide basic, translational, and clinical research with respect to new diagnostic, prevention, and novel treatment methodology for individuals with cavernous angioma; and (2) serve as a model for, and provide support to, medical schools and research institutions.
Requires the Director of the Center to: (1) ensure that the Center provides community-, family-, and patient-centered culturally sensitive care; (2) encourage and coordinate opportunities for individuals to participate in clinical research studies that will advance medical research and care; and (3) develop the Center as a model and training facility for other facilities throughout the United States that are engaged in research regarding, and care for individuals with, cavernous angioma.
People & committees
Sen. Udall, Tom [D-NM] · D–NM
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.
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 14, 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.3684 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.3684 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.3684 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.3684 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.