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 · Sep 29, 2006
Remember 9/11 Health Act - Amends the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to deem certain emergency service, rescue and recovery, and law enforcement personnel and transit and cleanup workers who responded to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in New York City, residents of and individuals employed or attending school, child care, or adult day care in the declared disaster area (eligible recipients) to be civil employees under provisions relating to: (1) compensation to federal employees for work injuries; and (2) claims relating to damage to, or loss of, personal property incident to federal service, except that such an eligible recipient shall not be responsible for the payment of any health care expenses that result from exposure to the adverse conditions after such attack.
Amends the Public Health Service Act to direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to award grants or cooperative agreements to specified programs, including one established by the New York City Fire Department, to carry out screening and clinical examinations and long-term health monitoring and analysis for eligible recipients. Limits such monitoring to 20 years and 40,000 individuals.
Requires the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to conduct or support diagnostic or treatment research for adverse health conditions considered to be associated with the terrorist attacks.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Allows the Secretary to establish similar compensation and health programs for those affected by the September 11, 2001, Pentagon attack.
Requires the Secretary to convene a 9/11 Health Emergency Coordinating Council to examine and formulate recommendations on the adequacy of the: (1) responses by the federal, state, and local governments and the private sector to the attacks; (2) care and compensation for the victims; (3) federal tracking of the monitoring and treatment of individuals suffering health effects from the attacks; and (4) coordination among the Council members to the attacks. Allows the Council, upon request, to issue advisory opinions on the relative obligation of the federal government and any insurance company resulting from the attacks.
People & committees
Sen. Clinton, Hillary Rodham [D-NY] · D–NY
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.
Source last updated: Dec 12, 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.4022 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.4022 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.4022 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.4022 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.