PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 20, 2013
Safe Prescribing Act of 2013 - Amends the Controlled Substances Act to remove dihydrocodeinone (hydrocodone) from classification as a schedule III controlled substance.
Directs the Attorney General to immediately allow manufacturers and distributors to store hydrocodone combination products in accordance with the physical security requirements for schedule III, IV, and V controlled substances for three years beginning on the date of enactment of this Act.
Requires the Comptroller General to submit a report on the reclassification of hydrocodone products under this Act, including: (1) an assessment of the degree to which the reclassification of such products under this Act impacts the ability of patients with legitimate medical needs, particularly those in rural areas and nursing home facilities, to access adequate pain management; and (2) recommendations necessary to address any issues relating to patient access to adequate pain management.
People & committees
Sen. Manchin, Joe, III [D-WV] · D–WV
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 the Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 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.621 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.621 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.621 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.621 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.