PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 3, 2015
Medical Evaluation Parity for Servicemembers Act of 2015
Directs the Secretary of the military department concerned to: (1) provide an individual with a mental health screening before such individual enlists or is commissioned as an officer in the Armed Forces, and (2) use such results as a baseline for any subsequent mental health examinations.
Prohibits the Secretary from considering the results of such screening in determining the promotion of a member of the Armed Forces.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary to treat a screening in the same manner as medical records with respect to laws and regulations relating to the privacy of information.
Requires the National Institute of Mental Health of the National Institutes of Health to submit to Congress and the Department of Defense (DOD) a report on preliminary mental health screenings of members of the Armed Forces, including recommendations regarding: (1) establishing preliminary mental health screenings to establish parity with physical screenings; and (2) the composition of the mental health screening, evidenced-based best practices, and how to track changes relating to traumatic brain injuries, post-traumatic stress disorder, and other conditions.
Directs DOD and the Government Accountability Office to report on the efficacy of preliminary mental health screenings. Requires DOD to report on the efficacy of the mental health components of the physical examinations to members of the Armed Forces who are separated from active duty.
People & committees
Sen. Portman, Rob [R-OH] · R–OH
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 Armed Services.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.646 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.646 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.646 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.646 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.