PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committees on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions; the Judiciary. Joint hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 108-826.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 19, 2003
Biological, Chemical, and Radiological Weapons Countermeasures Research Act - Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to add a new title, Title 18: Biological, Chemical, and Radiological Countermeasures Research, which may be cited as the Biological, Chemical, and Radiological Weapons Countermeasures Research Act of 2003.Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to make available to manufacturers of terror weapons countermeasures, and to publish, a list of materials that may be used as weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Directs the Secretary to revise the list on at least an annual basis. Requires the Secretary to determine countermeasures that diagnose, treat, or prevent infection from biological agents or toxins (countermeasures) for each item on the list.Requires private sector entities that are engaged in certain research to register with the Department of Homeland Security if they wish to benefit from various tax, patent, procurement, liability limitations, and other incentives established under this Act. Classifies such research as: (1) countermeasures; (2) equipment to detect a terrorist attack carried out with a terror weapon (detection equipment); (3) diagnostics to detect, identify, or analyze biological agents or toxins (diagnostics); and (4) research tools used in the laboratory (research tools) that enable the rapid and effective development of countermeasures.Establishes in the Treasury of the United States a "Terror Weapon Countermeasure Purchase Fund (TWCPF)" to purchase, and provide adequate payment for, countermeasures, detection equipment, diagnostics, and research tools.Extends market exclusivity for new drugs that are countermeasures.Authorizes the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to award partnership challenge grants to promote joint ventures between NIH, its grantees, and for-profit biotechnology, pharmaceutical, and medical device industries for the development of countermeasures and research tools.
People & committees
Sen. Lieberman, Joseph I. [D-CT] · D–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committees on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions; the Judiciary. Joint hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 108-826.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4009-4017)
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 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.666 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.666 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.666 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.666 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.