PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to Subcommittee on International Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 29, 1999
Physician Assistant Equity Act - Requires the Director of the Office of Personnel Management: (1) to review the classification of the position of physician assistant; (2) in conducting the review, to solicit comments from physician assistants and organizations representative of physician assistants and give specific consideration to the private sector qualifications, requirements for practice, compensation, and experience of such an assistant and the educational and practice qualifications required for the position, including national accreditation standards and State licensing requirements; (3) to reclassify the position in a professional class that is different from the class of positions that includes any nurse position or medical technician position; and (4) to make any appropriate adjustments in personnel and pay administration consistent with the review and classification conducted under this Act.
People & committees
Sen. Conrad, Kent [D-ND] · D–ND
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to Subcommittee on International Security.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4433)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 20, 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.909 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.909 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.909 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.909 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.