H.R. 4299: Improving Regulatory Transparency for New Medical Therapies Act
Before you vote › Federal bills
H.R. 4299: Improving Regulatory Transparency for New Medical Therapies Act
113th Congress · introduced 2014-03-26 · Crime and Law Enforcement · Latest: Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 451.
federal
Follow this bill, step by step
- Where it came from: introduced 2014-03-26 · official record
- Who proposed it: Rep. Pitts, Joseph R. [R-PA-16] · what a sponsor is
- What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
- Where it stands now: Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 451. Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
- If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.
Official title
Improving Regulatory Transparency for New Medical Therapies Act
Plain summary
Improving Regulatory Transparency for New Medical Therapies Act - Amends the Controlled Substances Act to require any proceedings for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule of the Attorney General for the classification of a controlled substance that are initiated at the request of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to control a drug or other substance not previously scheduled, where the Secretary has recommended the drug or other substance be placed in schedule II, III, IV, or V, to be commenced not later than 120 days after receipt of written recommendations from the Secretary. Requires the final rule to be issued not later than 60 days after the date on which both the public comment period has closed and the new drug is the subject of an approved new drug application, unless a hearing on the proposed rule is granted by the Attorney General. Directs the Attorney General, for the purposes of registration to manufacture a controlled substance in schedule III, IV, or V for use only in a clinical trial, to register an applicant, or serve upon the applicant an order to show cause why registration should not be denied, revoked, or suspended, not later than 180 days after receiving an application and all information necessary to make a determination about whether the issuance of such registration is inconsistent with the public interest. Directs the Attorney General, for the purposes of registration to manufacture a controlled substance in schedule I or II for use only in a clinical trial, to: (1) issue a notice of application not later than 90 days after receipt of an application and all necessary information to issue such notice; and (2) register an applicant, or serve upon the applicant an order to show cause why registration should not be denied, revoked, or suspended, within 180 days following the close of the comment period and receipt of all information necessary to make a determination about whether the issuance of such registration is consistent with the public interest and with U.S. obligations under international treaties in effect on May 1, 1971, unless a hearing on the application has been granted pursuant to a provision of the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act regarding emergency situations.
Congressional Research Service summary (Reported to House amended, Part II), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.
What a vote does
A “Yea” vote
If it passes both chambers and is signed, it becomes law.
A “Nay” vote
If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.
PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).
What does this mean? (plain words)
Official text
Improving Regulatory Transparency for New Medical Therapies Act
Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Reported to House amended, Part II)
AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text
No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.
Limited to a few requests an hour per person.
The strongest published arguments
Arguments for (supporters)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Arguments against (opponents)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Alternatives
Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes
Officials and money
Sponsor: Rep. Pitts, Joseph R. [R-PA-16] · 15 cosponsors
Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.
Cosponsors on this site
Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), H. Morgan Griffith (R-VA), Robert E. Latta (R-OH), Paul Tonko (D-NY)
No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.
Words on this page, explained (3)
- Obligation
- A binding promise by a government agency to pay money, for example by signing a contract or awarding a grant. Spending data such as USAspending.gov counts money when it is obligated, which can be before it is actually paid out.
- Public comment
- A chance for anyone to tell a government agency what they think about a proposed rule or plan before it is final. Agencies must consider the comments they receive.
- Rulemaking
- The process agencies use to write regulations that carry out laws passed by Congress or a legislature. Usually an agency publishes a proposed rule, takes public comments, then publishes a final rule.
Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.
Sources
- Congressional Research Service summary (Reported to House amended, Part II)
- Congress.gov
- Data: GovInfo BILLSTATUS bulk data (Library of Congress), BILLSTATUS-113hr4299.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/113/hr>
Record fed-us-cong113-hr4299 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong113 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong113