Overview
Title
To amend the Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act to reauthorize such Office, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
H.R. 9598 is a bill that wants to help stop bad drugs by giving money to different groups and teams so they can work together and keep people safe; it also makes sure they study how well the help for stopping drug overdoses is working.
Summary AI
The bill, H.R. 9598, seeks to reauthorize and amend the Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act, enhancing efforts to combat drug trafficking and misuse in the United States. It introduces amendments to definitions, funding allocations, and strategies for addressing emerging drug threats, including support for opioid antagonists like naloxone. The bill emphasizes cooperation between federal, state, and local agencies and extends the duration of grants and funding for initiatives focused on drug control and prevention until 2031. Additionally, it requires the Office of National Drug Control Policy to submit a report to Congress on the availability of life-saving opioid overdose reversal medications.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The bill titled "Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 2024" seeks to amend existing drug control policy legislation to bolster its capacity to address the increasingly complex challenges of drug misuse and trafficking in the United States. It aims to update the language in previous acts and introduce new measures for more effective prevention, treatment, enforcement, and resources related to national drug control efforts.
General Summary of the Bill
Primarily, the bill focuses on reauthorizing the Office of National Drug Control Policy, enhancing terms and definitions related to drug threats, promoting harm reduction by ensuring accessibility to life-saving medications like naloxone, and empowering efforts against illicit drug trafficking. It includes broader definitions, outlines funding allocations, and mandates cooperation among different governmental departments for a unified approach to drug control. The bill also emphasizes community-based strategies and calls for reports assessing the availability and effectiveness of opioid overdose reversal medications.
Summary of Significant Issues
A notable issue is the discretionary language change from “shall” to “may,” which potentially weakens the enforceability of certain policies, rendering them less mandatory and potentially less effective. The absence of specific guidelines for grant distributions and impact measurement could lead to inconsistent funding and potential favoritism. Tight deadlines for reporting, as seen in the 180-day deadline for a study on opioid reversal agents, might not allow ample time for effective data gathering and analysis, compromising the quality of the findings. Additionally, the bill emphasizes coordination across multiple departments without specifying clear accountability measures, potentially leading to diluted responsibility. Lastly, lacking clear metrics for assessing strategic outcomes could hamper effective evaluation and success measurement.
Potential Public Impact
For the public, the bill aims to enhance current drug control efforts, potentially leading to reduced drug misuse and enhanced community health and safety. Its emphasis on making life-saving drugs readily available, if effectively implemented, could significantly lower overdose mortality rates. The public may also benefit from more robust measures against drug trafficking, potentially reducing related crime and improving general safety.
Stakeholder Impact
Positive Impacts The bill promises significant benefits for community health organizations and law enforcement agencies. Increased access to naloxone could empower communities to handle overdose cases more effectively. Law enforcement agencies may gain enhanced resources and directives for dismantling drug trafficking networks, potentially leading to safer communities.
Negative Impacts However, without specific funding allocations or clear guidelines, some stakeholders might experience uncertainty or inconsistency in receiving the intended support. The proposed discretionary changes and the undefined scope of metric assessments could lead to ineffective policy enforcement, possibly frustrating efforts from stakeholders relying on clear, structured guidelines.
Conclusion
While the "Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 2024" addresses critical components of drug control, ambiguities in language and lack of specific guidance could pose challenges. These may undermine the bill’s intended impact if not addressed through future refinements. The effectiveness of the bill in improving national drug policies will greatly depend on the clarity of its provisions and the strategic interagency cooperation it aims to foster.
Financial Assessment
The bill H.R. 9598 reauthorizes and amends the Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act, with a distinct focus on funding allocations and grants to support drug control and prevention efforts.
Financial Allocations and Grants
The bill outlines several key financial allocations, emphasizing increased funding through 2031. It allocates $298,579,000 for each fiscal year from 2025 to 2031, specifically for initiatives that tackle drug trafficking and related activities as mentioned in section 707(p). This extensive provision demonstrates a long-term commitment to fund drug control initiatives.
Additionally, section 706(t) ensures that not less than $5,000,000 is allocated for fentanyl interdiction activities each year. This dedicated funding aims to bolster efforts against the trafficking of fentanyl, a potent synthetic opioid, which has become a significant issue in drug control policies.
Grants and Funding Programs
The reauthorization also extends financial support to various grant programs. Section 1024(a) of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 is amended to provide $109,000,000 for each fiscal year from 2025 to 2031. This financial support is intended to empower coalitions in their local anti-drug efforts.
Moreover, the National Community Anti-Drug Coalition Institute is reauthorized under a grant of $2,500,000 annually for the fiscal years 2025 through 2031. Similarly, grants to address local drug crises are set at $5,200,000 for each year within the same period. These grants aim to enhance local and community-based strategies in combating drug misuse.
Issues of Allocation and Impact
One issue identified in the bill is the heavy emphasis on grant allocations without clear criteria for distribution or guidelines for measuring impact or outcomes. The considerable allocations, such as the $20,000,000 and $5,200,000 for various programs, could lead to questions about favoritism or inefficient use of funds. Without established metrics or criteria, it may be challenging to monitor how effectively these funds are being utilized or to ensure they are reaching areas of greatest need.
Time Constraints and Reporting Requirements
The requirement for a life-saving opioid overdose reversal study report within 180 days, as noted in section 1121, raises concerns about whether the timeframe allows for comprehensive data collection and analysis. This could affect the thoroughness or effectiveness of the findings and subsequent decision-making processes related to funding allocations.
Furthermore, the lack of clear metrics for assessing success, particularly concerning the deployment of life-saving opioid antagonists like naloxone, remains an issue. This might hinder the ability to measure the efficacy of funded programs and their alignment with the bill's objectives.
In summary, while the bill H.R. 9598 earmarks significant financial resources for drug control and prevention, it also highlights the need for clear criteria and robust evaluation mechanisms to ensure these funds are used effectively. Addressing these issues will be critical to the success of the initiatives supported by the financial allocations in the bill.
Issues
The discretionary change in language from 'shall' to 'may' in sections 704(a)(1)(C) and 709(f)(1) might weaken the enforceability or commitment of certain actions, which could lead to less accountability and effectiveness in drug control policy.
Heavy emphasis on grant allocations without clear criteria for distribution or guidelines for measuring impact or outcomes, such as the allocations of $20,000,000 and $5,200,000 for various programs, risks favoritism and inefficient use of funds, as seen in sections 706(t) and 714.
The requirement for a life-saving opioid overdose reversal study report within 180 days in section 1121 might not allow sufficient time for comprehensive data collection and analysis, potentially leading to incomplete or less effective findings.
There is a lack of clear metrics or mechanisms for assessing the success of proposed strategies or actions, particularly concerning life-saving opioid antagonists or reversal agents, which is addressed in section 1121.
Redundant language related to life-saving opioid antagonists or reversal agents, like naloxone, appears in multiple sections (such as sections 702 and 704), potentially causing misinterpretation or complexity.
The provisions for additional judiciary prosecutorial resources in section 706(u), while important, lack specific guidelines or metrics to evaluate success or need for reassignment, which could lead to inefficient resource allocation.
The focus on coordinating with multiple departments, as seen with Homeland Security and Attorney General enforcement provisions in section 704, lacks precise clarity on oversight or accountability measures, which could dilute responsibility.
The lack of budget and funding specifics necessary to implement strategies and actions required in section 1121 might result in challenges related to executing these strategies effectively.
The requirement to update Congress on significant strategy changes related to life-saving opioid antagonists lacks a clear definition of 'significant update,' which could lead to inconsistencies in reporting.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section provides the short title for the act, which can be referred to as the “Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 2024”.
2. Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill proposes amendments to the Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998 and the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, aiming to enhance the definition of drug-related terms, increase accessibility to life-saving medications like naloxone, promote primary substance use prevention, and ensure adequate resources for drug control and law enforcement activities against illicit drug trafficking. Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of supporting community efforts to combat drug crises, and calls for a report on the availability and effectiveness of opioid overdose reversal medications.
Money References
- (iii) in subparagraph (D)— (I) by inserting after “the preceding year” the following: “, along with historical comparisons over the prior 20 years,”; and (II) in clause (iii), by inserting after “seizing drugs,” the following: “including precursor chemicals,”; (B) in subsection (e)(2), by inserting before the period at the end the following: “and $3,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2025 through 2031”; and (C) in subsection (f)— (i) in paragraph (2), by inserting after “agency shall” the following: “, in accordance with guidelines issued by the Director for standard definitions, identification, and review procedures,”; and (ii) by striking paragraph (4); (5) in section 706 (21 U.S.C. 1705)— (A) in subsection (c)— (i) in paragraph (1)— (I) by striking subparagraph (D); (II) in subparagraph (H)— (aa) by inserting after “identifying existing” the following: “evidence,”; and (bb) by striking “will obtain such data” and inserting “will ensure such data is obtained”; (III) in subparagraph (J)(ii), by inserting “evidence,” before “data”; (IV) in subparagraph (L), by inserting “evidence” after “Such other”; and (V) in subparagraph (M)(iv), by inserting “storing and retrieving,” after “collecting,”; (ii) in paragraph (2)— (I) by redesignating subparagraphs (E) and (F) as subparagraphs (G) and (H), respectively; and (II) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following new subparagraphs: “(E) The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. “(F) The Chief Data Officers Council.”; (iii) in paragraph (3)— (I) in subparagraph (B)(ii)— (aa) in subclause (I), by striking “; and”; (bb) in subclause (II), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; and”; and (cc) by inserting at the end the following new subclause: “(III) an analysis of the effects of trends of encounters of inadmissible aliens at and between the ports of entry, and the effect of any increases or changes in the level of trade and travel, on the capacity and ability of the Department of Homeland Security to interdict and prevent the unlawful entry of illicit drugs into the United States by any means.”; and (II) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: “(D) REQUIREMENT FOR CARIBBEAN BORDER COUNTERNARCOTICS STRATEGY.
- “(E) Any quantifiable measures the Director determines to be appropriate to detail progress toward the achievement of the goals of the National Drug Control Strategy, including to the extent practicable, data disaggregated by specific geographic areas or sub-populations of interest.”; and (C) in subsection (g)(2)— (i) in subparagraph (D), by striking “narcotics” and inserting “drugs”; (ii) in subparagraph (E), by striking “drug use” and inserting “illegal drug use”; and (iii) in subparagraph (F), by striking “drug use” and inserting “illegal drug use”; (6) in section 707 (21 U.S.C. 1706)— (A) in subsection (l)(2)(F), by inserting “and authorities enforcing illicit drug trafficking laws” after “task forces”; (B) in subsection (m)(2), by inserting “, authorities enforcing illicit drug trafficking laws,” after “agencies”; (C) in subsection (p)— (i) in paragraph (5). by striking “; and” and inserting a semicolon; (ii) in paragraph (6), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; and”; and (iii) by inserting at the end the following new paragraph: “(7) $298,579,000 for each of fiscal years 2025 through 2031.”; (D) in subsection (s)— (i) in the matter before paragraph (1), by striking “The Director” and inserting “Except as provided in subsection (t)(2), the Director”; (ii) in paragraph (2), by striking “; and” and inserting a semicolon; (iii) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; and”; and (iv) by adding at the end the following: “(4) enhancing fentanyl seizure and interdiction activities.”; and (E) by adding at the end the following: “(t) Supplemental grants for Fentanyl Interdiction Activities.
- — “(1) MINIMUM ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR FENTANYL INTERDICTION ACTIVITIES.—Of the amounts allocated for grants under subsection (s), not less than $5,000,000 shall be allocated for the purpose of making grants under subsection (s)(4).
- ; (7) in section 709(f)(1) (21 U.S.C. 1708(f)(1)), by striking “shall” and inserting “may”; (8) in section 709 (21 U.S.C. 1708)— (A) in subsection (f)(2)(B)(iii), by inserting after “professionals” the following: “including experts in evidence-based media campaigns, education, and evaluation”; and (B) in subsection (g), by striking “2023” and inserting “2031”; (9) in section 711 (21 U.S.C. 1710), including the headings, by striking “Command and Control Plan” each place it appears and inserting “Strategic Plan”; and (10) in section 714 (21 U.S.C. 1711), by inserting before the period at the end the following: “and $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2025 through 2031”. (b) Amendments to the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988.—The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 100–690) is amended— (1) in section 1024(a) (21 U.S.C. 1524(a)), by inserting before the period at the end the following: “and $109,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2025 through 2031”; and (2) in section 1032(b) (21 U.S.C. 1532(b))— (A) by striking “$125,000” each place the term appears and inserting “$150,000”; and (B) in paragraph (3)— (i) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the following: “(A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraph (F), the Administrator may award up to 2 additional grants under this paragraph to an eligible coalition awarded a grant under paragraph (1) or (2) for any first fiscal year after the end of the 4-year or 9-year period following the period of the initial or subsequent grant under paragraph (1) or (2), as the case may be.”; (ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking “a renewal grant” and inserting “up to 2 renewal grants”; (iii) in subparagraph (C), by striking “an additional grant” and inserting “the additional grants”; and (iv) by striking subparagraph (D) and inserting the following: “(D) RENEWAL GRANTS.—Subject to subparagraph (F), the Administrator may award a renewal grant to a grant recipient under this paragraph for each fiscal year of the 4-fiscal-year period following the first fiscal year for which an additional grant under this paragraph is awarded in an amount not to exceed the amount of non-Federal funds raised by the coalition, including in-kind contributions, for that fiscal year.
- (c) Reauthorization of the National Community Anti-Drug Coalition Institute.—Section 4(d) of Public Law 107–82 (21 U.S.C. 1521 note) is amended by striking “section 1032 of the National Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988 (15 U.S.C. 1532), make a grant of $2 million under subsection (a), for each of the fiscal years 2018 through 2023” and inserting “section 1024 of the National Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1524), make a grant of $2,500,000 under subsection (a), for each of the fiscal years 2025 through 2031”. (d) Reauthorization of community-Based coalition enhancement grants To address local drug crises.—Subsection (i) of section 103 of the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act of 2016 (21 U.S.C. 1536) is amended by inserting before the period at the end the following: “and $5,200,000 for each of fiscal years 2025 through 2031”.
1121. Requirement for life-saving opioid overdose reversal study Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Congress emphasizes the importance of making opioid overdose reversal medications, like naloxone, readily available and is requiring a report from the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy within 180 days. This report must cover strategies to ensure easy access to these medications, potential challenges, necessary policies, and actions taken by related agencies to promote availability and educate the public on their use.