H. Con. Res. 110 (111th)Bill Overview

Support National Celiac Awareness Month and Research

Concurrent ResolutionHealth|Commemorative events and holidaysDigestive and metabolic diseases
Cosponsors
Support
Lean Democratic
Introduced
Apr 27, 2009
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Concurrent ResolutionWhat this resolution actually does

This resolution expresses support for National Celiac Awareness Month, calls for encouraging screening and early detection, and urges increased Federal funding for celiac disease research. It summarizes findings about the disease and recommends working with health care providers and advocacy groups. As a concurrent resolution, it states the position of both chambers but does not create binding law.

Passage rules

Concurrent resolutions must be adopted by both the House and the Senate but are not sent to the President and do not have the force of law.

This concurrent resolution recognizes May as National Celiac Awareness Month, highlights celiac disease prevalence and diagnostic challenges, and urges collaboration with health care providers and advocacy groups to encourage screening and early detection.

It also calls for increased Federal funding for celiac disease research and mentions needs like dietitian consultation, diagnostic standardization, and school access to medically prescribed diets.

Passage0/100

As a concurrent resolution it is not legislation that becomes law; passage by both chambers would result in adoption, not enactment.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill functions as a standard commemorative concurrent resolution: it clearly articulates the issue and expresses Congress's support for National Celiac Awareness Month, while offering only high-level exhortations rather than binding or operational directives.

Contention20/100

Scope of federal funding: liberals want more; conservatives worry about costs

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Likely helpedFederal agencies

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Potential benefitMay raise public awareness and prompt more people to seek testing and diagnosis.
  • Potential benefitCould encourage clinical referral patterns toward dietitian consultation and nutritional management.
  • Potential benefitAdvocacy for increased research funding might lead to additional studies and potential treatments.
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenAs a concurrent resolution, it has no binding force and may produce minimal direct effect.
  • Potential burdenIf followed by funding increases, it could reallocate limited research dollars from other health priorities.
  • Federal agenciesDevelopment of federal gluten-testing and labeling standards could impose compliance costs on food producers.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Scope of federal funding: liberals want more; conservatives worry about costs
Progressive95%

Overall supportive.

Sees the resolution as a useful, low-conflict public-health step to help an underdiagnosed condition.

Wants stronger commitments to research funding and school accommodations for medically prescribed diets.

Leans supportive
Centrist90%

Generally favorable but pragmatic.

Views the resolution as a symbolic, bipartisan step to improve public health and diagnosis.

Wants clarity on costs and measurable outcomes before expanding programs.

Leans supportive
Conservative65%

Cautiously supportive of awareness goals but wary of increased federal spending and new federal standards.

Prefers state/local handling of school accommodations and cautious oversight of any regulatory labeling efforts.

Split reaction
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood0/100

As a concurrent resolution it is not legislation that becomes law; passage by both chambers would result in adoption, not enactment.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Resolution type is nonbinding and not an enactable law
  • No specific appropriation level or funding mechanism provided
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Scope of federal funding: liberals want more; conservatives worry about costs

As a concurrent resolution it is not legislation that becomes law; passage by both chambers would result in adoption, not enactment.

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill functions as a standard commemorative concurrent resolution: it clearly articulates the issue and expresses Congress's support for National Celiac Awareness Month, wh…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis