Bill Foster (D-IL)
Examining Opioid Treatment Infrastructure Act of 2026
A Democratic bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Examining Opioid Treatment Infrastructure Act of 2026 requires the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct an evaluation of opioid-use disorder treatment. Within 24 months of the law passing, a report must be submitted to Congress. This report will cover the capacity, availability, and needs for both inpatient and outpatient treatment across the country. It includes looking at specific programs, geographical differences, and barriers to reporting overdose data.
Yes· 3 of 27
- Scored +7
Does this do more about addiction and overdose deaths?
The bill mandates a comprehensive evaluation of opioid treatment capacity and overdose reporting to better address the crisis.
- Scored +6
Would Native Americans be better off under this?
The bill specifically requires an evaluation of treatment availability for American Indians and Alaska Natives.
- Scored +5
Would women be better off under this?
The bill specifically assesses treatment programs designed for pregnant women.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Assessment of Treatment Needs: Section 2(7) directs an assessment of the need for residential and outpatient treatment, which helps identify where more help is required.
-
Focus on Specialized Care: Section 2(3) looks at the capacity of programs designed for specific groups, such as adolescents or pregnant women.
-
Evidence-Based Options: Section 2(5) evaluates the availability of programs using reliable scientific evidence, including FDA-approved medicines and nonpharmacological therapies.
-
Tribal Health Support: Section 2(8) examines the availability of treatment for American Indians and Alaska Natives through Indian health programs.
-
Improving Data: Section 2(9) seeks to identify and overcome barriers to real-time reporting of de-identified drug overdose information.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No negative impacts for individuals or groups are explicitly mentioned in the provided text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would Native Americans be better off under this? — The bill specifically requires an evaluation of treatment availability for American Indians and Alaska Natives. Would women be better off under this? — The bill specifically assesses treatment programs designed for pregnant women. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income individuals often face the most barriers to treatment, which this bill seeks to identify. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Identifies geographical differences in treatment availability, which is often a critical issue in rural areas. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Improves general public health data and treatment access for all affected populations. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Improves general public health data and treatment access for all affected populations. Would children be better off under this? — The bill explicitly looks at the capacity of treatment programs designed for adolescents. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Improves general public health data and treatment access for all affected populations. Would men be better off under this? — Men are significantly impacted by opioid-use disorders and would benefit from improved infrastructure. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Adults suffering from opioid addiction will benefit from better identified treatment needs. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Improves overall healthcare infrastructure for opioid treatment. Would retired people be better off under this? — Retirees affected by opioid addiction benefit from better infrastructure assessment. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Seniors suffering from opioid addiction will benefit from better identified treatment needs. Would students be better off under this? — Adolescents/students are specifically mentioned as a target group for treatment capacity evaluation. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Identifies geographical differences in treatment availability, including urban areas. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Veterans are a high-risk group for opioid-use disorders. Would white Americans be better off under this? — Improves general public health data and treatment access for all affected populations. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults are a significant demographic affected by opioid-use disorders. Would high-income households be better off under this? — General improvement in public health infrastructure.
- Healthcare
- Does this do more about addiction and overdose deaths? — The bill mandates a comprehensive evaluation of opioid treatment capacity and overdose reporting to better address the crisis. Does this make health care easier to get in general? — The bill identifies gaps and needs in inpatient and outpatient treatment infrastructure to improve future access. Does this make mental health care easier to get? — The bill evaluates treatment capacity and needs for opioid-use disorders, which are closely tied to mental health services.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The requirement for a public report to Congress improves transparency regarding treatment infrastructure. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill directs the federal Comptroller General to conduct a national evaluation.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this narrow the gap between how men and women are treated? — The bill specifically examines treatment capacity for pregnant women. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — The report specifically examines treatment availability for American Indians and Alaska Natives.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — By examining geographical differences in treatment availability, the bill may highlight needs in rural areas.
- 7/14/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Introduced in House