Troy Carter (D-LA)
Expressing support for the designation of September 2025 as "National Prostate Cancer Awareness Month".
A Democratic resolution with 3 Republican cosponsors · See all 6 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
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
A House resolution is the House speaking for itself: stating a position, honouring someone, or setting its own rules. Adopting it is the whole process. Once the House agrees to it, it is officially the House's word; it is not a law, so the Senate and the President have no part in it.
What this bill would do
This resolution expresses support for designating September 2025 as National Prostate Cancer Awareness Month. It highlights the high number of men diagnosed with and dying from prostate cancer in the United States. The text points out that African-American men and men with a family history face higher risks. It stresses the importance of early screening and detection to save lives. The resolution encourages research to improve treatments, discover causes, and eventually find a cure. Finally, it calls on the American public and groups to promote awareness and observe the month with activities.
Yes· 3 of 12
- Scored +8
Would men be better off under this?
The resolution focuses entirely on raising awareness, encouraging screening, and improving treatment access for prostate cancer, which directly impacts men.
- Scored +7
Would people over 65 be better off under this?
Older men face the highest risk of developing prostate cancer, and awareness efforts directly benefit senior men's health outcomes.
- Scored +7
Would retired people be better off under this?
Retirees, being predominantly in older age brackets, benefit significantly from increased awareness and screening recommendations for prostate cancer.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Raising Awareness and Encouraging Screening: Under Resolved (2)(A), the resolution declares that steps should be taken to raise awareness about the importance of screening and treating prostate cancer. This is positive because screening can detect the disease at earlier, more treatable stages and increase the 5-year survival rate to nearly 100 percent.
-
Promoting Research for Better Treatments: Under Resolved (2)(B), the text encourages research to improve screening and treatment, discover causes, and develop a cure for prostate cancer. This could benefit individuals by leading to future medical advancements and better health outcomes.
-
Improving Healthcare Access: Under Resolved (2)(C), the resolution states that steps should be taken to continue considering ways to improve access to and the quality of healthcare services for detecting and treating prostate cancer. This is a positive step for individuals trying to get proper medical care.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No Negative Impacts Identified: Based on the provided text, there are no specific sections or provisions that outline negative consequences or burdens for individuals or groups of people in the United States.
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 men be better off under this? — The resolution focuses entirely on raising awareness, encouraging screening, and improving treatment access for prostate cancer, which directly impacts men. Would retired people be better off under this? — Retirees, being predominantly in older age brackets, benefit significantly from increased awareness and screening recommendations for prostate cancer. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Older men face the highest risk of developing prostate cancer, and awareness efforts directly benefit senior men's health outcomes. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — The resolution explicitly addresses the higher incidence and mortality rates of prostate cancer among African-American men, promoting focused awareness and screening. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — The resolution notes that 40 percent of newly diagnosed prostate cancer cases occur in men under 65 and risks rise after 50, making awareness vital for this group. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — The resolution highlights VA Precision Oncology Centers of Excellence dedicated to treating veterans with prostate cancer.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — The resolution explicitly calls for steps to improve access to and quality of healthcare services for detecting and treating prostate cancer. Does this put more money into medical research? — The resolution encourages research to improve screening, treatment, and discover a cure for prostate cancer. Does this help veterans get medical care? — The resolution acknowledges and supports specialized oncology services provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into scientific research? — The resolution encourages increased research efforts into the causes, screening, treatment, and cure of prostate cancer.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — The resolution highlights the disproportionate impact and higher mortality rate of prostate cancer on African-American men, promoting targeted awareness.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive? — The resolution recognizes VA healthcare centers specializing in oncology care for veterans.
- 11/12/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 9/3/2025
- Submitted in House
- Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- 4 Cosponsors added.
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Neal DunnRepublican · Florida
Ted LieuDemocrat · California
Richard McCormickRepublican · Georgia
Max MillerRepublican · Ohio
Robert MenendezDemocrat · New Jersey
Mike ThompsonDemocrat · California