Healthcare
4 bills 20 analyzed clauses
Explore affected groups
D NJ · Senate
Policy Effects
Estimated effects on people, organizations, and industries in bills this legislator sponsored, cosponsored, or voted on. Includes bills they voted against.
These are assessments of legislative text, not measurements of realized outcomes or the legislator’s intent.
This selection could not be loaded. Your current view is still available.
Open the requested selection in a full pageStart with a policy area to see the specific groups affected.
4 bills 20 analyzed clauses
Explore affected groups3 bills 5 analyzed clauses
Explore affected groups2 bills 3 analyzed clauses
Explore affected groups2 bills 2 analyzed clauses
Explore affected groups2 bills 2 analyzed clauses
Explore affected groups1 bill 4 analyzed clauses
Explore affected groups1 bill 1 analyzed clause
Explore affected groups1 bill 1 analyzed clause
Explore affected groups1 bill 1 analyzed clause
Explore affected groups1 bill 1 analyzed clause
Explore affected groups1 bill 1 analyzed clause
Explore affected groups1 bill 1 analyzed clause
Explore affected groups1 bill 1 analyzed clause
Explore affected groupsPotential benefits are effects assessed as favorable to the named group. Potential burdens impose costs, restrictions, risks, or lost opportunities on that group.
Mixed effects contain countervailing effects on the same group. Unclear effects have an undetermined direction. A group can have separate benefits and burdens; these are counted separately.
Counts describe the number of identified effects, not their size or public value. Bill and clause counts are distinct within each view. Shared evidence may appear under several groups or policy areas, so their counts should not be added together.
Historical bill versions are included. Clauses analyzed in different versions count separately. A bill’s current status does not establish that every analyzed provision was enacted.
Only direct effects with high or medium confidence in the policy-area assignment are included. Bills are connected through sponsorship, cosponsorship, or Yea/Nay votes; a vote against a bill does not reverse its assessed effects. Vote dates filter recorded votes and vote-linked bills; sponsorship remains included.
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the limitation on the deduction for State and local taxes.
To condemn convicted felon, Joanne Chesimard, who is also known as Assata Shakur, and those celebrating her violent actions against New Jersey law enforcement members, to call for her immediate extradition or return to the United States from Cuba, where Ms. Chesimard is receiving safe haven to the United States to escape prosecution or confinement for criminal offenses committed in the United States, and to officially honor and commemorate the New Jersey law enforcement members killed and affected by her violent acts.
To modify the disposition of certain outer Continental Shelf revenues and to open Federal financial sharing to heighten opportunities for renewable energy, and for other purposes.
Loading countries...
Select a clause to see detailed analysis
Failed to load analysis
Please try again
Failed to load clauses
Please try again
Explore affected groups in Policy Effects to view supporting evidence. Existing clause links also open here.
Select a clause to see detailed analysis