POLISCOPE
Back to feed
HR6860FEDERALIN_COMMITTEE
High Impact

Restore Protections for Dialysis Patients Act

December 17, 2024

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

Where This Stands

Introduced
Committee
Floor Vote
Passed
Signed

Currently IN_COMMITTEE. The next step in the legislative lifecycle is Floor Vote.

Version history

Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.

View official text →

The Frame

What this does

The bill ensures that private health insurance plans maintain consistent coverage standards for dialysis patients, preventing plans from creating coverage gaps that would otherwise force patients to rely solely on Medicare for their treatment costs.

Who is mentioned in the record

Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.

End-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients

The bill prohibits private health plans from providing them with inferior coverage compared to other enrollees.

Private health insurance plans

These plans are prohibited from differentiating benefits based on a patient's ESRD diagnosis or need for dialysis.

Medicare program

The bill aims to prevent the shifting of primary healthcare costs for dialysis patients from private plans to the Medicare program.

What changed

Current stage: IN_COMMITTEE.

What's next

Floor Vote.

Background

  • The Medicare Secondary Payer Act was originally enacted to ensure that Medicare does not pay for medical services when a private health plan is legally responsible for the costs. context

Summary

This bill prevents private health insurance plans from discriminating against patients with by limiting their coverage for dialysis services. It clarifies that insurance plans cannot shift the cost of dialysis care onto Medicare by offering inferior benefits to patients with kidney failure compared to other enrollees.

Key Facts

You don't have to trust us. Each fact below is taken straight from the official document - click any one to see the exact passage, highlighted in the original.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does this bill force insurance companies to include every dialysis clinic in their network?
No. The bill explicitly states that it does not require a group health plan to include any particular renal dialysis provider in its network.
What is the main goal of this legislation?
The goal is to prevent private health plans from discriminating against patients with end-stage renal disease by offering them worse coverage than other patients, which often forces these patients onto Medicare prematurely.

Why It Matters

The bill ensures that private health insurance plans maintain consistent coverage standards for dialysis patients, preventing plans from creating coverage gaps that would otherwise force patients to rely solely on Medicare for their treatment costs.

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Sponsors

Show 1 more sponsor

Discoveries

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift95% confidence

Clarification of Anti-Discrimination

The bill shifts from general anti-discrimination language to specific prohibitions against differentiating benefits based on ESRD diagnosis or dialysis need.

Connected Entities

organizationCommittee on Energy and CommerceReferred to the committeeMap →
personMr. Joyce of PennsylvaniaCo-sponsored the billMap →
bill_numberH.R. 6860Bill identifierMap →
personMr. RuizCo-sponsored the billMap →
personMr. Davis of IllinoisCo-sponsored the billMap →
dollar_amount1395Code of Federal RegulationsMap →
personMs. Clarke of New YorkCo-sponsored the billMap →
personMr. Kelly of PennsylvaniaIntroduced the billMap →
organizationCommittee on Ways and MeansReferred to the committeeMap →
dollar_amount42Code of Federal RegulationsMap →
dateDecember 19, 2023Bill introduction dateMap →
dollar_amount6860Bill identifierMap →
dollar_amount1862Amended sectionMap →
dollar_amount411Code of Federal RegulationsMap →
personMr. Dunn of FloridaCo-sponsored the billMap →

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance75
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy20
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment5
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz15
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record