PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Scott, Robert C. "Bobby" [D-VA-3] · D–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Oct 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10373 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10373 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10373 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10373 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-09-14 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Protecting Workers' Wages from Medical Debt Act would prevent employees' wages from being withheld through legal procedures to pay medical debt, even if another law allows it. Federal and state courts, states, and state officials or agencies could not issue or enforce orders that violate this protection.
This Act may be cited as the Protecting Workers' Wages from Medical Debt Act.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no wages of an employee may be subject to garnishment for the payment of any medical debt.
No court of the United States or any State, and no State (or officer or agency thereof), may make, execute, or enforce any order or process in violation of this section.
The bill would add a new section 8 to the Fair Labor Standards Act prohibiting wage garnishment for any medical debt. Garnishment means a legal procedure requiring someone's wages to be withheld to pay that debt.
The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 7 the following: 8. Prohibition on wage garnishment for medical debts
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no wages of an employee may be subject to garnishment for the payment of any medical debt.
The term garnishment means any legal or equitable procedure through which the wages of any individual are required to be withheld for payment of any medical debt.
Federal and state courts, as well as states and their officers or agencies, would be prohibited from making, carrying out, or enforcing an order or process that violates the ban.
No court of the United States or any State, and no State (or officer or agency thereof), may make, execute, or enforce any order or process in violation of this section.
Medical debt would mean debt arising from items and services furnished by a health care facility or health care provider. The definition refers to the Family and Medical Leave Act's definition of a health care provider.
The term medical debt means a debt arising from the furnishing of items and services by a health care facility or health care provider (as defined in section 101(6) of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2611(6)).
The bill would also repeal section 10 of the Fair Labor Standards Act as a conforming amendment. The supplied text does not reproduce the section being repealed.
(b) Conforming amendment Section 10 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 210) is repealed.
If enacted, the Act would take effect six months after enactment.
This Act shall take effect on the date that is 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act.
The supplied action snapshot, updated October 10, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Education and Workforce on September 14, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-10T08:05:22Z. 2026-09-14: Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. 2026-09-14: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-14. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or appropriations policy rider was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential exception was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. The bill's broad protection for its intended beneficiaries does not itself qualify. This conclusion is limited to this version.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 10, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI