PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 11, 1995
Amends the Internal Revenue Code, with respect to imposition of the excise tax for failure of group health plans to meet certain requirements, to require any preexisting condition limitation period with respect to an individual who commences coverage after December 31, 1995, to be reduced by the aggregate of the individual's prior periods of coverage under a plan. Treats a period as zero if a break in coverage of greater than 60 days has occurred between the most recent qualified coverage and commencement of the current coverage. Prohibits, with respect to an individual whose periods of previous coverage are greater than zero, the establishment by a plan of eligibility, continuation, enrollment, or contribution requirements based on factors directly related to health status, medical condition, claims experience, receipt of health care, medical history, disability, or evidence of insurability.
People & committees
Rep. Thomas, William M. [R-CA-21] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Feb 7, 2024. 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.1610 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.1610 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.1610 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.1610 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.