PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 22, 2013
Diagnostic Innovation Testing and Knowledge Advancement Act of 2013 - Sets forth additional factors for the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to consider in determining the payment amount for new clinical diagnostic laboratory tests under gapfilling procedures which are used when no comparable existing test is available.
Directs the Secretary to convene an independent advisory panel to inform and make recommendations to the Secretary regarding any new test.
Requires the Secretary to justify publicly the basis and rate determination for any payments made under the clinical laboratory fee schedule for new clinical diagnostic laboratory tests, including a detailed summary of information received regarding the additional factors considered. Requires the Secretary then, after publishing such justification, to provide for a reasonable period of reconsideration to: (1) receive any appeal of the payment determination, and (2) evaluate any additional information received regarding the justification and the factors considered.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Secretary, following the period of reconsideration, to make a final payment basis and payment rate determination, providing a justification for it with an explanation of what additional information was evaluated during reconsideration and how it was taken into account. Directs the Secretary to: (1) establish a process for application for the assignment of a temporary national HCPCS (Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System) code to uniquely identify a diagnostic test until a permanent national HCPCS code is available for assignment to that test, (2) analyze the process used for the gapfilling procedures used in determining payment amounts for new clinical diagnostic laboratory tests, and (3) implement improvements in the process after public notice and opportunity for comment.
Applies this Act to payment basis and payment rate determinations made on or after January 1, 2013.
People & committees
Rep. Roskam, Peter J. [R-IL-6] · R–IL
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 Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. 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.2085 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.2085 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.2085 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.2085 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.