To establish a demonstration project to authorize certain covered beneficiaries under the military health care system (including the dependents of active duty military personnel and retired members and their dependents) to enroll in the Federal Employees Health Benefits program and to ensure their future health security through the use of medical savings accounts.
Unfavorable Executive Comment Received from DOD.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 26, 1997
Directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a demonstration project in at least one region of the TRICARE program (a DOD managed health care program) to provide beneficiaries covered under the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS) with the option to receive health care through the Federal Employees Health Benefits program, in addition to other health care options available to such covered beneficiaries. Outlines participation eligibility requirements, with a special rule for Medicare (title XVIII of the Social Security Act) participants. Directs the Secretary of the Treasury to permit a project participant to take a tax credit of 25 percent of the amount paid on behalf of such participant to a medical savings account. Requires a report from the Secretary of Defense to the Congress containing a plan to implement the demonstration project and to permit participants to maintain and use medical savings accounts.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Civil Service.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1347)
Referred to House Ways and Means
Referred to House National Security
Referred to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, and in addition to the Committees on National Security, and 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 House Government Reform
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
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: Jun 6, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.2100 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.2100 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.2100 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.2100 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.