PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 30, 2015
Medicare Audit Improvement Act of 2015
This bill amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act (SSAct) with respect to the practices of recovery audit contractors (RACs) under the Medicare program fin identifying underpayments and overpayments and recouping overpayments.
Incentive payments to a RAC for recovery activities are prohibited for FY2015 and subsequent fiscal years.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Payments for recovery activities shall be reduced, according to a sliding scale established by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, to any RAC with a complex audit denial rate at the end of a fiscal year, determined pursuant to a specified formula, that is .1% or greater.
The one-year timely filing limit for certain rebilled SSAct title XVIII part B (Supplementary Medical Insurance) claims is eliminated, extending the deadline for the rebill to 180 days after final denial of the claim.
A determination of whether inpatient hospital services or inpatient critical access hospital services furnished to an individual are reasonable and necessary shall now be based solely on information available to the admitting physician at the time of the inpatient admission of the individual for such services, as documented in the medical record.
People & committees
Rep. Graves, Sam [R-MO-6] · R–MO
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 Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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.2156 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.2156 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.2156 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.2156 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.