PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 21, 1995
Medicare Physician Ownership Referral Reform Act of 1995 - Amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act to: (1) repeal the prohibition of physician referrals to certain entities with which the referring physician has a financial relationship if such relationship is based on compensation arrangements only; (2) eliminate reporting requirements under such provisions; (3) provide that such provisions preempt State law to the extent it is inconsistent; and (4) limit the designated health services subject to such prohibition to items and services furnished by a community pharmacy, magnetic resonance imaging and computerized tomography services, and outpatient physical therapy services. Revises exceptions to such prohibition against physician referrals to an entity in which the referring physician has an ownership or investment relationship to: (1) repeal the site-of-service requirement for excepted in-office ancillary services; (2) revise the exceptions for services furnished in a rural area and for pre-paid plans; and (3) add new exceptions for shared facility services, services furnished in communities with no alternative providers, in ambulatory surgical centers, in renal dialysis facilities, in a hospice, or in a comprehensive outpatient rehabilitation facility, and designated health services for which a physician or physician group is paid only on a capitated basis by a health plan or insurer. Amends the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 to make its amendments to such physician referral limitations inapplicable until the Secretary of Health and Human Services promulgates final implementing regulations.
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 and Environment, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on 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 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 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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 3, 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.2390 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.2390 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.2390 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.2390 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.