PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 19, 2009
Medicare Orthotics and Prosthetics Improvement Act of 2009 - Amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act with respect to recognized independent accreditation organizations which apply quality standards for suppliers of items and services relating to prosthetic devices and orthotics and prosthetics.
Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to designate and approve an independent accreditation organization for such purposes only if it is the American Board for Certification in Orthotics and Prosthetics, Inc., the Board for Orthotist/Prosthetist Certification, or a program that the Secretary determines has accreditation and approval standards essentially equivalent to those of such a Board. Requires such organization to satisfy all applicable criteria of the provider qualification designation for each of specified categories of prosthetics and orthotics. Requires application to prosthetic devices and orthotics and prosthetics generally of existing accreditation and licensure requirements for certain custom-fabricated prosthetics and custom-fabricated orthotics, as well as those categorized as custom-fitted high or custom-fitted low.
Modifies the Medicare payment methodology for prosthetic devices and orthotics and prosthetics to require the Secretary, for payment purposes, to take into account practitioner qualifications and complexity of care.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary to report to Congress on: (1) the steps taken by the Department of HHS to ensure that such licensure and accreditation requirements are enforced; and (2) the effect of the requirements of this Act on the occurrence of fraud and abuse under the Medicare program with respect to prosthetic devices and orthotics and prosthetics.
People & committees
Rep. Berkley, Shelley [D-NV-1] · D–NV
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 House Ways and Means
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 House Energy and Commerce
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: Aug 14, 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.2479 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.2479 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.2479 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.2479 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.