PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 114.
Congressional Research Service
Version 18 · Reported to House amended, Part I · Jun 16, 2015
Seniors' Health Care Plan Protection Act of 2015
(Sec. 2) States the intent of Congress to: (1) continue to study and request input on the effects of socioeconomic status and dual-eligible populations on the Medicare Advantage (MA) STARS rating system before reforming it, and, pending study and input results; (2) delay Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services authority to terminate MA plan contracts solely on the basis of performance under the STARS rating system.
Amends part C (Medicare+Choice) of title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act to prohibit the Department of Health and Human Services, through the end of plan year 2018, from terminating a contract with respect to the offering of an MA plan by a MA organization solely because the plan has failed to achieve a minimum quality rating under the 5-star rating system.
People & committees
Rep. Buchanan, Vern [R-FL-16] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 114.
Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged.
Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Ways and Means. H. Rept. 114-158, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Ways and Means. H. Rept. 114-158, Part I.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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: Apr 7, 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.2506 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.2506 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.2506 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.2506 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.