PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 21, 2009
Prosthetic and Custom Orthotic Parity Act of 2009 - Amends the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) to require a group health plan that provides medical and surgical benefits as well as benefits for prosthetic devices and components and orthotic devices to offer such prosthetic and orthotic coverage in the same manner as applicable to medical and surgical benefits. Prohibits separate financial requirements or more restrictive treatment limitations.
Limits required benefits for prosthetic devices and custom orthotic devices and related services to the most appropriate model that adequately meets the medical requirements of the patient. Requires benefits to include repairs and replacements as determined appropriate by the treating physician.
Prohibits any annual or lifetime dollar limitation on benefits for prosthetic devices and custom orthotic devices and related services unless such limitation applies in the aggregate to all benefits.
People & committees
Rep. Andrews, Robert E. [D-NJ-1] · D–NJ
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, Employment, Labor, and Pensions.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1239)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Mar 23, 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.2575 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.2575 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.2575 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.2575 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.