PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 116.
Congressional Research Service
Version 18 · Reported to House amended, Part I · Jun 16, 2015
Securing Care for Seniors Act of 2015
(Sec. 2) This bill amends part C (Medicare+Choice) of title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act (SSAct) to direct the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) (in effect, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [CMS]) to revise for 2017, and periodically afterwards, the system for risk adjustments to payments to Medicare+Choice organizations so that an individual's risk score takes into account the number of chronic conditions with which the individual has been diagnosed.
HHS must, including an actuarial opinion of the CMS Chief Actuary, evaluate the impacts of:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
including two years of data to compare the models used to determine the risk scores for 2013 and 2014,
removing the diagnosis codes related to chronic kidney disease in the 2014 risk adjustment model, and
including 10% of encounter data in computing payment for 2016 and CMS readiness to incorporate encounter data in risk scores.
HHS shall also analyze the best practices of MedicareAdvantage (MA) plans to slow disease progression related to chronic kidney disease.
HHS shall then, if appropriate, make revisions to the risk adjustment system, based on such an evaluation or analysis, to better reflect and appropriately weight for the population served.
(Sec. 3) Congress declares that the MA star rating system lacks proper accounting for the socioeconomic status of plan enrollees and the extent to which those plans serve individuals also eligible for medical assistance under SSAct title XIX (Medicaid).
People & committees
Rep. Black, Diane [R-TN-6] · R–TN
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. 116.
Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged.
Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Ways and Means. H. Rept. 114-160, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Ways and Means. H. Rept. 114-160, Part I.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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.2579 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.2579 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.2579 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.2579 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.