PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 11, 2009
Doctor-Patient Relationship and Research Protection Act - Amends the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 to: (1) expand the membership of the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research; and (2) require the Council to provide for a public comment period prior to obligating funds for comparative effectiveness research, support increased public awareness of such research, and identify conflicts of interest in appointing members of the Council.
Prohibits the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services from using federally funded clinical comparative effectiveness research data to make coverage determinations under Medicare for medical treatments, services, and items on the basis of cost.
Provides for expedited appeals of Medicare coverage determinations using federally funded comparative effectiveness research.
Denies federal funding for clinical comparative effectiveness research that does not consider racial, ethnic, gender, and geographic differences within patient subpopulations.
People & committees
Del. Christensen, Donna M. [D-VI-At Large] · D–VI
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 Military Personnel.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to House Veterans' Affairs
Referred to House Armed Services
Referred to House Ways and Means
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, Armed Services, and Veterans' Affairs, 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.2824 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.2824 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.2824 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.2824 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.