PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 25, 2013
Part D Beneficiary Appeals Fairness Act - Amends part D (Voluntary Prescription Drug Benefit Program) of title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act, with respect to a prescription drug plan (PDP) that provides for any tiered cost-sharing within a formulary (including a structure that provides for different co-payment or coinsurance amounts for drugs in different tiers included within the formulary), to authorize a Medicare part D eligible individual enrolled in the plan to request an exception to the tiered cost-sharing structure.
States that in no case may the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) allow a PDP sponsor to make any formulary tier of the tiered cost-sharing structure (including a formulary tier used for very high cost or unique items) ineligible for lower-cost sharing through an exception.
People & committees
Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank," Jr. [D-GA-4] · D–GA
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 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 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.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.2827 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.2827 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.2827 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.2827 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.