PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 13, 1996
Amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act with regard to the Medicare health maintenance organization and competitive medical plans (organizations) program to require them to: (1) establish and maintain adequate arrangements with a sufficient number, mix, and distribution of health professionals in making services available and accessible under the program; and (2) provide for the full participation of all eligible physicians who graduated from either allopathic or osteopathic medical schools and have received training from programs approved by either the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education or the American Osteopathic Association. Prohibits organizations from: (1) discriminating against a health physician or nonphysician health professional based solely on their certification or license, in participation in providing covered health services or reimbursement or indemnification for providing such services, if they may legally provide them in accordance with State law; or (2) excluding a nonphysician health professional from participation in its provider network based solely on the professional's certification or license or lack of affiliation with, or admitting privileges at, a hospital, if such lack of affiliation is due to the professional's type of license.
People & committees
Rep. Coburn, Tom [R-OK-2] · R–OK
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 Subcommittee on Health and Environment, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on 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 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 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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 3, 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.3079 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.3079 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.3079 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.3079 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.