PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 29, 1996
Hippocratic Oath and Patient Protection Act of 1996 - Prohibits health carriers, in contracts with providers or enrollees, from: (1) preventing or limiting provider communications to a patient or the public; (2) operating an incentive plan that does not meet requirements of specified provisions of title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act; or (3) including a provision to indemnify a carrier against liability from an action brought by or for an enrollee or provider for damage caused to the enrollee or provider by the carrier. Requires carriers to disclose in plain English: (1) a list of all services and benefits offered; (2) procedures used by the plan; and (3) any existing incentive plan. Mandates a civil monetary penalty and authorizes a private cause of action for violations.
People & committees
Rep. Sanders, Bernard [I-VT-At Large] · I–VT
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 Employer-Employee Relations.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Hazardous Materials.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Economic and Educational Opportunities, 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 Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Economic and Educational Opportunities, 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 Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Economic and Educational Opportunities, 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 Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Economic and Educational Opportunities, 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.3222 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.3222 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.3222 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.3222 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.