PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 29, 2015
State Health Care Options Act of 2015
This bill amends the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) and the Internal Revenue Code to modify the process for state innovation waivers.
(Under current law, the Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] and the Department of the Treasury may approve a state's request to waive specific provisions of PPACA if the state proposal provides health care access that is comparable to what would exist without a waiver and does not increase the federal deficit.)
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill expedites the approval process for:
a health-flex waiver from requirements for qualified health plans and essential health benefits; and
an exchange waiver to assume responsibility for certain functions of the exchanges, including the certification of permissible health plans.
If a state submits to HHS a notice of its intent to implement one or both of the waivers, the waivers shall be deemed to be approved and effective. The notice must include the years for which the waiver shall be effective (which may be indefinite), an assurance the state will comply with reporting requirements, and other specified details.
A state may not waive PPACA requirements related to coverage for preexisting conditions and the extension of coverage for adult children.
States with exchange waivers may certify permissible health plans that residents may purchase outside of an exchange, if the plans meet specified requirements regarding benefits, levels of coverage, transparency of premium justifications, and information.
Taxpayers in waiver states that are living at or below 300% of the federal poverty level (400% under current law) may receive health insurance subsidies under PPACA.
People & committees
Rep. Hultgren, Randy [R-IL-14] · R–IL
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.
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.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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.3352 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.3352 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.3352 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.3352 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.