PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 29, 2009
Health Care OverUse Reform Today Act (HealthCOURT Act) of 2009 - Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to propose to Congress a formalized process for the development of performance-based quality measures that could be applied to physicians' services under title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act. Requires the proposal: (1) to be in concert and agreement with the Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement; and (2) utilize only measures agreed upon by each physician specialty organization.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) provide for the selection and issuance of best practice guidelines for treatment of medical conditions; and (2) contract with a qualified physician consensus-building organization (such as the Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement), in concert and agreement with physician specialty organizations, to develop such guidelines.
Prohibits the award of any noneconomic damages in any health care lawsuit with respect to treatment that is within an issued guideline.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits the award of punitive damages against a health care practitioner in such a lawsuit based on a claim that medical treatment caused the claimant harm if the treatment: (1) was subject to quality review by a qualified physician consensus-building organization; (2) was approved in a guideline that underwent full review by such organization, public comment, the Secretary's approval, and dissemination; and (3) is generally recognized among qualified experts as safe, effective, and appropriate.
Amends the Public Health Service Act to authorize the Secretary to award grants to states for the development, implementation, and evaluation of administrative health care tribunals for the resolution of disputes concerning injuries allegedly caused by health care providers.
Expresses the sense of Congress that a health insurance issuer should be liable for damages for a harm caused when it makes a decision as to what care is medically necessary and appropriate.
People & committees
Rep. Price, Tom [R-GA-6] · R–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 House Ways and Means
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 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.3372 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.3372 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.3372 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.3372 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.