PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 12, 1996
Graduate Medical Education Trust Fund Act of 1996 - Amends the Social Security Act (SSA) to add a new title XXI (Teaching Hospital and Graduate Medical Education Trust Fund), which establishes in the Treasury the Teaching Hospital and Graduate Medical Education Trust Fund for formula payments to teaching hospitals for the direct and indirect costs of operating approved medical residency training programs. Authorizes appropriations. Provides for certain adjustments in Medicare payments under SSA title XVIII, removing medical education and disproportionate share hospital payments from calculation of adjusted average per capita cost. Establishes within the Department of Health and Human Services a National Advisory Council on Postgraduate Medical Education to advise the Secretary on appropriate policies for making postgraduate medical education support payments in order to assure an adequate supply of physicians trained in various specialties, consistent with the health care needs of the United States.
People & committees
Rep. Bentsen, Ken [D-TX-25] · D–TX
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 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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1593)
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.4069 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.4069 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.4069 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.4069 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.