PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 27, 2000
Medicare+Choice Rescue Act of 2000 - Amends part C (Medicare+Choice) of title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act (SSA), with respect to payments to Medicare+Choice organizations, to: (1) increase the national per capita Medicare+Choice growth percentage in 2001 and 2002; (2) eliminate the reduction in Medicare+Choice payment rates by budget neutrality adjustments; (3) establish a payment floor for Medicare+Choice plans, as well as an additional floor for an annual increase in Medicare+Choice capitation rates; and (4) apply a budget neutrality principle to the new Medicare+Choice risk adjustment methodology.Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to correct for misestimates in the national per capita Medicare+Choice growth rate by providing for an increase by 3.6 percent in the amount of payment otherwise applicable to Medicare+Choice organizations offering Medicare+Choice plans in 2001. Limits retroactive adjustments.Amends Medicare part C to provide for: (1) continuous open enrollment and disenrollment under Medicare+Choice and Medicare supplemental policy (Medigap) provisions on coverage election periods; and (2) variations in premiums and benefits under Medicare+Choice within counties.Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to provide that risk-adjustment methodology under Medicare+Choice, insofar as it makes adjustments to capitation rates for health status, shall not only apply to ten percent of 1/12 of the annual Medicare+Choice capitation rate in the case of an eligible individual who is institutionalized until the first year in which the Secretary implements a modification of such methodology based on health status so that such methodology includes medical diagnostic factors from all provider settings (including hospital and nursing facility settings).
People & committees
Rep. Kolbe, Jim [R-AZ-5] · R–AZ
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.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
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.5320 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.5320 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.5320 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.5320 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.