PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 13, 2017
USPSTF Transparency and Accountability Act of 2017
This bill amends the Public Health Service Act to expand the scope and responsibilities of the United States Preventive Services Task Force to require it to: (1) publish research plans to guide its review of scientific evidence relating to the effectiveness of preventive services; (2) make evidence reports and recommendations available for public comment; (3) establish a system for grading preventive care (Grades A, B, C, and D and a Grade I for insufficient information); and (4) convene a preventive services stakeholders board to provide feedback on task force activities and recommend preventive services and scientific evidence for the task force to review. Members of the task force and the preventive services stakeholders board must disclose conflicts of interest.
The Government Accountability Office must report on: (1) current recommendations of the task force; (2) task force recommendations and recommendations of other federal health agencies, national medical professional societies, and patient and disease advocacy organizations; and (3) the impact of task force recommendations on insurance coverage, access, and outcomes, including the impact on morbidity and mortality.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
This bill amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act to revise HHS's authority to modify coverage of preventive services. HHS may modify such coverage only based on a task force grade or recommendation that was developed or updated in accordance with this bill.
Medicare quality measures related to a recommendation of the task force may only be applied if the recommendation was developed or updated in accordance with this bill.
People & committees
Rep. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN-7] · R–TN
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 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 11, 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.539 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.539 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.539 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.539 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.