PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 5, 2003
Medicare Patient Access to Preventive and Diagnostic Tests Act of 2003 - Amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act to direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to: (1) establish procedures for determining the basis for, and amount of, Medicare payment for any clinical diagnostic laboratory test with respect to which a new or substantially revised Health Care Financing Administration Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) code is assigned on or after January 1, 2004; (2) set the national fee schedule amounts for tests performed; and (3) establish a mechanism for review of the adequacy of payment amounts for a particular test.Prohibits the Secretary from: (1) assigning a code for a new clinical diagnostic laboratory test that differs from the code recommended by the American Medical Association Common Procedure Terminology Editorial Panel and results in lower payment than would be made if the Secretary accepted such recommendation solely on the basis that the test is a test that may be performed by a laboratory with a certificate of waiver under the Public Health Service Act; or (2) substituting for the fee schedule amount otherwise established under the Act for a test a least costly alternative fee schedule amount.
People & committees
Rep. Dunn, Jennifer [R-WA-8] · R–WA
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 18, 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.569 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.569 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.569 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.569 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.