PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jun 19, 2018
Combating Opioid Abuse for Care in Hospitals Act of 2018 or the COACH Act of 2018
(Sec. 2) This bill requires the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to publish guidance for hospitals on pain management and opioid-use disorder prevention strategies for Medicare beneficiaries.
(Sec. 3) The CMS must also convene a technical expert panel to recommend opioid and opioid-use disorder quality measures for possible use in hospital payment and reporting models under Medicare.
(Sec. 4) The Department of Health and Human Services must: (1) convene a technical expert panel to recommend ways to reduce opioid use in surgical settings and best practices for pain management, specifically during the perioperative (pre-operative through post-operative) period; and (2) report on diagnosis-related group codes that have the highest volume of surgeries and the availability of associated data regarding post-operative opioid use, including prescription patterns and rates of consumption.
(Sec. 5) The CMS must also publish and periodically update all guidance issued since January 1, 2016, related to the prescription of opioids for Medicare beneficiaries.
People & committees
Rep. Curbelo, Carlos [R-FL-26] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5254-5256)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H5254-5256)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5774.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5254-5255)
Mrs. Walorski moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 593.
Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged.
Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Ways and Means. H. Rept. 115-762, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Ways and Means. H. Rept. 115-762, Part I.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and 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 Energy and 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.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.5774 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.5774 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.5774 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.5774 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.