PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to House Ways and Means
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 10, 2010
Amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act to exempt qualified hospital-related durable medical equipment (DME) entities from programs for competitive acquisition of items and services. Defines a qualified hospital-related DME entity as a DME supplier that: (1) owns and controls, is owned and controlled by, or is under common ownership and control with one or more hospitals or one or more hospitals and a university; and (2) meets the applicable quality and financial standards.
Declares that in the case of certain DME and medical supplies furnished by a qualified hospital-related DME entity in a competitive acquisition area for which a contract is in effect: (1) the competitive acquisition programs shall not apply; and (2) payment shall be made to the entity without regard to whether it submitted a bid or was awarded such a contract, and in the amount payable for such equipment and supplies under the contract for the area and period involved.
Limits the application of this Act to items and services furnished by a qualified hospital-related DME entity that: (1) has provided satisfactory assurances that a substantial majority of its patients who are enrolled under Medicare part B (Supplementary Medical Insurance) are patients of a hospital that owns and controls, or is owned and controlled by, the entity or any provider of services affiliated with the hospital; and (2) was either furnishing items and services of such type on or before April 1, 2010, or owns and controls, is owned and controlled by, or is under common ownership and control with, a hospital (or one or more hospitals and a university) that was furnishing such items or services of such type on or before such date.
People & committees
Rep. Dingell, John D. [D-MI-15] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to House Ways and Means
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 House Energy and Commerce
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: Jan 2, 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.6095 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.6095 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.6095 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.6095 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.