PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.625 / 105th Congress

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide additional consumer protections for Medicare supplemental insurance.

Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 6, 1997

Medigap Amendments of 1997 - Amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act with respect to certification of Medicare supplemental health insurance (Medigap) policies, particularly coverage for pre-existing conditions, providing for additional consumer protections for certain individuals whose enrollment with an eligible organization ceases for one or more specified reasons. Prohibits a Medigap policy issuer from denying or conditioning a policy to such an individual, from imposing preexisting condition exclusions, and from discriminating in pricing because of the individual's health, claims experience, or disability in the case of such an individual who has had continuous coverage (with no break longer than 63 days), if the policy in which the individual wishes to enroll has a comparable or less generous benefits package. Revises the prohibition against an insurer's excluding benefits based on a pre-existing condition during the initial six-month enrollment period after an individual first becomes eligible for Medicare. Extends the six-month initial enrollment period to non-elderly Medicare beneficiaries. Authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services to provide grants to private, independent, nonprofit consumer organizations and State agencies applying to conduct programs to prepare and make available to Medicare beneficiaries comprehensive and understandable information on enrollment in health plans with a Medicare managed care contract and in Medigap policies in which they are eligible to enroll. Requires any eligible organization with a Medicare managed care contract or any issuer of a Medigap policy to: (1) conduct a consumer satisfaction survey of the enrollees under such contract or such policy; and (2) make the survey results available to the Secretary and the State Insurance Commissioner of the State in which the enrollees are so enrolled. Requires each organization which provides a Medicare managed care contract or issues a Medigap policy to pay to the Secretary its pro rata share of the estimated costs to be incurred by the Secretary in providing the grants. Makes necessary appropriations.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Johnson, Nancy L. [R-CT-6] · R–CT

Committees

  • Energy and Commerce Committee
  • Ways and Means Committee
65 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.

  2. Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.

  3. Referred to House Ways and Means

  4. Referred to House Commerce

  5. Referred to the Committee on 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.

  6. Introduced in House

  7. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

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.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.625 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.625 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.625 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.625 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.

View full prompt & sources