PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 12, 1997
Patient Freedom of Choice Act of 1997 - Amends titles XVIII (Medicare) and XIX (Medicaid) of the Social Security Act (SSA) to require hospitals participating in the Medicare or Medicaid programs to: (1) give notice of availability of providers as part of the discharge planning process; and (2) maintain and disclose information on certain referrals. Provides for additional enforcement of such requirement through civil money penalties. Amends SSA title XI to provide for disclosure of certain information on hospital financial interest and referral patterns to the Secretary of Health and Human Services, who shall in turn make such information public.
People & committees
Rep. Stark, Fortney Pete [D-CA-13] · D–CA
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 and Environment.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to House Ways and Means
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.
Referred to House Commerce
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E237-238)
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: Jun 3, 2026. 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.734 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.734 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.734 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.734 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.