PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 3, 2009
Military Retirees Health Care Protection Act - Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) the Department of Defense (DOD) and the nation have a committed health benefits obligation to retired military personnel that exceeds the obligation of corporate employers to civilian employees; and (2) DOD has many additional options to constrain the growth of health care spending in ways that do not disadvantage beneficiaries, and should pursue such options rather than seeking large fee increases for beneficiaries.
Prohibits an increase after: (1) April 1, 2006, in a premium, deductible, copayment, or other charge prescribed by the Secretary of Defense for medical and dental health care coverage for military personnel; and (2) September 30, 2009, in the dollar amount of a cost-sharing requirement under the DOD pharmacy benefits program.
Prohibits: (1) charges for DOD inpatient care from exceeding $535 per day; and (2) beginning on January 1, 2009, an increase in premiums under TRICARE (a DOD managed health care program) for certain members of the Selected Reserve.
People & committees
Rep. Edwards, Chet [D-TX-17] · D–TX
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 Military Personnel.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
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 14, 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.816 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.816 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.816 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.816 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.