PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 14, 2026
Putting Patients First by Strengthening Provider Accountability in FECA Act
This bill explicitly authorizes the Department of Labor to suspend payments under the federal workers’ compensation program to certain providers convicted of fraud. (Current regulations establish various grounds for excluding a provider from payment under the program, including a conviction for fraudulent activity in connection with a federal or state medical benefit program.)
Under the bill, Labor may suspend payments to a provider convicted of fraud related to the federal workers’ compensation program, a similar state program, or a federal health care benefit program (e.g., Medicare). Specifically, Labor may suspend (1) payments to such a provider for services, appliances, or supplies covered under the program; or (2) payments for certain initial expenses incurred by an employing agency with respect to such a provider.
Labor must issue regulations to carry out these provisions.
People & committees
Rep. Mackenzie, Ryan [R-PA-7] · R–PA
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 Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 396 - 0 (Roll no. 251). (text: CR H4654)
House roll call 251 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 396 - 0 (Roll no. 251). (text: CR H4654)
House roll call 251 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H4671)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 8823.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4654-4656)
Mr. Walberg moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 33 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
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: Sep 19, 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.8823 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.8823 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.8823 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.8823 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.