PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 27, 2003
Seniors Health and Independence Preservation Act of 2003 - Amends part C (Medicare+Choice) of title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act to: (1) consolidate and restate the Federal laws relating to the social health maintenance organization (SHMO) demonstration projects; and (2) make the projects permanent.Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to promulgate a regulation that permits each SHMO demonstration project to expand its service area to include areas within the State served by the organization that are not contiguous to any other service area of the organization.Permits the participation in the SHMO demonstration project program of: (1) the five organizations authorized under the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 to demonstrate the concept of SHMOs that were approved by the Secretary in 1995; and (2) each entity that received a planning grant in 1998 under the 1997 Grants Program for Reforming Service Delivery for Dual Eligible Beneficiaries to develop a Second Generation Social HMO Demonstration Program.Requires the Secretary to notify the appropriate congressional committees prior to making any change to the benefits available under a SHMO demonstration project.Directs the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission to study and report to Congress on the cost-effectiveness of SHMO demonstration projects and their potential expansion.Requires the Secretary to conduct, and report to Congress on, a comparative qualitative survey of the satisfaction of Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in: (1) the original Medicare fee-for-service program under Medicare parts A (Hospital Insurance) and B (Supplementary Medical Insurance); (2) a Medicare+Choice plan under Medicare part C (Medicare+Choice); and (3) an SHMO.
People & committees
Rep. Issa, Darrell E. [R-CA-49] · R–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.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 18, 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.960 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.960 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.960 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.960 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.