Protecting Patients from Surprise Medical Bills Act
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 1, 2019
Protecting Patients from Surprise Medical Bills Act This bill prohibits balance billing the holder of a self-insured group health plan (plans in which an employer pays claims to providers for health benefits offered to employees) for emergency and specified nonemergency services. Balance billing is the practice of charging a plan holder for the difference between a provider's rate for a service and the in-network rate. First, the bill requires self-insured group health plans that cover emergency services to comply with the requirements for other types of group health plans. This includes the requirement to bill a plan holder no more than the in-network cost-sharing amount for covered emergency services, even if the provider is out-of-network. Second, the bill prohibits emergency services providers from billing a self-insured group plan holder for any remaining balance for covered services not paid to the provider by the employer. Further, unless a plan holder has the option to select an in-network provider, an out-of-network provider of covered, nonemergency services is prohibited from billing plan holders for the difference in rates for such services when provided at an in-network facility. Employers must pay out-of-network providers for services subject to the requirements of this bill (1) the amount the provider claims, (2) the usual and customary amount for such services in that community, or (3) an amount agreed to within 60 days of when the claim is submitted. Otherwise the parties may enter voluntary binding arbitration.
Source last updated: Dec 3, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
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 S.1266 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 S.1266 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 S.1266 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 S.1266 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.