PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 29, 2005
Justice for Medicare Beneficiaries Act of 2005 - Amends the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 to require administrative law judges in the Department of Health and Human Services involved with the Medicare appeals process to be bound only by applicable statutes, regulations, and rulings issued in accordance with the Administrative Procedures Act. Declares that such judges shall not be required to give substantial deference to local coverage determinations, local medical review policies, or Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services program guidance.
Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to ensure, in providing for the geographic distribution of administrative law judges, that: (1) there is at least one site in each state, the District of Columbia, and each territory for in-person hearings before a judge; and (2) there are at least two such sites in the five states with the largest populations, geographically distributed within each state.
Directs the Secretary to ensure that: (1) if an individual entitled to or enrolled for Medicare benefits requests a hearing before an administrative law judge, it shall be in-person unless he or she requests that it be conducted using tele- or video-conferencing technologies; and (2) the time frame to decide an appeal is not different for either kind of hearing.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Delays from October 1, 2005, until October 1, 2006, the transfer of the adjudication authority of administrative law judges responsible for hearing Medicare cases from the Commissioner of Social Security and the Social Security Administration to the Secretary and the Department of Health and Human Services.
People & committees
Sen. Dodd, Christopher J. [D-CT] · D–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S7634-7635)
Introduced in Senate
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 15, 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 S.1335 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 S.1335 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 S.1335 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 S.1335 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.