PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Dec 19, 2013
Cancer Treatment Parity Act of 2013 - Amends the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), the Public Health Service Act, and the Internal Revenue Code to require a group or individual health plan providing benefits with respect to anticancer medications administered by a health care provider to provide no less favorable coverage for prescribed, patient-administered anticancer medications used to kill, slow, or prevent the growth of cancerous cells and that have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Applies such requirement to medication that is prescribed based on a finding by the treating physician that the medication is: (1) medically necessary for the purpose of killing, slowing, or preventing the growth of cancerous cells in accordance with nationally accepted standards of medical practice; and (2) clinically appropriate in terms of type, frequency, extent site, and duration.
Permits such coverage to be subject to the same cost-sharing applicable to anticancer medications administered by a health care provider under the plan.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits a health plan from imposing an increase in out-of-pocket costs, reclassifying benefits with respect to anticancer medications, or applying more restrictive limitations on prescribed orally- or intravenously-administered or injected anticancer medications.
Requires a plan to provide notice to each participant and beneficiary regarding the coverage required under this Act.
Requires the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission to assess how closing the Medicare part D donut hole affects Medicare coverage for orally-administered anticancer medications, with a particular focus on cost and accessibility.
People & committees
Sen. Franken, Al [D-MN] · D–MN
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 Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 8, 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.1879 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.1879 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.1879 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.1879 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.