PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 21, 2006
Medicare Durable Medical Equipment Access Act of 2005 - Amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act to prohibit the Secretary of Health and Human Services from awarding any contracts under the competitive durable medical equipment items and services acquisition program unless: (1) the quality standards have been implemented; and (2) the Secretary has received advice from the program oversight committee.
Requires the Secretary (who currently is authorized), in carrying out competitive acquisition programs, to exempt: (1) rural areas and areas with low population density within urban areas that are not competitive, unless there is a significant national market through mail order for a particular item or service; and (2) items and services for which the application of competitive acquisition is not likely to result in significant savings. Adds to such exemptions smaller metropolitan statistical areas.
Modifies requirements for the protection of small suppliers in bidding and contracting. Requires the Secretary to permit suppliers classified as small businesses to continue to participate as suppliers at the selected award price so long as they submit bids at less than the fee schedule amount otherwise applicable to the items and they otherwise comply with applicable program requirements.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Provides for appeal rights (currently denied).
Requires the Secretary to exempt from competitive acquisition requirements items and services for which the application of competitive acquisition is not likely to result in significant savings of at least 10%.
Prohibits the Secretary from implementing a program with respect to an item or service unless the Secretary demonstrates a probability of achieving significant savings of at least 10%, compared to the fee schedule in effect on January 1, 2006, by including the item or service in the program.
Prohibits the Secretary from implementing certain requirements for the payment basis for covered items furnished after January 1, 2009, with respect to the application of rates in an area that is not a competitive acquisition area, unless the Secretary has completed and published in the Federal Register a comparability analysis to ensure the application is appropriate. Requires application of the comparability analysis requirement to certain other part B items and services.
People & committees
Sen. Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT] · R–UT
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 S9899-9900)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.3920 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.3920 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.3920 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.3920 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.