PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 22, 1997
Medicare Physician Workforce Improvement Act of 1997 - Amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act to revise the rules for determining the number of full-time equivalent residents in an approved medical residency training program for purposes of determining payments for direct graduate medical education (GME) costs to provide that a resident enrolled in a fellowship in geriatric medicine or geriatric psychiatry within an approved medical residency training program be counted twice for the period such resident is enrolled in such fellowship (thereby doubling GME payments made to teaching hospitals for geriatric fellows as an incentive for such hospitals to promote and recruit such fellows). Caps the double payment to be provided for an approved medical residency training program to a maximum of 400 fellows per year. Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish and conduct a limited number of demonstration projects to increase the number of certified geriatricians who are appropriately trained to provide items and services to beneficiaries under the Medicare program in a range of patient settings. Directs the Secretary to make annual reports to the Congress on such projects.
People & committees
Sen. Reid, Harry [D-NV] · D–NV
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 S5002-5003)
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 21, 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.779 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.779 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.779 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.779 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.