Rural Health Care Protection and Improvement Act of 1997
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 9, 1997
Rural Health Care Protection and Improvement Act of 1997 - Amends the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 to reauthorize and extend the Rural Health Care Transition Grant Program, as well as to authorize the Administrator of the Health Care Financing Administration to adjust program grants to hospitals, or terminate them, if the Administrator determines that the hospital is using grant funds inappropriately. Amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act to revise the formulae for payments to health maintenance organizations and competitive medical plans for the stated purpose of improving fairness of payments to such entities. Requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to determine the annual per capita rate of payment for each payment area by adjusting the annual capitation rate for: (1) individuals (not, as currently, a class of individuals) who are enrolled with an eligible organization that has entered into a risk-sharing contract and who are enrolled under Medicare part B (Supplementary Medical Insurance) only; and (2) such risk factors as age, disability status, gender, institutional status, end-stage renal disease, and other appropriate factors so as to ensure actuarial equivalence. Requires the Secretary to establish a separate rate of payment to an eligible organization with respect to any individual determined to have end-stage renal disease and enrolled with the organization. Prescribes a general formula for the annual capitation rate of a payment area based on an area-specific capitation rate and an input-price-adjusted national capitation rate. Specifies area-specific and national percentages for contract years 1998 through 2001 and after. Requires the Secretary to increase or decrease payments to service providers, physicians, and other health care professionals under the Medicare fee-for-service program in each payment area to reflect, to the greatest extent possible, the proportionate increase or decrease (as applicable) in payments to eligible organizations under Medicare in payment areas by reason of this Act in order to ensure that payments to such health care professionals are made on a fair and equitable basis. Prohibits the total amount expended under Medicare from being increased or decreased by reason of such requirement. Directs the Secretary to report to the Congress on the methodology to be used in determining the increase or decrease in such payments. Requires the Secretary to take necessary steps to ensure, to the greatest extent possible, that eligible organizations use any increase in Medicare payments by reason of this Act to increase the provision of health care services to Medicare beneficiaries or to improve health care services infrastructure.
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
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.860 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.860 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.860 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.860 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.