Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for c…
This bill directs the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to issue a clarification, within 60 days of enactment, that fully implanted active middle ear hearing devices are prosthetics and therefore not subject to the Medicare hearing aid coverage exclusion in section 1862(a)(7) of the Social Security Act. The bill ties the term prosthetic to the definition in 42 C.F.R. §414.202.
Liberals emphasize access and disability inclusion benefits.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise administrative directive to CMS that clearly states its objective, identifies the implementing official, sets a short deadline, and ties the clarification to existing statutory and regulatory language.
This bill directs the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to issue a clarification, within 60 days of enactment, that fully implanted active middle ear hearing devices are prosthetics and therefore not subject to the Medicare hearing aid coverage exclusion in section 1862(a)(7) of the Social Security Act.
The bill ties the term prosthetic to the definition in 42 C.F.R. §414.202.
No additional funding, reimbursement rates, or implementation details are specified.
Narrow administrative clarification with modest fiscal implications improves prospects, but requires committee clearance and Senate procedural accommodation; fiscal uncertainty reduces certainty.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise administrative directive to CMS that clearly states its objective, identifies the implementing official, sets a short deadline, and ties the clarification to existing statutory and regulatory language. It is limited in procedural specificity, fiscal acknowledgment, and safeguards against ambiguity.
Liberals emphasize access and disability inclusion benefits.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize access and disability inclusion benefits.
Likely supportive because the bill expands Medicare coverage interpretation for an assistive medical device, improving access for disabled and older Americans.
They would welcome removing a technical barrier but want assurance coverage is equitable and affordable for beneficiaries.
Generally favorable as a narrow technical fix that reduces regulatory ambiguity and helps patients obtain medical devices.
Will seek cost estimates, implementation details, and safeguards against fraud or unintended costs.
Skeptical because it expands Medicare-covered items and may increase federal spending, but some conservatives may accept this narrow clarification if medically justified.
Preference for strict medical necessity standards and cost controls.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow administrative clarification with modest fiscal implications improves prospects, but requires committee clearance and Senate procedural accommodation; fiscal uncertainty reduces certainty.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize access and disability inclusion benefits.
Narrow administrative clarification with modest fiscal implications improves prospects, but requires committee clearance and Senate procedu…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise administrative directive to CMS that clearly states its objective, identifies the implementing official, sets a short deadline, and ties the clarificatio…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.