Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for c…
This bill amends section 1866(a)(1) of the Social Security Act to require hospitals, critical access hospitals, and rural emergency hospitals not to consider an individual’s vaccination status when deciding which patient receives an organ transplant. The prohibition is added as a condition in the statute that governs hospitals’ participation in Medicare programs.
Left emphasizes clinical outcomes and public-health risk.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly and narrowly creates a substantive prohibition by amending the Social Security Act, but it provides limited operational detail.
This bill amends section 1866(a)(1) of the Social Security Act to require hospitals, critical access hospitals, and rural emergency hospitals not to consider an individual’s vaccination status when deciding which patient receives an organ transplant.
The prohibition is added as a condition in the statute that governs hospitals’ participation in Medicare programs.
Narrow statutory tweak with low fiscal impact helps, but contentious vaccine-related policy and lack of medical exemptions reduce odds, especially in Senate.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly and narrowly creates a substantive prohibition by amending the Social Security Act, but it provides limited operational detail.
Left emphasizes clinical outcomes and public-health risk.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Left emphasizes clinical outcomes and public-health risk.
Likely skeptical or opposed.
They would view prohibiting consideration of vaccination status as interfering with evidence-based clinical decisionmaking and transplant outcomes.
They worry it may increase infection risk and reduce overall transplant success.
Mixed/pragmatic.
They recognize access concerns but also value outcome-driven medical criteria.
They would seek implementation details and safeguards to prevent worse transplant outcomes.
Likely broadly supportive.
They would view the bill as protecting individual liberty and preventing vaccination status from being used as a gatekeeper for lifesaving care.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow statutory tweak with low fiscal impact helps, but contentious vaccine-related policy and lack of medical exemptions reduce odds, especially in Senate.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Left emphasizes clinical outcomes and public-health risk.
Narrow statutory tweak with low fiscal impact helps, but contentious vaccine-related policy and lack of medical exemptions reduce odds, esp…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly and narrowly creates a substantive prohibition by amending the Social Security Act, but it provides limited operational detail.
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.