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…
Amends Medicare physician payment law to require that the work geographic index for services furnished in Hawaii be raised to at least 1.5 beginning January 1, 2026, if it would otherwise be lower. The increase is explicitly not to be implemented in a budget‑neutral manner, so it increases program spending relative to current law.
Liberals emphasize access and workforce benefits; conservatives emphasize fiscal cost.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly targeted substantive amendment to the Medicare physician payment statute that is specific and well-integrated into existing law but minimal in ancillary detail.
Amends Medicare physician payment law to require that the work geographic index for services furnished in Hawaii be raised to at least 1.5 beginning January 1, 2026, if it would otherwise be lower.
The increase is explicitly not to be implemented in a budget‑neutral manner, so it increases program spending relative to current law.
Simple, narrow change helps a small constituency and could be attached to larger legislation, but new unoffset federal spending and lack of compromise reduce standalone chances.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly targeted substantive amendment to the Medicare physician payment statute that is specific and well-integrated into existing law but minimal in ancillary detail.
Liberals emphasize access and workforce benefits; conservatives emphasize fiscal cost.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize access and workforce benefits; conservatives emphasize fiscal cost.
Likely supportive.
The bill directs federal resources to raise Medicare physician payments in Hawaii, aiming to improve access and provider sustainability.
Supporters see targeted federal investment as appropriate to address geographic workforce shortages.
Cautiously favorable but pragmatic.
Recognizes targeted payment increases can address access problems, but worries about cost, precedent, and evidence of effectiveness.
Would favor monitoring, cost estimates, and possible sunset or evaluation.
Likely opposed.
Sees the bill as a state‑specific increase in federal spending that departs from budget neutrality and risks creating precedent.
Prefer market or state solutions and tighter control of Medicare spending.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Simple, narrow change helps a small constituency and could be attached to larger legislation, but new unoffset federal spending and lack of compromise reduce standalone chances.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize access and workforce benefits; conservatives emphasize fiscal cost.
Simple, narrow change helps a small constituency and could be attached to larger legislation, but new unoffset federal spending and lack of…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly targeted substantive amendment to the Medicare physician payment statute that is specific and well-integrated into existing law but minimal in ancillary…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.