Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
This bill directs the HHS Secretary, through the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, to conduct a one-year study on hospitals' use of electronic automated referrals for deceased organ donation. The study must assess time savings, timeliness, impacts on donation volumes, literature, best practices, IT security, and recommend steps to expand nationwide, and deliver a report to relevant congressional committees within one year.
Privacy and data-sharing concerns (conservative) vs donation gains (liberal)
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-scoped, time‑bound congressional study directive with clearly enumerated topics and a defined responsible office, but it lacks funding direction and detailed methodological or stakeholder engagement guidance.
This bill directs the HHS Secretary, through the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, to conduct a one-year study on hospitals' use of electronic automated referrals for deceased organ donation.
The study must assess time savings, timeliness, impacts on donation volumes, literature, best practices, IT security, and recommend steps to expand nationwide, and deliver a report to relevant congressional committees within one year.
Narrow, technical, low-cost study with clear deliverable and broad appeal; historically similar bills often pass or are incorporated into larger packages.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-scoped, time‑bound congressional study directive with clearly enumerated topics and a defined responsible office, but it lacks funding direction and detailed methodological or stakeholder engagement guidance.
Privacy and data-sharing concerns (conservative) vs donation gains (liberal)
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Privacy and data-sharing concerns (conservative) vs donation gains (liberal)
Likely views the bill positively as a low-cost federal effort to increase organ donation rates and reduce disparities in donor identification.
They will focus on potential public-health benefits while urging strong privacy, equity, and consent protections.
The study is seen as a pragmatic first step toward broader adoption.
Generally supportive because the bill commissions a study rather than imposing mandates, seeking evidence on efficiency and outcomes.
They will emphasize cost-benefit, interoperability, and implementation feasibility.
The centrist stance values measured federal involvement to produce actionable recommendations.
Cautiously supportive because the bill is limited to a study and aims to increase organ donations, a broadly popular goal.
Skepticism will focus on federal expansion, data privacy, and added regulatory burdens on hospitals.
Preference will be for voluntary, state-led adoption and minimal new federal mandates.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, technical, low-cost study with clear deliverable and broad appeal; historically similar bills often pass or are incorporated into larger packages.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Privacy and data-sharing concerns (conservative) vs donation gains (liberal)
Narrow, technical, low-cost study with clear deliverable and broad appeal; historically similar bills often pass or are incorporated into l…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-scoped, time‑bound congressional study directive with clearly enumerated topics and a defined responsible office, but it lacks funding direction and detaile…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.