Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
This bill amends 10 U.S.C. §1094 to require the Secretary of Defense to ensure individuals who independently provide health care at Department of Defense medical facilities hold required licenses. It directs establishment of a centralized credentialing system usable across services and locations for commanding officers to verify licensure.
Liberals emphasize patient safety and standardization benefits
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly establishes an administrative obligation and a measurable performance standard and assigns responsibility to the Secretary of Defense, but it leaves significant implementation, resourcing, and oversight details unspecified.
This bill amends 10 U.S.C. §1094 to require the Secretary of Defense to ensure individuals who independently provide health care at Department of Defense medical facilities hold required licenses.
It directs establishment of a centralized credentialing system usable across services and locations for commanding officers to verify licensure.
The Secretary must ensure at least 90% of verifications (when not involving an adverse record) are completed within seven days of request.
A narrow administrative reform with low controversy and limited fiscal impact; implementation and resource questions are the main obstacles.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly establishes an administrative obligation and a measurable performance standard and assigns responsibility to the Secretary of Defense, but it leaves significant implementation, resourcing, and oversight details unspecified.
Liberals emphasize patient safety and standardization benefits
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize patient safety and standardization benefits
Likely supportive: the bill standardizes licensure checks and prioritizes patient safety across all military medical facilities.
It aligns with goals for equity and oversight of public medical providers, though implementation details and funding matter.
Generally favorable but pragmatic: supports standardized, timely verification while seeking assurance on costs and feasibility.
Would want a clear implementation plan, interoperability with state licensure systems, and metrics for performance.
Cautiously supportive on principle due to readiness and patient safety benefits, but concerned about added federal bureaucracy, cost, and potential duplication of state licensure authority.
Prefers lean, interoperable solutions using existing systems.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
A narrow administrative reform with low controversy and limited fiscal impact; implementation and resource questions are the main obstacles.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize patient safety and standardization benefits
A narrow administrative reform with low controversy and limited fiscal impact; implementation and resource questions are the main obstacles.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly establishes an administrative obligation and a measurable performance standard and assigns responsibility to the Secretary of Defense, but it leaves significa…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.