Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
The ROOT Act amends Medicare law to change how Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) for certain outpatient imaging are implemented. Beginning January 1, 2026, qualified clinical decision support mechanisms (CDSMs) must report specified data to HHS, ordering professionals' compliance rates will be calculated, certain services and small/rural/clinical trial orders are exempted, providers must include the ordering professional's NPI on claims, and the Secretary must study and report on compliance and potential interventions every five years.
Liberals emphasize reducing low-value imaging and data for oversight
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-targeted administrative amendment to Medicare law that prescribes statutory requirements for data collection, reporting, compliance measurement, and exemptions concerning appropriate use criteria for imaging services, while delegating operational details to the Secretary.
The ROOT Act amends Medicare law to change how Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) for certain outpatient imaging are implemented.
Beginning January 1, 2026, qualified clinical decision support mechanisms (CDSMs) must report specified data to HHS, ordering professionals' compliance rates will be calculated, certain services and small/rural/clinical trial orders are exempted, providers must include the ordering professional's NPI on claims, and the Secretary must study and report on compliance and potential interventions every five years.
Relatively narrow, technical bill with bipartisan potential, but standalone passage is uncertain amid competing priorities and possible provider opposition.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-targeted administrative amendment to Medicare law that prescribes statutory requirements for data collection, reporting, compliance measurement, and exemptions concerning appropriate use criteria for imaging services, while delegating operational details to the Secretary.
Liberals emphasize reducing low-value imaging and data for oversight
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize reducing low-value imaging and data for oversight
Likely cautiously supportive: it strengthens data collection for evidence-based imaging and includes targeted exemptions.
Concern remains about administrative burden and potential access barriers if compliance leads to prior authorization or penalties.
Generally favorable if implemented pragmatically: promotes measurement and accountability while offering exemptions.
Will seek clear rulemaking, phased rollout, and cost/benefit evidence before endorsing enforcement steps like payment adjustments.
Skeptical or opposed: views as expanded federal oversight and data collection on private clinical decisions.
Exemptions help, but remaining mandates, reporting requirements, and possible downstream penalties raise concerns about bureaucracy and access.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Relatively narrow, technical bill with bipartisan potential, but standalone passage is uncertain amid competing priorities and possible provider opposition.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize reducing low-value imaging and data for oversight
Relatively narrow, technical bill with bipartisan potential, but standalone passage is uncertain amid competing priorities and possible pro…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-targeted administrative amendment to Medicare law that prescribes statutory requirements for data collection, reporting, compliance measurement, and exempti…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.