S. 1799 (119th)Bill Overview

A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for certain cognitive impairment detection in the Medicare annual wellness visit and initial preventative physical examination.

Health|Health
Cosponsors
Support
Bipartisan
Introduced
May 19, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

The bill amends the Social Security Act to require cognitive impairment detection during the Medicare annual wellness visit and the initial preventive physical examination. Detection must use one of the National Institute on Aging–identified instruments for primary care and results and the tool used must be documented in the medical record.

Why people may split

Progressives emphasize equity and guaranteed follow-up services.

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly scoped substantive change that is legally precise in its statutory amendments and clear in purpose, but under-specified in operational, fiscal, and oversight details necessary for comprehensive implementation.

The bill amends the Social Security Act to require cognitive impairment detection during the Medicare annual wellness visit and the initial preventive physical examination.

Detection must use one of the National Institute on Aging–identified instruments for primary care and results and the tool used must be documented in the medical record.

The requirement takes effect for services furnished on or after January 1, 2026.

Passage60/100

Small, administrable change in Medicare preventive care that is low controversy, but lacks visible cost estimate and may prompt implementation questions.

CredibilityPartially aligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly scoped substantive change that is legally precise in its statutory amendments and clear in purpose, but under-specified in operational, fiscal, and oversight details necessary for comprehensive implementation.

Contention30/100

Progressives emphasize equity and guaranteed follow-up services.

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Likely helpedLikely burdened

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Potential benefitIncreases early identification of cognitive impairment, enabling earlier care planning and referrals.
  • Potential benefitStandardizes tools by requiring use of NIA-identified instruments across Medicare preventive visits.
  • Potential benefitMay improve enrollment in clinical trials and access to treatments by documenting diagnosis earlier.
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenAdds clinician time and documentation burden during AWV and IPPE visits.
  • Potential burdenMay increase downstream Medicare spending from follow-up diagnostics and services.
  • Potential burdenRisk of false positives may cause anxiety, unnecessary testing, and increased costs.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Progressives emphasize equity and guaranteed follow-up services.
Progressive90%

Likely supportive overall as it promotes earlier detection, potential reduction of disparities, and access to planning and supports.

May raise concerns that detection alone is insufficient without guaranteed follow-up services, care access, and equitable implementation.

Leans supportive
Centrist80%

Generally favorable as a targeted preventive-care enhancement with clear standards, but wants clarity on implementation, reimbursement, and clinician workflow impacts.

Will seek pragmatic amendments to address costs, training, and quality measurement.

Leans supportive
Conservative60%

Cautiously open but concerned about federal micromanagement of medical practice, added administrative burdens, and unfunded mandates increasing Medicare costs.

May accept if clinician discretion and payment clarity preserved.

Split reaction
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood60/100

Small, administrable change in Medicare preventive care that is low controversy, but lacks visible cost estimate and may prompt implementation questions.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • No CBO cost estimate provided
  • Provider reimbursement and time burden details absent
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Progressives emphasize equity and guaranteed follow-up services.

Small, administrable change in Medicare preventive care that is low controversy, but lacks visible cost estimate and may prompt implementat…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly scoped substantive change that is legally precise in its statutory amendments and clear in purpose, but under-specified in operational, fiscal, and over…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis