S. 1941 (119th)Bill Overview

Cure Hepatitis C Act of 2025

Health|Health
Cosponsors
Support
Bipartisan
Introduced
Jun 4, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

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

Establishes a Hepatitis C Elimination Program at HHS with a national strategy, advisory committee, interagency working group, public dashboard, and annual reports. Creates a 5-year subscription purchasing program for direct-acting antiviral hepatitis C drugs to provide no-cost treatment to defined covered populations.

Why people may split

Progressives emphasize equity and elimination; conservatives emphasize federal cost and procurement overreach.

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a detailed substantive policy proposal that combines statutory program creation, funding, procurement authority, and modifications to existing benefit and drug-pricing law to expand access to hepatitis C treatment for defined populations.

Establishes a Hepatitis C Elimination Program at HHS with a national strategy, advisory committee, interagency working group, public dashboard, and annual reports.

Creates a 5-year subscription purchasing program for direct-acting antiviral hepatitis C drugs to provide no-cost treatment to defined covered populations.

Authorizes grants to states, community providers, correctional systems, tribal and safety-net programs, funds point-of-care testing development, and eliminates Medicare Part D cost-sharing for hepatitis C antivirals for plan years 2027–2031.

Passage45/100

Policy is technically focused and non-ideological, aiding support, but multi‑billion appropriations and drug program changes raise barriers.

CredibilityPartially aligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a detailed substantive policy proposal that combines statutory program creation, funding, procurement authority, and modifications to existing benefit and drug-pricing law to expand access to hepatitis C treatment for defined populations.

Contention72/100

Progressives emphasize equity and elimination; conservatives emphasize federal cost and procurement overreach.

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Likely helpedFederal agencies

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

Likely helped
  • Potential benefitRemoves cost barriers to hepatitis C treatment for covered populations, increasing patient access to curative therapies.
  • Potential benefitA subscription procurement model may lower per-course drug costs through bulk guaranteed purchases.
  • Potential benefitTargeted grants and outreach could increase screening, diagnosis, and linkage to care among high-risk groups.
Likely burdened
  • Federal agenciesTotal appropriations authorize roughly $9.78 billion through 2031, increasing federal discretionary spending.
  • Potential burdenProhibiting 340B use for program drugs may reduce program revenues or disrupt safety-net providers' financial models.
  • Potential burdenAdministrative requirements, registration, and audit provisions could impose compliance burdens on pharmacies and provi…
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Progressives emphasize equity and elimination; conservatives emphasize federal cost and procurement overreach.
Progressive95%

Likely strongly supportive: treats hepatitis C as a preventable, curable public-health problem and removes financial barriers for vulnerable groups.

Values funding for elimination, incarcerated people, uninsured, tribal programs, and Medicare cost-sharing removal.

Leans supportive
Centrist70%

Generally favorable but pragmatic: supports a measurable elimination plan and price-leveraging subscription buys, while wary of fiscal costs, implementation complexity, and state uptake.

Wants performance oversight and clarity on interactions with existing programs.

Leans supportive
Conservative20%

Skeptical or opposed: critiques center on federal spending, procurement centralization, and expanded federal involvement in drug purchasing and distribution.

Some support possible for targeted public-safety benefits, like treating incarcerated individuals.

Likely resistant
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 likelihood45/100

Policy is technically focused and non-ideological, aiding support, but multi‑billion appropriations and drug program changes raise barriers.

Scope and complexity
52%
Scopemoderate
52%
Complexitymedium
Why this could stall
  • No CBO score or formal cost estimate included
  • Manufacturer willingness to accept subscription bids unknown
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 elimination; conservatives emphasize federal cost and procurement overreach.

Policy is technically focused and non-ideological, aiding support, but multi‑billion appropriations and drug program changes raise barriers.

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a detailed substantive policy proposal that combines statutory program creation, funding, procurement authority, and modifications to existing benefit and drug-pri…

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