Gregory Murphy (R-NC)

No Surprises Act Enforcement Act

H.R. 4710 · House bill Health

A Republican bill with 17 Democratic cosponsors · See all 38 cosponsors

Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Education and Workforce, and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

In committee

Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.

The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.

Its path through Congress

  1. Introduced
  2. In Committee

What this bill would do

This bill, titled the "No Surprises Act Enforcement Act," aims to increase penalties for group health plans and health insurance issuers that violate balance billing requirements. It amends the Public Health Service Act, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The legislation introduces higher fines for specific failures regarding balance billing provisions. Additionally, it establishes penalties for the late payment or non-payment of required amounts following an IDR entity payment determination. Finally, the bill mandates new transparency reporting requirements to keep Congress informed about audits and enforcement actions.

Yes· 3 of 6

  • Scored +7

    Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?

    The bill strengthens protections against unexpected medical costs by increasing penalties for balance billing violations.

  • Scored +6

    Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?

    The bill mandates new, regular reporting requirements to Congress regarding audits and enforcement actions.

  • Scored +5

    Does this give the federal government more power?

    The bill expands the Secretary's authority to assess civil penalties and oversee reporting.

The opposite

  • Scored -4

    Would business owners be better off under this?

    Insurance issuers and health plans face significantly higher penalties and more regulatory scrutiny.