James McGovern (D-MA)
To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide coverage for wigs as durable medical equipment under the Medicare program, and for other purposes.
A Democratic bill with 8 Democratic cosponsors · See all 8 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on 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
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill aims to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act. The main goal is to provide coverage for wigs, referred to as cranial prostheses, as durable medical equipment under the Medicare program. This coverage would apply when a dermatologist, oncologist, or attending physician certifies the medical necessity of the prostheses. This necessity must be part of a proposed course of rehabilitative treatment or for hair loss caused by conditions like cancer, chemotherapy, or autoimmune diseases.
Yes· 3 of 4
- Scored +7
Would people over 65 be better off under this?
Seniors on Medicare benefit from the coverage of cranial prostheses for medical hair loss.
- Scored +7
Would retired people be better off under this?
Retirees utilizing Medicare will benefit from the covered cost of cranial prostheses.
- Scored +6
Does this make health care easier to get in general?
It increases healthcare access by providing Medicare coverage for essential hair loss treatments.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Medicare Coverage for Cranial Prostheses: This provision would allow individuals to have wigs covered as durable medical equipment under Medicare. This is a benefit for people experiencing hair loss due to specific health conditions (Section 1 of the bill).
-
Medical Necessity Certification: By allowing a dermatologist, oncologist, or attending physician to certify the need for these prostheses, the bill ensures the equipment is linked to a medical necessity such as cancer, chemotherapy, or autoimmune diseases (Section 1(a)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Requirement for Written Certification: Individuals would need a dermatologist, oncologist, or attending physician to certify the medical necessity in writing to qualify for coverage (Section 1(a)).
-
Exclusion of Non-Certified Prostheses: The bill includes a provision that addresses cranial prostheses that are not certified in the required manner, implying they would not receive the same coverage (Section 1(b)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would retired people be better off under this? — Retirees utilizing Medicare will benefit from the covered cost of cranial prostheses. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Seniors on Medicare benefit from the coverage of cranial prostheses for medical hair loss.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — It increases healthcare access by providing Medicare coverage for essential hair loss treatments. Does this put more money into Medicare, the health coverage for people over 65? — The bill expands Medicare coverage to include cranial prostheses as durable medical equipment.
- 10/1/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/31/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/20/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/6/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/9/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/8/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/16/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/12/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on 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.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Suzan DelBeneDemocrat · Washington
Ro KhannaDemocrat · California
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Ayanna PressleyDemocrat · Massachusetts
Mike QuigleyDemocrat · Illinois
Janice SchakowskyDemocrat · Illinois
Rashida TlaibDemocrat · Michigan
Eugene VindmanDemocrat · Virginia