A Republican bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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, known as the "PARTNERS Act of 2026," proposes an amendment to title XVIII of the Social Security Act. It aims to allow individual States to enforce Medicare Advantage plan requirements. Under this act, States could require Medicare Advantage organizations that sell, issue, renew, or offer plans within their borders to meet specific requirements. Additionally, the bill directs the Secretary to coordinate enforcement efforts with the States where these organizations are licensed or operate. The Secretary is also permitted to enter into collaborative enforcement agreements with States.
Yes· 3 of 4
- Scored +7
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
The bill explicitly grants states the authority to require Medicare Advantage organizations to meet specific plan requirements.
- Scored +3
Would people over 65 be better off under this?
Giving states more enforcement power over Medicare Advantage plans may lead to better protection of benefits for seniors.
- Scored +3
Would retired people be better off under this?
Enhanced state oversight of Medicare Advantage plans may provide more security for retirees using these services.
The opposite
- Scored -3
Does this give the federal government more power?
The bill shifts some oversight authority from the federal government to individual states through collaborative enforcement agreements.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
State Enforcement Authority: Under Section 2, States would have the power to require that Medicare Advantage organizations meet the requirements of this part regarding the plans they issue, sell, renew, or offer in that State. This provides States with a mechanism to ensure plan requirements are met.
-
Coordinated Enforcement: Section 2 includes a provision that the Secretary shall coordinate enforcement of established standards with the State where an organization is licensed or offers plans. This coordination could include entering into collaborative enforcement agreements between the Secretary and a State.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No negative impacts are explicitly stated in the provided text.
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? — Enhanced state oversight of Medicare Advantage plans may provide more security for retirees using these services. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Giving states more enforcement power over Medicare Advantage plans may lead to better protection of benefits for seniors.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The bill explicitly grants states the authority to require Medicare Advantage organizations to meet specific plan requirements. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill shifts some oversight authority from the federal government to individual states through collaborative enforcement agreements.
- Healthcare
- Does this put more money into Medicare, the health coverage for people over 65? — The bill empowers states to enforce existing Medicare Advantage requirements, which may improve the oversight of funds used for these plans.
- 6/8/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/11/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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
Lloyd DoggettDemocrat · Texas
Austin ScottRepublican · Georgia