A Republican bill with 14 Republican cosponsors · See all 14 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
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, known as the "TRUTH in Coverage Act of 2026," seeks to amend several federal laws regarding health insurance. It would require group health plans and health insurance issuers that provide benefits for "sex-rejecting procedures" to also cover items and services intended to address the harms caused by those procedures. These services, referred to as "restorative care," are intended to restore healthy human form and functioning. The mandate applies regardless of whether the individual received the original procedure under their specific plan or coverage. The new requirements would go into effect for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2027.
Yes· 3 of 9
- Scored +7
Would LGBTQ people be better off under this?
The bill provides essential coverage for care related to gender-affirming procedures.
- Scored +6
Does this make health care easier to get in general?
The bill improves healthcare access by requiring coverage for restorative care and associated complications.
- Scored +5
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
The bill increases consumer protection by mandating coverage for restorative care following certain medical procedures.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Would business owners be better off under this?
The bill imposes new coverage requirements on group health plans.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Coverage for Restorative Care: Individuals who have undergone "sex-rejecting procedures" would be entitled to benefits for items and services aimed at addressing harms, complications, or adverse effects. This includes care to address reproductive-system injury, endocrine dysfunction, sexual dysfunction, and various surgical complications (Section 2, subsection a; Section 2, subsection c-4).
-
Standardized Financial and Treatment Limits: The bill ensures that the financial requirements and treatment limitations for restorative care are not more restrictive than the predominant requirements applied to substantially all other medical and surgical benefits covered by the plan. This prevents the creation of separate, more restrictive cost- sharing or treatment restrictions for these specific services (Section 2, subsection b; Section 2, subsection b-1; Section 2, subsection b-2).
-
Broad Range of Supported Services: The bill identifies a wide variety of needs that could be addressed through coverage, ranging from physical rehabilitation services like speech or physical therapy to diagnostic testing and long-term medical surveillance (Section 2, subsection c-4-L; Section 2, subsection c-4-N).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Coverage Limitations on Fertility: While the bill covers many restorative aspects, it specifically excludes fertility services that involve methods circumventing natural human functions, such as handling a human egg or embryo outside the body (Section 2, subsection c-4-O).
-
Exceptions for Specific Medical Conditions: Certain medical services are excluded from the definition of a "sex-rejecting procedure," which may impact how coverage is applied for individuals with specific medical diagnoses, such as those with a medically verifiable disorder of sex development (Section 2, subsection c-6-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 LGBTQ people be better off under this? — The bill provides essential coverage for care related to gender-affirming procedures. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The bill provides coverage for medically necessary services which can reduce out-of-pocket burdens for those affected. Would men be better off under this? — The bill covers reproductive-related complications for specific medical contexts. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The bill provides medical coverage benefits for specific health needs. Would women be better off under this? — The bill covers reproductive-related complications for specific medical contexts. Would business owners be better off under this? — The bill imposes new coverage requirements on group health plans.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — The bill improves healthcare access by requiring coverage for restorative care and associated complications. Does this make mental health care easier to get? — The bill expands coverage to include psychiatric or psychological conditions associated with specific procedures.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill increases consumer protection by mandating coverage for restorative care following certain medical procedures.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this expand the rights of LGBTQ people? — The bill provides coverage for medical issues resulting from procedures often used by the LGBTQ community.
- 9/16/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/27/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/16/2026
- 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.
- 12 Cosponsors 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.
Brian BabinRepublican · Texas
Sheri BiggsRepublican · South Carolina
John CarterRepublican · Texas
Earl CarterRepublican · Georgia
Juan CiscomaniRepublican · Arizona
Clay FullerRepublican · Georgia
Michael GuestRepublican · Mississippi
Andy HarrisRepublican · Maryland
Abraham HamadehRepublican · Arizona
Mike KennedyRepublican · Utah
Mary MillerRepublican · Illinois
John McGuireRepublican · Virginia
Marlin StutzmanRepublican · Indiana
Matt Van EppsRepublican · Tennessee