A Democratic bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
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
The "Fair Billing Act" aims to amend the Social Security Act by requiring off-campus outpatient departments of healthcare providers to have a separate identification number and to submit attestations of compliance. This is intended to ensure proper billing practices and oversight. The changes would go into effect on January 1, 2026.
Yes· 3 of 7
- Scored +1
Would people over 65 be better off under this?
The act has a potential positive impact for seniors because it aims to ensure proper billing practices and oversight.
- Scored +1
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
The act has a potential positive impact for low income households, by ensuring correct and transparent billing.
- Scored +1
Would middle-income households be better off under this?
The act could have a positive impact for middle-class households by ensuring proper billing practices and oversight.
The opposite
- Scored -1
Would business owners be better off under this?
The act could increase administrative costs for business owners, namely healthcare providers.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
The requirement for separate identification numbers for off-campus outpatient departments, as described in SEC. 2 (a), could lead to more transparent and accurate billing. This might help patients better understand their medical bills and potentially reduce instances of incorrect charges.
-
The mandated attestations of compliance with regulations, per SEC. 2 (a), could help ensure that off-campus departments adhere to quality standards. This could improve patient care and safety at these locations.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- The new requirements for identification numbers and attestations, as mentioned in SEC. 2 (a), could potentially increase administrative burdens and costs for healthcare providers. These increased costs could then be passed on to patients in the form of higher prices for medical services.
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 households on low incomes be better off under this? — The act has a potential positive impact for low income households, by ensuring correct and transparent billing. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The act could have a positive impact for middle-class households by ensuring proper billing practices and oversight. Would retired people be better off under this? — The act has a potential positive impact for retirees because it aims to ensure proper billing practices and oversight. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — The act has a potential positive impact for seniors because it aims to ensure proper billing practices and oversight. Would business owners be better off under this? — The act could increase administrative costs for business owners, namely healthcare providers.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The act ensures proper billing practices, which improves consumer protection.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The act requires unique identifiers and compliance attestations, increasing transparency.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — It improves healthcare access by ensuring the quality standards in off-campus departments.
- 7/29/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
3 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Roger MarshallRepublican · Kansas