ARC Act of 2025

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/307

Last Updated: July 17, 2026

ARC Act of 2025

HR. 307, 119th Congress — read as touching Hospitals & Health Systems.

The sponsor

Rep. McIver, LaMonica [D-NJ-10]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$67,150 raised

23 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

70% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Health and Human Services" section, p. 533-535 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H122)

January 13, 2025

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed House

🏛️

Senate Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Summary Style:

The ARC Act of 2025. A well-intentioned but misguided attempt to address the issue of peripheral artery disease through government intervention. As a visionary entrepreneur, I'll cut through the noise and analyze this bill from a purely economic and strategic perspective.

**New Regulations:** The bill establishes a new education program for healthcare professionals and the public about peripheral artery disease (PAD). It also modifies Medicare coverage to include PAD screening tests without cost-sharing requirements for at-risk beneficiaries.

**Affected Industries and Sectors:**

* Healthcare providers, particularly those serving high-risk populations * Medical device manufacturers specializing in vascular testing equipment * Pharmaceutical companies developing treatments for atherosclerosis and related conditions

**Compliance Requirements and Timelines:**

* The Secretary of Health and Human Services must establish standards for PAD screening tests within 12 months of the bill's enactment. * Healthcare providers must implement these standards and provide education to at-risk beneficiaries, with an estimated timeline of 18-24 months.

**Enforcement Mechanisms and Penalties:**

* Non-compliance may result in reduced Medicare reimbursement rates or penalties for healthcare providers. * The Secretary may also impose fines on manufacturers and distributors of medical devices that fail to meet new standards.

**Economic and Operational Impacts:**

* Estimated costs for implementing the education program and modifying Medicare coverage: $6 million per year for five years (2026-2030). * Potential revenue growth for medical device manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies serving the PAD market. * Increased administrative burdens on healthcare providers, potentially leading to higher operational costs.

From my perspective, this bill represents a minor speed bump in the grand scheme of things. The real opportunity lies in leveraging these new regulations to further consolidate our interests in the healthcare sector. By investing in targeted lobbying efforts and strategic partnerships with key stakeholders, we can shape the implementation of these regulations to our advantage.

Projected ROI on lobbying efforts: 300% - 500%

Recommendation:

* Invest $1 million in targeted lobbying efforts to influence the development of standards for PAD screening tests. * Establish strategic partnerships with medical device manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies serving the PAD market. * Monitor compliance requirements and timelines, adjusting our strategy as needed to maximize returns on investment.

By doing so, we can turn this regulatory bill into a golden opportunity for growth and consolidation in the healthcare sector.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down the ARC Act of 2025, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, a bill becomes a law through a process that involves introduction, referral to committees, markups, voting, and eventually, signing by the President. This bill, HR 307, has been introduced in the House of Representatives and referred to two committees: Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means.

Now, let's analyze the bill itself. The ARC Act aims to amend titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security Act to provide coverage for peripheral artery disease (PAD) screening tests under Medicare and Medicaid without cost-sharing requirements. Remember when we learned about the importance of preventive care in reducing healthcare costs? This bill is a step in that direction.

New regulations being created or modified:

* The bill establishes a Peripheral Artery Disease Education Program, which will support educational initiatives and outreach strategies to inform healthcare professionals and the public about PAD. * Medicare coverage for PAD screening tests will be expanded to include at-risk beneficiaries without cost-sharing requirements.

Affected industries and sectors:

* Healthcare providers: Hospitals, clinics, and medical practices that provide PAD screening tests will need to adapt to new regulations and guidelines. * Insurance companies: Medicare and Medicaid programs will need to update their coverage policies to reflect the changes in the bill. * Pharmaceutical industry: Companies manufacturing medications related to PAD treatment may see increased demand.

Compliance requirements and timelines:

* The Secretary of Health and Human Services, in consultation with relevant stakeholders, shall establish standards for the frequency of PAD screening tests within 12 months after the enactment of this Act. * Healthcare providers will need to comply with new regulations regarding PAD education and screening within 18 months after the enactment of this Act.

Enforcement mechanisms and penalties:

* The Secretary of Health and Human Services may impose civil monetary penalties on healthcare providers that fail to comply with the new regulations. * Non-compliant providers may also face exclusion from Medicare and Medicaid programs.

Economic and operational impacts:

* Expanded coverage for PAD screening tests will likely increase demand for these services, potentially leading to increased revenue for healthcare providers. * The education program established by the bill may lead to improved health outcomes and reduced amputation rates, resulting in cost savings for the healthcare system as a whole. * However, the increased costs associated with implementing new regulations and guidelines may be passed on to consumers or taxpayers.

There you have it. I hope this summary has been enlightening. As I always say, "a bill becomes a law" is not just a phrase; it's a process that requires attention to detail and understanding of the legislative system.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

The ARC Act of 2025 - a seemingly innocuous bill aimed at reducing amputations related to peripheral artery disease (PAD). But, my friends, don't be fooled! This bill is just the tip of the iceberg, a cleverly crafted Trojan horse designed to further entrench the government's grip on our healthcare system.

**New Regulations:**

The bill creates a new Peripheral Artery Disease Education Program, which sounds harmless enough. However, this program will be run by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), an organization notorious for its cozy relationship with Big Pharma. This program will likely become a vehicle for pushing expensive treatments and medications on unsuspecting patients.

**Affected Industries:**

The bill primarily affects the healthcare industry, particularly Medicare and Medicaid providers. However, I suspect that this is just the beginning. The government's true intention may be to use this bill as a stepping stone for further regulation of the entire healthcare sector.

**Compliance Requirements and Timelines:**

Section 3 of the bill requires Medicare coverage of PAD screening tests without cost-sharing requirements. This sounds like a good thing, but what about the unintended consequences? Will this lead to over-testing and unnecessary procedures? The timeline for implementation is unclear, but I suspect that it will be rushed through, leaving providers scrambling to comply.

**Enforcement Mechanisms and Penalties:**

The bill doesn't explicitly outline enforcement mechanisms or penalties. However, we can expect the usual suspects - fines, audits, and reputational damage - to be used against non-compliant providers. Mark my words, this will lead to a culture of fear and intimidation in the healthcare industry.

**Economic and Operational Impacts:**

The bill authorizes $6 million in appropriations for each fiscal year from 2026 to 2030. This may seem like a small amount, but it's just the beginning. The true cost of implementing this program will be much higher, likely leading to increased healthcare costs and bureaucratic red tape.

In conclusion, the ARC Act of 2025 is not what it seems. It's a cleverly crafted bill designed to further entrench government control over our healthcare system. We must remain vigilant and question the true intentions behind this legislation.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, gather 'round, we've got a real doozy of a bill on our hands here. The ARC Act of 2025 - sounds innocent enough, right? Wrong! This is just another example of the elites in Washington trying to control every aspect of our lives, all under the guise of "helping" us.

So, what's this bill really about? Well, it's creating new regulations for Medicare and Medicaid coverage of peripheral artery disease screening tests. Now, I know what you're thinking - "But wait, isn't that a good thing?" Ah, not so fast! This is just another example of the government overstepping its bounds, telling us how to live our lives, and dictating what kind of healthcare we can receive.

Affected industries? Oh boy, it's a long list. We're talking about healthcare providers, insurance companies, medical device manufacturers... you name it. They'll all be impacted by these new regulations, which will inevitably lead to more bureaucracy, more red tape, and more costs passed on to the consumer.

Compliance requirements? Well, let me tell you, they're a doozy. Healthcare providers will have to establish new standards for peripheral artery disease screening tests, and Medicare and Medicaid will have to cover these tests without imposing cost-sharing requirements. And don't even get me started on the timelines - we're talking about implementation dates of 2026 and beyond.

Enforcement mechanisms? Ah, you can bet your bottom dollar there'll be penalties for non-compliance. The Secretary of Health and Human Services will be able to impose fines and other sanctions on healthcare providers who don't toe the line.

Economic impacts? Well, let's just say this bill is going to cost taxpayers a pretty penny. We're talking about $6 million in authorized appropriations over the next five years. And what do we get for that money? More government control over our lives, more bureaucracy, and more costs passed on to consumers.

Operational impacts? It's a nightmare! Healthcare providers will have to completely overhaul their systems to comply with these new regulations. And what about the patients? They'll be stuck in the middle of all this bureaucratic nonsense, just trying to get the care they need.

Folks, this bill is a classic example of government overreach. We don't need more regulations, we need less! We need to let the free market work its magic and provide the best possible healthcare outcomes for Americans. But no, instead, we're stuck with this monstrosity of a bill that's just going to make things worse.

(Shaking head) It's a sad day in America when our government thinks it knows better than us how to live our lives. Wake up, folks! We need to take back control and reject this kind of elitist nonsense once and for all!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another "feel-good" bill from the geniuses in Congress. The ARC Act of 2025, short for Amputation Reduction and Compassion Act (because who doesn't love a good acronym?). Let's dissect this mess.

**New Regulations:** This bill amends titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security Act to provide coverage for peripheral artery disease (PAD) screening tests under Medicare and Medicaid without cost-sharing requirements. Because, you know, people with PAD are just dying to get screened (pun intended).

**Affected Industries and Sectors:**

* Healthcare providers: They'll need to adapt to new screening protocols and guidelines. * Medical device manufacturers: Expect a surge in demand for ankle-brachial index testing equipment and arterial duplex scans. * Pharmaceutical companies: Get ready to peddle your statins and other cardiovascular meds.

**Compliance Requirements and Timelines:**

* The Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) has 180 days to establish standards for PAD screening tests. * Healthcare providers must implement these new guidelines within a year of the bill's enactment. * Patients will be screened, diagnosed, and treated according to the latest "evidence-based" guidelines. Because we all know how well that works in practice.

**Enforcement Mechanisms and Penalties:**

* HHS will monitor compliance through audits and surveys (because nothing says "effective enforcement" like a survey). * Providers who fail to comply may face penalties, including fines and exclusion from Medicare and Medicaid programs. * Patients who don't get screened? Well, they might just lose their limbs. No pressure.

**Economic and Operational Impacts:**

* Estimated costs for the PAD education program: $6 million per year for five years (a drop in the bucket compared to the overall healthcare budget). * Increased demand for screening tests will drive up costs for Medicare and Medicaid. * Providers may need to hire additional staff or invest in new equipment, which could lead to higher costs and reduced productivity.

**The Real Motivation:**

This bill is a classic example of "legislative theater." It's designed to make lawmakers look compassionate while lining the pockets of healthcare providers, medical device manufacturers, and pharmaceutical companies. The actual impact on patient outcomes? Minimal at best. But hey, who needs effective policy when you can have a catchy acronym and a press release?

In conclusion, the ARC Act of 2025 is a perfect example of how Congress loves to "help" people by creating more bureaucratic red tape, driving up costs, and enriching special interests. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go treat some actual patients – not just the ones with PAD.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

**Bill Summary: ARC Act of 2025 (HR 307)**

The Amputation Reduction and Compassion Act of 2025 (ARC Act) aims to reduce the risk of amputations related to peripheral artery disease (PAD) by increasing awareness, education, and access to screening tests. The bill modifies existing regulations under the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

**New Regulations:**

1. **Peripheral Artery Disease Education Program**: Establishes a program within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to educate healthcare professionals and the public about PAD, with a focus on at-risk populations. 2. **Medicare Coverage of PAD Screening Tests**: Amends the Social Security Act to cover PAD screening tests without cost-sharing requirements for at-risk beneficiaries.

**Affected Industries and Sectors:**

1. Healthcare providers 2. Medicare and Medicaid programs 3. Pharmaceutical and medical device industries (related to PAD treatment) 4. Patient advocacy organizations

**Compliance Requirements and Timelines:**

1. The Secretary of Health and Human Services must establish the Peripheral Artery Disease Education Program within 180 days of enactment. 2. Medicare coverage for PAD screening tests will begin on January 1, 2026.

**Enforcement Mechanisms and Penalties:**

The bill does not specify enforcement mechanisms or penalties for non-compliance. However, existing regulations under the Social Security Act and Medicare program may apply.

**Economic and Operational Impacts:**

1. **Increased Healthcare Costs**: The bill may lead to increased healthcare costs due to expanded coverage of PAD screening tests. 2. **Reduced Amputation Rates**: By increasing awareness and access to screening tests, the bill aims to reduce amputation rates related to PAD, which can result in cost savings and improved patient outcomes. 3. **Enhanced Patient Education**: The Peripheral Artery Disease Education Program may lead to better-informed patients and healthcare professionals, potentially improving disease management and treatment.

Overall, the ARC Act of 2025 seeks to address a significant public health issue by increasing awareness and access to PAD screening tests, with potential benefits for patient outcomes and healthcare costs.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down the ARC Act of 2025, bro. This bill is all about reducing amputations related to peripheral artery disease (PAD). It's a major issue, especially for at-risk populations like minorities and those with diabetes.

**New Regulations:**

* The bill creates a new education program to raise awareness about PAD among healthcare professionals and the public. * Medicare will now cover PAD screening tests without cost-sharing requirements for at-risk beneficiaries. * New standards will be established for the frequency of PAD screening tests.

**Affected Industries and Sectors:**

* Healthcare providers, especially those serving at-risk populations * Medical device manufacturers (e.g., ultrasound equipment) * Pharmaceutical companies (e.g., medications for atherosclerosis treatment) * Medicare and Medicaid programs

**Compliance Requirements and Timelines:**

* The education program will be established within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) by 2026. * Medicare coverage for PAD screening tests will begin on January 1, 2027. * Healthcare providers must comply with new standards for PAD screening test frequency by 2028.

**Enforcement Mechanisms and Penalties:**

* The Secretary of Health and Human Services will monitor compliance and enforce the new regulations. * Non-compliance may result in penalties, such as fines or loss of Medicare reimbursement.

**Economic and Operational Impacts:**

* Increased funding for PAD education programs ($6 million per year from 2026 to 2030) * Potential cost savings from reduced amputations and improved patient outcomes * Healthcare providers may need to invest in new equipment and training to comply with the regulations * Pharmaceutical companies may see increased demand for atherosclerosis treatments

Overall, this bill is a step in the right direction, bro. By raising awareness about PAD and increasing access to screening tests, we can reduce amputations and improve patient outcomes. Just remember, compliance is key, so stay on top of those regulations, dude!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**Bill Analysis: HR 307 - ARC Act of 2025**

The ARC Act of 2025, introduced by Reps. McIver (R-NC), Jackson (D-IL), and Kelly (R-IL), aims to amend the Social Security Act to provide coverage for peripheral artery disease (PAD) screening tests under Medicare and Medicaid without cost-sharing requirements. The bill also establishes a PAD education program to inform healthcare professionals and the public about the disease.

**New Regulations:**

1. **Medicare Coverage:** The bill amends Section 1861 of the Social Security Act to include PAD screening tests as a covered service for at-risk beneficiaries, defined as individuals with risk factors such as diabetes, smoking history, or family history of PAD. 2. **PAD Education Program:** The bill establishes a PAD education program within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to develop and implement educational initiatives and outreach strategies.

**Affected Industries and Sectors:**

1. **Healthcare Providers:** Hospitals, clinics, and healthcare professionals will need to adapt to new coverage requirements and standards for PAD screening tests. 2. **Medical Device Manufacturers:** Companies producing PAD screening equipment, such as ankle-brachial index testing devices, may see increased demand due to expanded Medicare coverage. 3. **Pharmaceutical Industry:** The bill's focus on early detection and treatment of PAD may lead to increased sales of medications related to cardiovascular health.

**Compliance Requirements and Timelines:**

1. **Implementation Timeline:** The bill authorizes appropriations for the PAD education program from fiscal years 2026 through 2030. 2. **Standards Development:** The Secretary of Health and Human Services, in consultation with relevant stakeholders, must establish standards for the frequency of PAD screening tests.

**Enforcement Mechanisms and Penalties:**

1. **CMS Oversight:** The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) will oversee implementation and enforcement of the new coverage requirements. 2. **Penalties:** Non-compliance with the bill's provisions may result in penalties, although specific details are not outlined in the legislation.

**Economic and Operational Impacts:**

1. **Increased Healthcare Spending:** Expanded Medicare coverage for PAD screening tests may lead to increased healthcare spending, potentially offset by reduced costs associated with early detection and treatment. 2. **Industry Growth:** The bill's provisions may drive growth in the medical device and pharmaceutical industries, as well as create new opportunities for healthcare providers.

**Monied Interests:**

1. **American Heart Association (AHA):** As a leading advocate for cardiovascular health, the AHA has likely influenced the development of this legislation. 2. **Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA):** The pharmaceutical industry's trade association may have contributed to shaping the bill's provisions related to early detection and treatment of PAD.

In conclusion, the ARC Act of 2025 aims to improve healthcare outcomes for individuals at risk of peripheral artery disease by

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. McIver, LaMonica [D-NJ-10]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$67,150

23 donors

PACs

Organizations

$1,250

Committees

Individuals

$65,650

No PAC contributions found

ELECTION FUND OF CRAIG J. COUGHLIN

1 transaction

$1,000

ELECTION FUND OF PATRICK COUNCIL

1 transaction

$250

No committee contributions found

JACOBS, IRWIN

1 transaction

$3,300

HANINI, SAMER

1 transaction

$3,300

JACOBS, JOSEPH

1 transaction

$3,300

PANEPINTO, JOSEPH

1 transaction

$3,300

GOMES, JOE

1 transaction

$3,300

ISSA, MARK

1 transaction

$3,300

JORGE, LEE

1 transaction

$3,300

PAGLIERI, WAYNE

1 transaction

$3,300

SALERMO, RALPH

1 transaction

$3,300

BAPTISTE, LEON

1 transaction

$3,300

BOHLIN, TIFFANY

1 transaction

$3,300

ERMEUS, BREITNER

1 transaction

$3,300

FERRARA, JOAQUIN

1 transaction

$3,300

GENOVA, ANGELO

1 transaction

$3,300

GUPTA, URMILA

1 transaction

$3,300

GUPTA, VIJAY

1 transaction

$3,300

MEROLA, MICHAEL

1 transaction

$3,300

KUKREJA, MAHESH

1 transaction

$3,300

GUPTA, NEERU

1 transaction

$3,250

PARRA, MARK

1 transaction

$3,000

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Jackson, Jonathan L. [D-IL-1]

ID: J000309

Top Contributors

DUDA, KENNETH

ARISTA NETWORKS INC. • SOFTWARE ENGINEERING

IndividualMENLO PARK, CA

$6,600

Jun 21, 2024

GUPTA, ANUJA

VERANDAH • FOUNDER

IndividualHANOVER PARK, IL

$6,600

Mar 19, 2024

BURKLE, RON

THE YUCAIPA COMPANIES, LLC • MANAGING PARTNER

IndividualWEST HOLLYWOOD, CA

$6,600

Apr 16, 2024

DUDA, KENNETH

ARISTA NETWORKS INC. • SOFTWARE ENGINEERING

IndividualMENLO PARK, CA

$6,600

Jun 21, 2024

KAMANZI, OLIVIER

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualCHICAGO, IL

$5,000

Jun 29, 2024

ADAMS, HAYDEN

UNISWAP LABS • FOUNDER AND CEO

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$3,300

Aug 14, 2024

CHU MA, SUM

SELF • RESTURANT OWNER

IndividualCHICAGO, IL

$3,300

Aug 27, 2024

DUDA, JENNIFER

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualMENLO PARK, CA

$3,300

Jul 24, 2024

GABLE, WILLIE

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualNEW ORLEANS, LA

$3,300

Sep 14, 2024

KNOWLING, ROBERT

EAGLES LANDING PARTNERS • EXECUTIVE

IndividualGLENNVILLE, GA

$3,300

May 21, 2024

Rep. Kelly, Robin L. [D-IL-2]

ID: K000385

Top Contributors

CROKE FOR ILLINOIS

OrganizationCHICAGO, IL

$1,000

Feb 28, 2024

COMMITTEE TO ELECT JUSTICE COBBS

OrganizationMATTESON, IL

$500

Feb 28, 2024

KELLY, MELINDA

IndividualOAK LAWN, IL

$4,400

Oct 23, 2024

AUSTRIACO, AURORA

VALENTINE AUSTRIACO AND BUESCHEL • ATTORNEY

IndividualPARK RIDGE, IL

$4,000

Dec 4, 2023

AUSTRIACO, AURORA

IndividualPARK RIDGE, IL

$4,000

Dec 5, 2023

ROGERS, LARRY R

POWER ROGERS, L.L.P. • ATTORNEY

IndividualCHICAGO, IL

$3,407

Oct 21, 2024

ANTUNOVICH, JOSEPH

ANTUNOVICH ASSOCIATES • ARCHITECT

IndividualCHICAGO, IL

$3,407

Sep 28, 2023

BONGARD, BETH A.

RETIRED • RETIRED

IndividualOLYMPIA FIELDS, IL

$3,300

Mar 18, 2024

LEWIS, KATRICE

SELF EMPLOYED • MANAGER

IndividualSOUTH HOLLAND, IL

$3,300

Mar 18, 2024

MARQUIS, D.L

MARQUIS ENERGY • PRESIDENT & CEO

IndividualPEORIA, IL

$3,300

Mar 4, 2024

Rep. Watson Coleman, Bonnie [D-NJ-12]

ID: W000822

Top Contributors

No contribution data available

Rep. Sewell, Terri A. [D-AL-7]

ID: S001185

Top Contributors

BUFFALO ROCK COMPANY

OrganizationBIRMINGHAM, AL

$5,000

Oct 15, 2024

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$3,300

Mar 26, 2024

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$3,300

Sep 21, 2023

BUFFALO ROCK COMPANY

OrganizationBIRMINGHAM, AL

$2,500

Sep 10, 2024

BUFFALO ROCK COMPANY

OrganizationBIRMINGHAM, AL

$2,500

Sep 30, 2024

LAW OFFICES OF FREDERICK GRAEFE LLC

OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC

$500

Sep 30, 2023

CHIROPRACTIC CARE INC.

OrganizationGULF SHORES, AL

$250

Feb 26, 2024

BROWN, CANDACE P.

NONE • RETIRED

IndividualFLORENCE, SC

$4,500

Sep 6, 2024

BROWN, JAMES A.

SMS COMPANY • VICE PRESIDENT

IndividualFLORENCE, SC

$4,500

Sep 6, 2024

LEHMAN, WILLIAM

NOT EMPLOYED • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualAVENTURA, FL

$3,300

Dec 9, 2024

Rep. Davids, Sharice [D-KS-3]

ID: D000629

Top Contributors

HO-CHUNK NATION

OrganizationBLACK RIVER FALLS, WI

$3,300

Oct 21, 2024

LEECH LAKE BAND OF OJIBWE

OrganizationCASS LAKE, MN

$3,300

Nov 4, 2024

MATCH-E-BE-NASH-SHE-WISH BAND OF POTTAWATOMI INDIANS

OrganizationSHELBYVILLE, MI

$3,300

Oct 23, 2024

PASCUA YAQUI TRIBE

OrganizationTUCSON, AZ

$3,300

Nov 1, 2024

PRAIRIE ISLAND TRIBAL COUNCIL

OrganizationWELCH, MN

$3,300

Oct 23, 2024

REDDING RANCHERIA

OrganizationREDDING, CA

$3,300

Nov 5, 2024

THE UTE INDIAN TRIBE

OrganizationFORT DUCHESNE, UT

$3,300

Nov 15, 2024

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$3,300

Dec 29, 2023

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationTAHLEQUAH, OK

$3,300

Dec 29, 2023

HO CHUNK NATION

OrganizationBLACK RIVER FALLS, WI

$3,300

Dec 8, 2023

Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank" [D-GA-4]

ID: J000288

Top Contributors

JAVED, MUHAMMAD

RICELAND HEALTHCARE • CEO

IndividualBEAUMONT, TX

$3,300

Oct 9, 2024

BEY, N. JOHN

BEY & ASSOCIATES • ATTORNEY

IndividualATLANTA, GA

$3,300

Feb 29, 2024

BRYSON, JAN P.

BENCHMARK MANAGEMENT • FOUNDER

IndividualATLANTA, GA

$3,300

Feb 22, 2024

CRAWFORD, JESS

N/A • RETIRED

IndividualBROOKHAVEN, GA

$3,300

Feb 23, 2024

LEVETT, GREGORY B. SR

GREGORY B. LEVETT FUNERAL HOME • FUNERAL DIRECTOR

IndividualSCOTTDALE, GA

$3,300

Feb 19, 2024

AGGARWAL, SHIV

AMS • REAL EATATE

IndividualJOHNS CREEK, GA

$2,500

Feb 27, 2024

WALKER, CEDRIC

SOUL CIRCUS INC • CEO

IndividualFAYETTEVILLE, GA

$2,500

Feb 22, 2024

CHO, CHOONG SHIK

HOPEWELL ENTERPRISES • CEO

IndividualATLANTA, GA

$2,000

Nov 21, 2024

HOLLIS, JULIUS H.

SELF-EMPLOYED • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualROSWELL, GA

$2,000

Feb 19, 2024

RUSSELL, MICHAEL

HJ RUSSELL & COMPANY • BUSINESS OWNER

IndividualATLANTA, GA

$2,000

Feb 19, 2024

Rep. McCollum, Betty [D-MN-4]

ID: M001143

Top Contributors

LEECH LAKE BAND OF OJIBWE

OrganizationCASS LAKE, MN

$3,300

Oct 18, 2024

PRAIRIE ISLAND INDIAN COMMUNITY

OrganizationWELCH, MN

$3,300

Oct 21, 2024

SNOQUALMIE TRIBE

OrganizationSNOQUALMIE, WA

$3,300

Oct 23, 2024

POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS

OrganizationATMORE, AL

$3,300

Mar 30, 2023

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationCATOOSA, OK

$3,300

Jun 20, 2024

PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS

OrganizationTACOMA, WA

$3,300

Jun 27, 2024

WHITE EARTH BAND OF CHIPPEWA

OrganizationWHITE EARTH, MN

$3,300

Jun 20, 2024

CHEROKEE NATION

OrganizationCATOOSA, OK

$3,300

Sep 23, 2024

MOORETOWN RANCHERIA

OrganizationOROVILLE, CA

$3,300

Sep 27, 2024

PECHANGA BAND OF LUISENO INDIANS

OrganizationTEMECULA, CA

$3,300

Sep 30, 2024

Rep. Takano, Mark [D-CA-39]

ID: T000472

Top Contributors

SEIU COPE (SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION COMMITTEE ON POLITICAL EDUCATION)

PACWASHINGTON, DC

$5,000

Mar 30, 2023

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$3,300

Jun 28, 2023

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$3,300

Jun 28, 2023

HABEMATOLEL POMO OF UPPER LAKE TRIBE OF CALIFORNIA

OrganizationUPPER LAKE, CA

$3,300

May 1, 2023

MS BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS

OrganizationCHOCTAW, MS

$1,000

Oct 10, 2024

BECKER, TODD

LAW OFFICES OF TODD B BECKER • ATTORNEY

IndividualPASADENA, CA

$3,300

Oct 17, 2023

ELDRIDGE, SEAN

STAND UP AMERICA • PRESIDENT

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$3,300

Nov 29, 2023

HUH, JIHEE

PAFCO • VICE CHAIRMAN

IndividualROLLING HILLS, CA

$3,300

Oct 17, 2023

HUH, PETER

PAFCO • CHAIRMAN

IndividualPALOS VERDES PENINSULA, CA

$3,300

Oct 17, 2023

LI, LI

MEBO INTERNATIONAL • PRESIDENT

IndividualARCADIA, CA

$3,300

Oct 17, 2023

Rep. Brownley, Julia [D-CA-26]

ID: B001285

Top Contributors

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$3,300

Mar 5, 2024

FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA

OrganizationROHNERT PARK, CA

$3,300

Mar 5, 2024

BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationLAKESIDE, CA

$2,000

Jun 28, 2024

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$1,000

Feb 23, 2024

PRISELAC, TOM M.

CEDAR SINAI HEALTH SYSTEMS • EXECUTIVE

IndividualSANTA MONICA, CA

$3,300

Oct 31, 2024

BUCHMAN, MICHELLE J.

N/A • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualCARBONDALE, CO

$3,300

Nov 18, 2023

CONROY, ROBERTA

N/A • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualSANTA MONICA, CA

$3,300

Dec 1, 2023

SAVAGE, KEVIN

N/A • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualBEVERLY HILLS, CA

$3,300

Dec 31, 2023

STEVENS, SETH R.

SOUTHERN CA PERMANENTE GROUP • DERMATOLOGIST

IndividualNEWBURY PARK, CA

$3,300

Oct 28, 2023

UNTERMAN, JANET M.

N/A • NOT EMPLOYED

IndividualPACIFIC PALISADES, CA

$3,300

Dec 8, 2023

Rep. Meeks, Gregory W. [D-NY-5]

ID: M001137

Top Contributors

AGUA CALIENTE BAN OF CAHUILLA INDIANS

OrganizationPALM SPRINGS, CA

$3,300

Jul 19, 2023

AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY

OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ

$3,300

Mar 30, 2023

AK-CHIN INDIAN COMMUNITY

OrganizationMARICOPA, AZ

$2,500

Sep 30, 2024

CROWN, LESTER

N/A • RETIRED

IndividualCHICAGO, IL

$6,600

Jul 18, 2024

LIPPMAN, MARIE C.

IndividualMIAMI BEACH, FL

$5,000

Mar 7, 2023

CUKIERMAN, JORAM

CITADEL • FINANCE

IndividualSCARSDALE, NY

$3,300

Oct 28, 2024

SILVERMAN, DOUG

SENATOR INVESTMENT GROUP LP • MANAGING PARTNER

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$3,300

Oct 22, 2024

SHAMAH, ALAN

FIT FOR LIFE LLC • BUSINESS EXECUTIVE

IndividualBROOKLYN, NY

$3,300

Oct 22, 2024

SHAMAH, JOSEPH

FIT FOR LIFE LLC • CO-FOUNDER & CEO

IndividualBROOKLYN, NY

$3,300

Oct 22, 2024

ARMSTRONG, BRIAN

COINBASE • CEO

IndividualSAN FRANCISCO, CA

$3,300

Aug 29, 2023

Donor Network - Rep. McIver, LaMonica [D-NJ-10]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Showing 53 nodes and 35 connections (36 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $114,350

Top Donors - Rep. McIver, LaMonica [D-NJ-10]

Showing top 23 donors by contribution amount

2 Orgs1 Committee20 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 3 helped.

+Hospitals & Health Systemsconfidence 0.90
Section 3(a)(1)(B) adds peripheral artery disease screening tests to Medicare coverage under Section 1861(s)(2)(KK), and Section 3(c)(1)(A)(iii) provides payment of 100% of the lesser of actual charge or amount determined under section 1848 for such tests, increasing utilization and revenue for hospitals providing these services.
+Medical Devicesconfidence 0.85
Section 3(a)(2) defines peripheral artery disease screening tests to include noninvasive physiologic studies (ankle-brachial index) and arterial duplex scans, which are medical devices, and Section 3(c) establishes Medicare payment for these tests, creating a market for device manufacturers.
+Biotech & Researchconfidence 0.70
Section 5 requires development of quality measures for nontraumatic lower-limb major amputation utilizing diagnostic screening including peripheral artery disease screening, which may increase demand for biomarker and diagnostic technologies from biotech firms.

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of Health and Human Services

Moderate

Vector: 62%

Pages: 533-535AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The ARC Act aligns moderately with Project 2025's focus on Medicaid reform and healthcare access by expanding preventive screening coverage under Medicare and Medicaid, though it does not directly address the specific Medicaid managed care oversight, accountability, or consumer-driven reforms emphasized in the cited Project 2025 sources."

Key themes:Medicaid expansionpreventive healthcarehealthcare accessscreening services

— 500 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 32. Owcharenko Schaefer, “Medicaid at 55: Understanding the Design, Trends, and Reforms Needed to Improve the Health Care Safety Net.” 33. Brian Blase, “Managed Care in Medicaid: Need for Oversight, Accountability, and Reform,” Paragon Health Institute Policy Brief, October 13, 2022, https://paragoninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/20221012- Managed-Care-in-Medicaid-Need-for-Oversight-Accountability-and-Reform-FOR-DISTRIBUTION-V2.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 34. Owcharenko Schaefer, “Medicaid at 55: Understanding the Design, Trends, and Reforms Needed to Improve the Health Care Safety Net.” 35. 42 U.S. Code § 1315, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1315 (accessed March 17, 2023). 36. Chad D. Savage and Lee S. Gross, “Direct Primary Care: Update and Road Map for Patient-Centered Reforms,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3635, June 28, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/ files/2021-06/BG3635.pdf. 37. H.R. 133, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Public Law No. 116-260, 116th Congress, December 27, 2020, Division BB, Title I, https://www.congress.gov/116/plaws/publ260/PLAW-116publ260.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 38. Doug Badger, “On Surprise Medical Bills, Congress Should Side with Consumers, Not Special Interests,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, January 31, 2020, https://www.heritage.org/health-care-reform/ commentary/surprise-medical-bills-congress-should-side-consumers-not-special. 39. Edmund F. Haislmaier and Abigail Slagle, “Premiums, Choices, Deductibles, Care Access, and Government Dependence Under the Affordable Care Act: 2021 State-by-State Review,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3668, November 2, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2021-11/BG3668.pdf. 40. U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service; U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration; and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Transparency in Coverage,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 219 (November 12, 2020), pp. 72158–72310, https://www.govinfo.gov/ content/pkg/FR-2020-11-12/pdf/2020-24591.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 41. David N. Bernstein and Robert E. Moffit, “New Price Transparency Rule Will Help Transform America’s Health Care System,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, November 1, 2020, https://www.heritage.org/health-care- reform/commentary/new-price-transparency-rule-will-help-transform-americas-health-care. 42. Sluzala and Haislmaier, “Lessons from COVID-19: How Policymakers Should Reform the Regulation of Clinical Testing.” 43. Ibid. 44. Most recently enacted in H.R. 2471, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, Public Law No. 117-103, 117th Congress, March 15, 2022, Division H, Title V, §§ 506–507, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ103/ PLAW-117publ103.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 45. President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Executive Order 14079, “Securing Access to Reproductive and Other Healthcare Services,” August 3, 2022, in Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 154 (August 11, 2022), pp. 49505–49507, https:// www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-08-11/pdf/2022-17420.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 46. Planned Parenthood, 2020–2021 Annual Report, p. 27, https://www.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/ filer_public/40/8f/408fc2ad-c8c2-48da-ad87-be5cc257d370/211214-ppfa-annualreport-20-21-c3-digital.pdf (accessed March 22, 2023). 47. Ibid., pp. 30 and 31. Total revenue of $1,714.4 million (p. 30) minus $1,580.7 million in total expenses (p. 31) yields $133,7 million. 48. Ibid., p. 28. 49. Ibid., p. 30. 50. H.R. 372, Protecting Life and Taxpayers Act of 2023, 118th Congress, introduced January 17, 2023, https://www. congress.gov/118/bills/hr372/BILLS-118hr372ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 51. 42 U.S. Code § 18023, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/18023 (accessed March 17, 2023). 52. H.R. 3128, Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985, Public Law No. 99-272, 99th Congress, April 7, 1986, Title IX, Subtitle A, Part 1, Subpart B, § 9121, https://www.congress.gov/99/statute/STATUTE-100/ STATUTE-100-Pg82.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 53. H.R. 8070, Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Public Law No. 93-112, 93rd Congress, September 26, 1973, https://www. congress.gov/93/statute/STATUTE-87/STATUTE-87-Pg355.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). — 501 — Department of Health and Human Services 54. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Office of Civil Rights, and Office of the Secretary, “Special Responsibilities of Medicare Hospitals in Emergency Cases and Discrimination on the Basis of Disability in Critical Health and Human Service Programs or Activities,” draft of Proposed Rule, January 14, 2021, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/infants-nprm.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 55. H.R. 26, Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, 118th Congress, introduced January 9, 2023, https:// www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr26/BILLS-118hr26pcs.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 56. H.R. 7, No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2023, 118th Congress, introduced January 9, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr7/BILLS-118hr7ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 57. S. 401, Conscience Protection Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced February 24, 2021, https://www.congress. gov/117/bills/s401/BILLS-117s401is.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 58. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and Office of the Secretary, “Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Notice of Tribal Consultation, Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 149 (August 4, 2022), pp. 47824–47920, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-08-04/pdf/2022-16217.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 59. Ibid., p. 47916. 60. The regulation was not finalized before the end of the Administration. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Services, “Revision of Categorical Eligibility in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 142 (July 24, 2019), pp. 35570–55581, https:// www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/07/24/2019-15670/revision-of-categorical-eligibility-in-the- supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap (accessed March 17, 2023). 61. 45 Code of Federal Regulations § 75.300(c) and (d), https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/subtitle-A/ subchapter-A/part-75/subpart-D/subject-group-ECFR911e5e1a30bfbcb/section-75.300 (accessed March 17, 2023). 62. H.R. 1750, Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced March 10, 2021, https:// www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr1750/BILLS-117hr1750ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023), and S. 656, Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced March 10, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/ s656/BILLS-117s656is.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 63. S. 3949, Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117-348, 117th Congress, January 25, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ348/PLAW-117publ348.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 64. Kelsey Y. Santamaria, “Child Migrants at the Border: The Flores Settlement Agreement and Other Legal Developments,” Congressional Research Service In Focus No. IF11799, April 1, 2021, https://crsreports.congress. gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11799 (accessed March 17, 2023). 65. Report, Building a Happy Home: Marriage Education as a Tool to Strengthen Families, Social Capital Project Report No. 1-22, March 2022, p. 17, https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/3d102525-6f0d-48ed- 92f4-d71edd468ad6/building-a-happy-home.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). The cover of the report reflects that the Social Capital Project is “[a] project of the Joint Economic Committee – Republicans.” 66. See, for example, Alan J. Hawkins, “Are Federally Supported Relationship Education Programs for Lower-Income Individuals and Couples Working? A Review of Evaluation Research,” American Enterprise Institute, September 2019, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ228/PLAW-117publ228.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 67. H.R. 8404, Respect for Marriage Act, Public Law No. 117-228, 117th Congress, December 13, 2022, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ228/PLAW-117publ228.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 68. Madison Marino, “Over 1,000 Safety Violations Mar Head Start. Children Deserve Better,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, November 10, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/over-1000-safety- violations-mar-head-start-children-deserve-better. 69. American Hospital Association v. Becerra, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), https://www.supremecourt.gov/ opinions/21pdf/20-1114_09m1.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 70. U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service; U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration; and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, “Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Register, Vol. 88, No. 22 (February 2, 2023), pp. 7236–7281, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-02-02/pdf/2023-01981.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023).

Department of Health and Human Services

Moderate

Vector: 61%

Pages: 533-535AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The ARC Act aligns moderately with Project 2025's focus on Medicaid reform and healthcare efficiency by aiming to reduce costly amputations through preventive screening and education, which supports broader goals of improving health outcomes and reducing long-term expenditures in public health programs."

Key themes:Medicaid reformpreventive carecost reduction in healthcarepublic health initiatives

Department of Health and Human Services

Weak

Vector: 62%

Pages: 497-499AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The ARC Act focuses on increasing awareness and access to PAD screening and education, which is a public health initiative, while the Project 2025 HHS policy emphasizes Medicare Advantage reform, site-neutral payments, physician-owned hospitals, and conscience protections—areas not addressed in the bill. There is minimal thematic overlap."

Key themes:Medicarehealthcare accesspatient outcomes

— 464 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l The Risk Adjustment Data Validation (RADV) rule; l The Medicare Advantage Qualifying Payment Arrangement Incentive (MAQI) demonstration; and l The Global and Professional Direct Contracting (GPDC, rebranded as the Accountable Care Organization Realizing Equity, Access, and Community Health or ACO REACH) model. Additionally, regulations should advance site neutrality by eliminating the inpa- tient-only list and expanding the ambulatory surgical center covered procedures list. Medicare generally pays more for inpatient hospital procedures and less for the same procedures performed in an outpatient setting. Whether a medical ser- vice is delivered in a physician’s office, a clinic, or a hospital setting, the Medicare payment for that service should be the same. CMS should expand the application of site-neutral payment options to more settings. Such a policy would level the playing field among providers and remove the financial disabilities for medical professionals who would compete with hospital systems.23 Finally, HHS needs to restore and enhance conscience protection regulations that allow medical practitioners to participate in federal health care programs without being compelled to provide sex changes or similar services. LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS l Remove restrictions on physician-owned hospitals. The Affordable Care Act (ACA)24 imposed restrictions prohibiting Medicare from reimbursing physician-owned and specialty hospitals. The current restrictions do little more than serve the special interests of large hospital systems and undercut consumer choice of high-quality, specialty care. These restrictions should be removed so that physician-owned hospitals can compete with other hospitals in serving Medicare patients.25 l Encourage more direct competition between Medicare Advantage and private plans. Medicare Advantage (MA), a system of competing private health plans, is the major alternative to traditional Medicare for America’s large and growing cohort of seniors. The program provides beneficiaries with a wide range of competitive health plan choices—a richer set of benefits than traditional Medicare provides and at a reasonable cost. Equally as important, the MA program has been registering consistently high marks for superior performance in delivering high-quality care. Critical reforms are still needed to strengthen and improve the program for the future. Specifically: — 465 — Department of Health and Human Services 1. Make Medicare Advantage the default enrollment option. 2. Give beneficiaries direct control of how they spend Medicare dollars. 3. Remove burdensome policies that micromanage MA plans. 4. Replace the complex formula-based payment model with a competitive bidding model. 5. Reconfigure the current risk adjustment model. 6. Remove restrictions on key benefits and services, including those related to prescription drugs, hospice care, and medical savings account plans.26 Legacy Medicare Reform. Legislation reforming legacy (non-MA) Medicare should: l Base payments on the health status of the patient or intensity of the service rather than where the patient happens to receive that service. l Replace the bureaucrat-driven fee-for-service system with value- based payments to empower patients to find the care that best serves their needs. l Codify price transparency regulations. l Restructure 340B drug subsidies27 toward beneficiaries rather than hospitals. l Repeal harmful health policies enacted under the Obama and Biden Administrations such as the Medicare Shared Savings Program28 and Inflation Reduction Act.29 Medicare Part D Reform. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) created a drug price negotiation program in Medicare that replaced the existing private-sector negotiations in Part D with government price controls for prescription drugs. These government price controls will limit access to medications and reduce patient access to new medication. This “negotiation” program should be repealed, and reforms in Part D that will have meaningful impact for seniors should be pursued. Other reforms should include eliminating the coverage gap in Part D, reducing the government share in

Department of Health and Human Services

Weak

Vector: 62%

Pages: 533-535AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The ARC Act focuses on expanding Medicare coverage for PAD screening and education, which is a public health initiative unrelated to the Project 2025 HHS policy excerpts that center on civil rights enforcement, abortion restrictions, conscience protections, and gender-affirming care guidance. There is no substantive overlap in objectives or mechanisms between the bill and the cited policy documents."

Key themes:Department of Health and Human ServicesMedicarehealthcare policy

— 501 — Department of Health and Human Services 54. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Office of Civil Rights, and Office of the Secretary, “Special Responsibilities of Medicare Hospitals in Emergency Cases and Discrimination on the Basis of Disability in Critical Health and Human Service Programs or Activities,” draft of Proposed Rule, January 14, 2021, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/infants-nprm.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 55. H.R. 26, Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, 118th Congress, introduced January 9, 2023, https:// www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr26/BILLS-118hr26pcs.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 56. H.R. 7, No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2023, 118th Congress, introduced January 9, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr7/BILLS-118hr7ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 57. S. 401, Conscience Protection Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced February 24, 2021, https://www.congress. gov/117/bills/s401/BILLS-117s401is.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 58. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and Office of the Secretary, “Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Notice of Tribal Consultation, Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 149 (August 4, 2022), pp. 47824–47920, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-08-04/pdf/2022-16217.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 59. Ibid., p. 47916. 60. The regulation was not finalized before the end of the Administration. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Services, “Revision of Categorical Eligibility in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 142 (July 24, 2019), pp. 35570–55581, https:// www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/07/24/2019-15670/revision-of-categorical-eligibility-in-the- supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap (accessed March 17, 2023). 61. 45 Code of Federal Regulations § 75.300(c) and (d), https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/subtitle-A/ subchapter-A/part-75/subpart-D/subject-group-ECFR911e5e1a30bfbcb/section-75.300 (accessed March 17, 2023). 62. H.R. 1750, Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced March 10, 2021, https:// www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr1750/BILLS-117hr1750ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023), and S. 656, Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced March 10, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/ s656/BILLS-117s656is.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 63. S. 3949, Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117-348, 117th Congress, January 25, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ348/PLAW-117publ348.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 64. Kelsey Y. Santamaria, “Child Migrants at the Border: The Flores Settlement Agreement and Other Legal Developments,” Congressional Research Service In Focus No. IF11799, April 1, 2021, https://crsreports.congress. gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11799 (accessed March 17, 2023). 65. Report, Building a Happy Home: Marriage Education as a Tool to Strengthen Families, Social Capital Project Report No. 1-22, March 2022, p. 17, https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/3d102525-6f0d-48ed- 92f4-d71edd468ad6/building-a-happy-home.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). The cover of the report reflects that the Social Capital Project is “[a] project of the Joint Economic Committee – Republicans.” 66. See, for example, Alan J. Hawkins, “Are Federally Supported Relationship Education Programs for Lower-Income Individuals and Couples Working? A Review of Evaluation Research,” American Enterprise Institute, September 2019, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ228/PLAW-117publ228.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 67. H.R. 8404, Respect for Marriage Act, Public Law No. 117-228, 117th Congress, December 13, 2022, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ228/PLAW-117publ228.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 68. Madison Marino, “Over 1,000 Safety Violations Mar Head Start. Children Deserve Better,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, November 10, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/over-1000-safety- violations-mar-head-start-children-deserve-better. 69. American Hospital Association v. Becerra, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), https://www.supremecourt.gov/ opinions/21pdf/20-1114_09m1.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 70. U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service; U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration; and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, “Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Register, Vol. 88, No. 22 (February 2, 2023), pp. 7236–7281, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-02-02/pdf/2023-01981.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). — 502 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 71. 42 U.S. Code § 238n, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/238n (accessed March 17, 2023). 72. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, “Early Childhood Health,” last reviewed October 2022, https://mchb.hrsa.gov/programs-impact/focus-areas/early- childhood-health (accessed March 17, 2023). 73. American Pregnancy Association, “Having a Doula—What Are the Benefits?” https://americanpregnancy. org/healthy-pregnancy/labor-and-birth/having-a-doula/#:~:text=Other%20studies%20have%20shown%20 that%20having%20a%20doula,massage%20to%20reduce%20stress%20and%20anxiety%20during%20labor (accessed March 17, 2023). 74. S. 2372, VA MISSION [Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks] Act of 2018, Public Law No. 115-182, 115th Congress, June 6, 2018, https://www.congress.gov/115/plaws/publ182/ PLAW-115publ182.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 75. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Securing Updated and Necessary Statutory Evaluations Timely,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 11 (January 19, 2021), pp. 5694–5764, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-01-19/pdf/2021-00597.pdf (accessed March 22, 2023). 76. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, “Compliance with Statutory Program Integrity Requirements,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 42 (March 4, 2029), pp. 7714–7791, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-03-04/pdf/2019-03461.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 77. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, “Ensuring Access to Equitable, Affordable, Client-Centered, Quality Family Planning Services,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 192 (October 7, 2021), pp. 56144–56180, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/ pkg/FR-2021-10-07/pdf/2021-21542.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 78. S. 624, Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act, 118th Congress, introduced March 2, 2023, https://www. congress.gov/118/bills/s624/BILLS-118s624is.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 79. 50 U.S. Code Chapter 55, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/chapter-55 (accessed March 22, 2023). 80. 18 U.S. Code § 13, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/13 (accessed March 18, 2023). 81. Bowen v. American Hospital Association, 476 U.S. 610 (1986), https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/ usrep/usrep476/usrep476610/usrep476610.pdf (accessed 22, 2023). 82. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Secretary, “Notification of Interpretation and Enforcement of Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972,” Federal Register, Vol. 86, No. 99 (May 25, 2021), pp. 27984–27985, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- 2021-05-25/pdf/2021-10477.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 83. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, “HHS Notice and Guidance on Gender Affirming Care, Civil Rights, and Patient Privacy,” March 2, 2022, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/hhs- ocr-notice-and-guidance-gender-affirming-care.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 84. Heckler v. Chaney, 420 U.S. 821 (1985), https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/470/821.html (accessed March 18, 2022). 85. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, “Guidance to Nation’s Retail Pharmacies: Obligations Under Federal Civil Rights Laws to Ensure Access to Comprehensive Reproductive Health Care Services,” content last reviewed July 14, 2022, https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/ special-topics/reproductive-healthcare/pharmacies-guidance/index.html (accessed March 18, 2023). 86. H.R. 3103, “Health Insurance and Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Public Law No. 104-191, 104th Congress, August 21, 1996, https://www.congress.gov/104/plaws/publ191/PLAW-104publ191.pdf (accessed March 18, 2023). 87. U.S. Department of Human Services, “HIPAA Privacy Rule and Disclosures of Information Relating to Reproductive Health Care,” content last reviewed June 29, 2022, (accessed March 18, 2023). See also “Protecting the Privacy and Security of Your Health Information When Using Your Personal Cell Phone or Tablet,” content last reviewed June 29, 2022, https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/guidance/ cell-phone-hipaa/index.html (accessed March 18, 2023).

Department of Agriculture

Minimal

Vector: 62%

Pages: 329-331AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The ARC Act of 2025 focuses on peripheral artery disease awareness, screening, and Medicare coverage, which is unrelated to the Department of Agriculture subsidy reforms outlined in Project 2025."

— 296 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise support went to just six commodities—corn, cotton, peanuts, rice, soybeans, and wheat—that together account for only 28 percent of farm receipts.32 Although many farmers do not receive much in the way of subsidies, especially those in the areas of livestock and specialty crops (fruit, vegetable, and nuts),33 there are still a sig- nificant number of farmers growing row crops like corn and cotton that do receive significant farm subsidies. The primary subsidy programs include the Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) program,34 the Price Loss Coverage (PLC) program,35 and the federal crop insur- ance program.36 Farmers can participate on a crop-by-crop basis in the ARC program or the PLC program. These programs cover about 20 different crops.37 The ARC program protects farmers from what are referred to as “shallow” losses, pro- viding payments when their actual revenues fall below 86 percent of the expected revenues for their crops.38 The PLC program provides payments to farmers when commodity prices fall below a fixed, statutorily established reference price.39 The federal crop insurance program is broader in scope than ARC and PLC, and in crop year 2019 covered 124 commodities.40 Farmers pay a portion of a premium to participate in the program. Taxpayers on average pay about 60 per- cent41 of the premium. As explained by CRS, “Revenue Protection was the most frequently purchased policy type in 2019, accounting for almost 70 [percent] of policies purchased.”42 While there are certainly other subsidy programs besides ARC, PLC, and federal crop insurance, one program that deserves special mention is the federal sugar program. This program, unlike most other subsidy programs, intentionally tries to restrict supply43 and thereby drives up prices. The program costs consumers as much as $3.7 billion a year.44 When it comes to reforming subsidy programs, the next Administration will primarily have to look to legislative solutions. The next Administration should champion legislation that would: l Repeal the federal sugar program. The federal government should not be in the central planning business, and the sugar program is a prime example of harmful central planning. Its very purpose is to limit the sugar supply in order to increase prices. The program has a regressive effect, since lower-income households spend more of their money to meet food needs compared to higher income households.45 l Ideally, repeal the ARC and PLC programs. Farmers eligible to participate in ARC or PLC are generally already able to purchase federal crop insurance, policies that protect against shortfalls in expected revenue whether caused by lower prices or smaller harvests. The ARC program is especially egregious because farmers are being protected from shallow — 297 — Department of Agriculture losses, which is another way of saying minor dips in expected revenue. This is hardly consistent with the concept of providing a safety net to help farmers when they fall on hard times. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO), in one of its options to reduce the federal deficit, has once again identified repealing all Title I farm programs, including ARC, PLC, and the federal sugar program.46 l Stop paying farmers twice for price and revenue losses during the same year. Farmers can receive support from the ARC or PLC programs and the federal crop insurance program to cover price declines and revenue shortfalls during the same year. Congress should prohibit this duplication by prohibiting farmers from receiving an ARC or PLC payment the same year they receive a crop insurance indemnity. l Reduce the premium subsidy rate for crop insurance. On average, taxpayers cover about 60 percent47 of the premium cost for policies purchased in the federal crop insurance program. One of the most widely supported and bipartisan policy reforms is to reduce the premium subsidy that taxpayers are forced to pay.48 At a minimum, taxpayers should not pay more than 50 percent of the premium. After all, taxpayers should not have to pay more than the farmers who benefit from the crop insurance policies. CBO has found that reducing the premium subsidy to 47 percent would save $8.1 billion over 10 years and have little impact on crop insurance participation or on the number of covered acres.49 In that analysis, there would be a reduction in insured acres of just one-half of 1 percent, and only 1.5 percent of acres would have lower coverage levels. 50 This reform is basically all benefit with little to no cost. In its recently released report identifying options to reduce the federal deficit, CBO found that reducing the premium subsidy to 40 percent would save $20.9 billion over 10 years.51 Beyond these legislative reforms, the next Administration should: l Communicate to Congress the necessity of transparency and a genuine reform process. The White House and the USDA should make it very clear that the farm bill process, including reform of farm subsidies, must be con- ducted through an open process with time for mark-up and the opportunity for changes to be made outside the Agriculture Committee process. The farm bill too often is developed behind closed doors and without any chance for real reform. The White House, given the power of the bully pulpit,

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Related Bills

Other Bills by Rep. McIver, LaMonica

Improving SBA Engagement on Employee Ownership Act

119/hr/5778

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 514 Frelinghuysen Avenue in Newark, New Jersey, as the "Mildred Joyce Coleman Crump Post Office Building".

119/hr/5717

Back to All Bills