[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 179 (Thursday, December 10, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H9217-H9218]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SECURING FAIRNESS IN REGULATORY TIMING ACT OF 2015
Mr. TIBERI. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 3831) to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
extend the annual comment period for payment rates under Medicare
Advantage, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 3831
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Securing Fairness in
Regulatory Timing Act of 2015''.
SEC. 2. EXTENDING THE ANNUAL COMMENT PERIOD FOR PAYMENT RATES
UNDER MEDICARE ADVANTAGE.
Section 1853(b)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1395w-23(b)(2)) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(or, in 2017 and each subsequent year,
at least 60 days)'' after ``45 days''; and
(2) by inserting ``(in 2017 and each subsequent year, of no
less than 30 days)'' after ``opportunity''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Tiberi) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. TIBERI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of H.R. 3831, the Securing
Fairness in Regulatory Timing Act of 2015. This is a small but really
important piece of legislation. I am pleased to have the gentleman from
California (Mr. Thompson), my friend, here to discuss this important
measure.
The House passed this measure earlier this year, in June, by
unanimous consent. Now, we return to the bill to add the technical
corrections asked for by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
and the Senate so we can send this bill to the President's desk before
the end of the year.
Today, the Medicare Advantage program, known by many as the MA
program, serves more than 16 million seniors across the United States
of America, including my mom and dad. Enrollment has increased more
than threefold in the past 10 years and is expected to nearly double in
the next 10 years.
To ensure that seniors in MA plans across the country are able to
continue to receive the high-quality care that they deserve, CMS is
expected to pay about $156 billion to more than 3,600 MA plans this
year alone. That amounts to nearly 30 percent of overall Medicare
spending.
Typically, every year CMS sends out what it calls a rate notice to
plans and Medicare Advantage companies that details the various payment
rates, as well as benefit changes that the agency intends to make for
the following plan year that impacts people like my mom and dad. This
notice follows the standard process of a draft notice. It gets
published; then the public has a certain amount of time to submit
comments and questions; and then the agency publishes a final notice
based on that feedback that they receive.
However, MA and Part D aren't treated the same as the other major
payment systems within Medicare itself. Right now, the current process
takes about 45 days, but only 15 of those days are allotted for the
commenting portion; 15 days for thousands of plans, millions of
stakeholders to submit comments on proposed changes to a program that
amounts to one-third of all Medicare spending.
I could almost understand this if the rate notice were a short and
concise document, if it were easy to understand and simple to
implement. But it is not. In fact, the rate notice has grown from
around 16 pages in 2006 to nearly 150 pages this year. That is over a
900 percent increase. All the while, the time for the public comment
period has remained static, exactly the same.
This means less and less time for the plans and Congress to conduct
the necessary review in order to provide CMS with the kind of feedback
that would better help the agency assess the impact of their proposed
changes to consumers. This is important because without accurate
feedback, CMS could inadvertently move forward with a proposed change
to the Medicare Advantage program that might negatively impact those
seniors--again, like my mom and dad--who depend on these plans for
access to their providers, to their doctors.
The legislation before us is simple, and it is straightforward. It
extends the public notice period from 45 days to 60 days. Therefore, it
would double the extension of the comment period from 15 days to 30
days. This is a commonsense, good-government fix we can make that will
give plans more time to understand the changes that CMS proposes and
other constructive feedback in order to make the Medicare Advantage
program, overall, more responsive to senior citizens' needs.
I encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to pass this
legislation again and send it to the Senate so we can get it to the
President's desk.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
I rise in support of H.R. 3831, the Securing Fairness in Regulatory
Timing Act of 2015. Every year, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services publishes its Medicare Advantage call letter and rate notice,
which outlines payment rates and changes for the nearly 2,000 plans
that serve our most vulnerable population.
Nearly 10 years ago, the call letter and rate notice were less than
20 pages long. However, since then, enrollment in Medicare Advantage
has nearly tripled, from 5.4 million to 16 million. Medicare Advantage
policies have become more complex, and the call letter and rate notice
has grown nearly tenfold, sometimes up to over 200 pages long.
At the same time, the time between the publishing of these draft
notices and the final notices, which is currently 45 days, has remained
unchanged. During this 45-day period, in which there are only 15 days
to comment on the proposed changes in the program, plans, stockholders,
members, and staff, are expected to review 150 pages of regulatory
changes and understand the impacts of those proposed policy changes on
a program that provides essential medical care to over a third of
Medicare beneficiaries.
We know from our experience, every February and March, that this does
not lend itself to an efficient, effective, nor transparent process.
Moreover, it
[[Page H9218]]
shortchanges CMS of thoughtful, constructive feedback that is necessary
to improve a program that our seniors enjoy and rely on.
H.R. 3831 is a simple, straightforward bill that will improve the
current process by expanding the cycle from 45 to 60 days, and that
gives plans, stakeholders, Members, and our staff 30 full days--double
the current time allowed--to analyze and provide feedback on the draft
call letter and rate notice.
This is a no-cost, good-government, bipartisan bill that will make
the process more transparent, fair, and advantageous for the
beneficiaries we serve. As my good friend from Ohio pointed out, we
have already passed this bill. It is only coming back for some
technical changes. I would ask, and strongly recommend, that all our
colleagues vote in favor of this bill so we can pass it to the Senate
and get on with our work.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
General Leave
Mr. TIBERI. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on H.R. 3831, as amended.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Ohio?
There was no objection.
Mr. TIBERI. Mr. Speaker, just to close, I agree 100 percent with my
friend from California. I urge all our colleagues to support this
important piece of legislation.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Tiberi) that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 3831, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________