[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 116 (Thursday, July 16, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4127-S4129]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL UNDER CHAPTER 8 OF TITLE 5, 
UNITED STATES CODE, OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE CENTERS FOR MEDICARE & 
   MEDICAID SERVICES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 
 RELATING TO ``MEDICARE PROGRAM; IMPLEMENTATION OF PRIOR AUTHORIZATION 
    FOR SELECT SERVICES FOR THE WASTEFUL AND INAPPROPRIATE SERVICES 
              REDUCTION (WISeR) MODEL''--Motion to Proceed

  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 447, S.J. 
Res. 198.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 447, S.J. Res. 198, a 
     joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval 
     under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule 
     submitted by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services of 
     the Department of Health and Human Services relating to 
     ``Medicare Program; Implementation of Prior Authorization for 
     Select Services for the Wasteful and Inappropriate Services 
     Reduction (WISeR) Model''.

  Mr. WYDEN. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  The yeas and nays are ordered.


                             S.J. Res. 198

  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, colleagues, at the beginning of this year, 
the Trump administration empowered unaccountable AI companies to delay 
and deny certain types of care in traditional Medicare.
  Now, Donald Trump promised--promised--that he would not touch 
Medicare, and, today, it is clear that that Trump promise has been 
broken.
  Seniors paid into Medicare out of every paycheck during their working 
years, and they did so with an expectation they would have an ironclad 
guarantee of affordable healthcare.
  Today, seniors in six States across America are discovering that care 
their doctor has recommended for them has been slowed or halted by a 
shadowy AI-driven third party.
  The consequences are not abstract. Seniors with severe back pain have 
to wait weeks for relief, upending their lives and leaving them 
suffering because of the bureaucracy of healthcare.
  The types of care that are subject to these restrictions are not 
frivolous: knee arthroscopies, nerve stimulations, steroid injections, 
cervical fusion. These types of procedures are the care that seniors 
rely on to stay mobile and pain-free in the aging process.
  Now, decisions between doctors and patients are overridden by for-
profit AI contractors. The Trump administration's only defense of this 
model has been to point to the rapid rise of skin substitute procedures 
to justify their flawed experiment.
  The Trump administration's work doesn't pass the smell test. First, 
the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services already have now lowered 
payment rates for this procedure; in doing so, closed the loophole 
driving the dramatic increase.
  (Mrs. CAPITO assumed the Chair.)
  Second, the skin substitute procedures only account for a tiny 
fraction of care under the model. In the case of Oregon's neighbor to 
the north, Washington State, skin substitutes account for less than 1 
percent of services--less than 1 percent of the services, Madam Chair--
subject to the prior authorization under this model. So the excuses 
hold no water.
  Prior authorization has run rampant in the American healthcare 
system. For-profit insurance companies are increasingly using this 
business tactic to block and deter care in order to increase their 
profits.
  I want to put a fine point on this. In 2024, insurance companies that 
sell Medicare Advantage plans denied more than 4 million prior 
authorization requests--just think about that: 4 million prior 
authorization requests. Of those denials, only 1 in 10 were appealed by 
a senior or their doctor. But when the denial was appealed, it was 
overturned 8 times out of 10. What this tells me is that prior 
authorization is being used to deny legitimate care, often acting as a 
bureaucratic hurdle meant to discourage seniors and their doctors from 
pursuing a course of treatment that might impact insurance company's 
bottom line.
  It is bad enough that this is the state of affairs in Medicare 
Advantage, but now the Trump administration is trying to import 
insurance company tactics into traditional Medicare. And that would 
mean that seniors who selected it precisely because they don't want to 
deal with the headaches and complexity of an insurance company would 
suffer.
  This is not a partisan issue. Many of my Republican colleagues have 
expressed concern about prior authorizations and the state of Medicare 
Advantage. I hope that they will stand with those of us today who want 
to tell the Trump administration to abandon an ill-advised experiment 
that seniors don't want. They didn't ask for it. It doesn't make sense.
  There is a lot of work to be done to improve both traditional 
Medicare and Medicare Advantage for seniors that count on the Medicare 
guarantee.
  And I have been working on that Medicare guarantee since the days 
when I was a codirector of the Oregon Gray Panthers. Let's work on that 
together, and we can start by ending this AI-driven prior authorization 
experiment. It is a mistake. We can't run the risk of it being sent to 
other parts of the healthcare system. I urge a ``yes'' vote.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.
  Mr. CRAPO. Madam President, in response to the discussion that my 
colleague from Oregon has just engaged in, far too often, our Nation's 
healthcare system incentivizes low-value, high-cost services. For 
years, bipartisan policy makers throughout Capitol Hill and 
across administrations have endeavored to disrupt this flawed paradigm, 
especially in the Medicare Program. Unfortunately, despite progress to 
incorporate new value-based payment arrangements, Medicare's underlying 
reimbursement structure continues to rely heavily on the volume of 
services provided, rather than the quality of care.

  In addition to failing patients and providers, Medicare's perverse 
financial incentives contribute to massive waste and abuse. Well-
meaning clinicians often face opaque coverage guidelines that can 
result in denied reimbursements, while malicious actors exploit 
bureaucratic vulnerabilities to defraud the program.
  Through the wasteful and inappropriate service reduction model--work 
WISeR--CMS is testing whether enhanced technology can help address 
these systemic failures. For a limited set of nonemergency services 
with a documented history of abuse and overuse, providers in select 
States must submit claims for review. Claims that meet existing 
Medicare coverage requirements are quickly approved, offering providers 
payment predictability.

[[Page S4128]]

  When issues arise, board-certified clinicians--not technological 
machines, board-certified clinicians--intervene to make the final 
decision. The potential benefit of this ``detect and prevent strategy'' 
is substantial. For example, Medicare spending on skin substitutes, one 
of the chosen WISeR model services, increased and--hear this--increased 
from $256 million in 2019 to $10 billion in 2024. It doesn't even take 
a technological machine to tell you that something is wrong there.
  Proactive, technology-based scrutiny could have detected this outlier 
spending growth and protected both patients and taxpayers.
  Regrettably, misinformation about this model has sparked fears of 
delays in essential patient care and additional burdens on providers.
  Later today, the Senate will proceed to a resolution to stop this 
important work of the WISeR model. Every Member of this body agrees 
that patients should have access to high-quality care, providers 
deserve predictable payment for services, and avoidable waste, fraud, 
and abuse in Medicare should be stopped. Ending this pilot program 
prematurely will deprive CMS of a useful tool to accomplish each of 
those goals.
  And I urge my colleagues to consider the facts and oppose this 
resolution.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, we don't take a back seat to anybody in 
terms of fighting inefficiency, fighting fraud. We have been working on 
those issues, as the chair of the Finance Committee knows, together 
wherever possible.
  Unfortunately, what we have seen in this experiment is that we are 
not dealing with inefficiency and fraud. We are forcing patients to 
come back again and again and again. That just defies common sense.
  And on the issues like skin substitutes, that has been addressed 
through a payment process, payment policy reform, to get at the 
incentives and wasteful utilization.
  So on the points that the minority is making, the reality is patients 
are not going to get care, and we are not going to make sensible 
changes as we have in other areas to deal with fraud and inefficiency.
  That is why we ought to be voting for what we are trying to do today 
on the Democratic side.
  I yield back and hope we will have a bipartisan vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I wanted to talk today about not just 
how Republicans are making healthcare more expensive but also how they 
are making it just plain worse for seniors.
  President Trump came into office saying he would not cut Medicare, 
but that was clearly a lie because right now his administration is 
trying to privatize Medicare; in part, by putting AI between Medicare 
beneficiaries and their healthcare.
  In January of this year, under Secretary Kennedy and Dr. Oz's 
leadership, CMS began this pilot program that uses AI to require prior 
authorization in traditional Medicare for the first time ever, and it 
is set to run for 6 years. They call it the Wasteful and Inappropriate 
Service Reduction Model. Well, they got the wasteful and inappropriate 
part right.
  The WISeR Model uses AI to deny vulnerable seniors the care they need 
and that their doctors recommend.
  Not only that, but the for-profit contractors that conduct this prior 
authorization are paid a percentage of the cost of care that they deny. 
They are literally incentivized to rip healthcare away from seniors 
because that is best for their bottom line. When your business model 
relies on denials, denials are what seniors are going to get, and that 
is perverse.
  WISeR was rolled out in the beginning of this year in my home State 
of Washington and five other States without safeguards and without any 
transparency and without the best interests of Medicare beneficiaries 
at the heart of this program.
  President Trump is saying: Forget the doctors who went to medical 
school and took an oath to do no harm. AI knows better when it comes to 
healthcare decisions for our seniors.
  The consequences of that poor judgment are real, and they are life-
threatening. I hear from Medicare patients in Washington State all the 
time. They are suffering debilitating pain for weeks because they are 
not getting the care they need, thanks to this harmful model--patients 
like Joanne. She is a Medicare beneficiary from Quilcene, WA.
  She went to her doctor for severe pain. An MRI showed that a 
herniated disk was pressing on her sciatic nerve. Joanne's doctor 
prescribed an epidural injection to help ease that pain. This was 
standard, routine care--care that, before this year, she would have 
been able to get quickly after it had been recommended by her doctor. 
But because of this WISeR Model, she had to wait 6 weeks to get 
approval. That means, thanks to WISeR, Joanne had to deal with 
unnecessary, unrelated pain for 6 weeks. Because of this nonsense 
delay, her day-to-day life was disrupted and the burden fell on her 
then to fight for the care she needed.
  This is simply outrageous, but that is also WISeR working by design, 
and that is a direct impact of the Trump administration's actions.
  We have seen way too many stories like Joanne's from States that have 
been selected for this pilot program. No way should an algorithm decide 
if seniors should get the care they need. That is exactly why I join my 
colleagues here in introducing a resolution to overturn this model. And 
I want all of my colleagues to join me in voting for it so we can make 
sure seniors in my State and all over the country can, once again, 
receive their healthcare on time and without interruption.
  Let's just use our common sense. It is clear as day that some AI 
models should never be at the wheel making healthcare decisions left 
and right. And it is not just patients I have heard from. I have met 
with healthcare providers all over my State. Whether it is a rural 
hospital or a doctor in Seattle, no one--no one--has had anything good 
to tell me about prior authorization in traditional Medicare.
  Now, I ran for office because I believe regular people deserve a say 
in how their government is run, and that is especially true when it 
comes to the government deploying AI technology. I don't know any 
senior--Republican or Democrat--who asked President Trump to let AI 
decide if their doctor-recommended treatment was necessary. Of course, 
AI can help make things more efficient or do good things. That is not 
what the WISeR Model is doing.
  So let's get to the crux of it. As a country, we make a promise to 
American seniors: If they paid their taxes throughout their careers, 
they earned their Medicare coverage. Full stop. WISeR breaks that 
promise to seniors with these senseless AI-driven prior authorizations 
that deny and delay care.
  Let me be clear, many seniors choose traditional Medicare over other 
options because traditional Medicare rarely requires prior 
authorizations. People choose traditional Medicare because they want to 
make their healthcare decisions with their doctor, not with a private 
company that is out to make a profit.
  Simply put, the WISeR Model--which, again, delays and denies 
necessary care to Medicare patients--is reckless, and it is 
irresponsible.
  I want my Republican colleagues to join us in voting to get rid of 
WISeR once and for all because this should not be a partisan issue. We 
all have seniors in our States that deserve the highest level of care 
without having to deal with redtape and delay. Thanks to Trump, AI is 
getting in between our seniors and their healthcare in Arizona, in New 
Jersey, in Ohio, in Oklahoma, in Texas, and in my State of Washington. 
We have an opportunity to stop this harmful experimental pilot program 
before more seniors are harmed. No senior in America should have to 
appeal their pain and suffering to a machine.
  To my colleagues, if it were your spouse or parent who needed care, 
whom would you want to decide if they get their treatment, their doctor 
or a for-profit algorithm? Would you want them to suffer in pain for 
weeks for care that they are entitled to? I know what my answer is.
  Let's maintain the promise of Medicare. Let's pass this resolution.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.

[[Page S4129]]

  

  Mr. WYDEN. Fortunately, for--let me say to Senator Murray that I so 
appreciate your presentation, and particularly talking about the 
algorithms. And, also, the fact is that under what you have described 
very clearly, the big winner under this flawed experiment is a bunch of 
middlemen who are trying to profit off denials, and not the people who 
really desperately need care.
  So I very much appreciate it, and Oregon is proud to be a partner 
with Washington State in leading the country to get rid of this very 
flawed idea. And I thank you for your remarks.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Thank you. Thank you.
  Mr. WYDEN. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I would ask consent to start the 1:30 
vote now.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                       Vote on Motion to Proceed

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion.
  The yeas and nays were previously ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant executive clerk called the roll.
  Mr. BARRASSO. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. 
McConnell), and the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker).
  Further, if present and voting: the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. 
Hagerty) would have voted ``nay'' and the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. 
Wicker) would have voted ``nay.''
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Murphy) 
is necessarily absent.
  The result was announced--yeas 46, nays 50, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 199 Leg.]

                                YEAS--46

     Alsobrooks
     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Blunt Rochester
     Booker
     Cantwell
     Coons
     Cortez Masto
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Fetterman
     Gallego
     Gillibrand
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hirono
     Kaine
     Kelly
     Kim
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lujan
     Markey
     Merkley
     Murray
     Ossoff
     Padilla
     Peters
     Reed
     Rosen
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schiff
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Slotkin
     Smith
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Warnock
     Warren
     Welch
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                                NAYS--50

     Armstrong
     Banks
     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Boozman
     Britt
     Budd
     Capito
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Curtis
     Daines
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hawley
     Hoeven
     Husted
     Hyde-Smith
     Johnson
     Justice
     Kennedy
     Lankford
     Lee
     Lummis
     Marshall
     McCormick
     Moody
     Moran
     Moreno
     Murkowski
     Paul
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Rounds
     Schmitt
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Sheehy
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Tuberville
     Young

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Hagerty
     McConnell
     Murphy
     Wicker
  The motion was rejected.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Armstrong). The majority leader.

                          ____________________