Protecting America’s Seniors’ Access to Care Act

Bill Number: H.R. 1303
Origin Chamber: House
Congress: 119th Congress, Session 1
Policy Area: Health
Status: Introduced
Latest Action: 2025-02-13: Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Last Updated: 2026-04-17T08:06:57Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

The "Protecting America's Seniors' Access to Care Act" (H.R. 1303) aims to prevent the federal government from enforcing new regulations that establish minimum staffing requirements for long-term care facilities, such as nursing homes, and require greater transparency in how states report Medicaid payments to these facilities. The goal is to block these rules to potentially maintain current operational flexibility for care providers.

Key Provisions

Short Title (Section 1): The bill is officially named the "Protecting America's Seniors' Access to Care Act."
Prohibition (Section 2): Starting on the date the bill becomes law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) is barred from implementing, administering, or enforcing:
The specific final rule issued by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS, a division of HHS) on May 10, 2024, titled "Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Minimum Staffing Standards for Long-Term Care Facilities and Medicaid Institutional Payment Transparency Reporting" (published in the Federal Register at 89 Fed. Reg. 40876).
Any future regulation that is substantially similar to this rule.
The bill was introduced on February 13, 2025, by Rep. Fischbach and co-sponsors, and referred to the House Committees on Ways and Means and Energy and Commerce for review.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

This bill would override and nullify a recently finalized federal rule that introduces mandatory minimum staffing levels (e.g., requiring a certain number of hours of care per resident per day) for long-term care facilities participating in Medicare and Medicaid programs.
It also blocks new reporting requirements for states to disclose how Medicaid funds are allocated to institutional providers, such as nursing homes, which were intended to ensure accountability and prevent misuse of funds.
Without this bill, the rule would have gone into effect, mandating compliance by facilities and states; the bill effectively freezes these changes, preserving pre-2024 staffing and reporting practices under existing Medicare and Medicaid laws.

Potential Impacts

On Government Agencies: HHS and CMS would be restricted from enforcing the rule, reducing their regulatory oversight in long-term care. This could shift enforcement burdens back to states or eliminate them, potentially saving federal administrative resources but limiting federal quality controls.
On Citizens: Seniors and residents in long-term care facilities might face unchanged staffing levels, which could affect care quality (e.g., higher risk of understaffing-related issues like delays in care). However, proponents argue it protects access by avoiding potential closures of under-resourced facilities. Families relying on Medicaid-funded care could see indirect effects on availability and costs.
On International Relations: No direct impacts, as the bill focuses on domestic U.S. healthcare programs.
Broader effects could include ongoing debates over care quality versus provider viability, potentially influencing future healthcare funding and state-level policies.

Main Stakeholders Affected

Long-Term Care Facilities and Providers: Nursing homes and similar institutions benefit from avoided compliance costs (e.g., hiring more staff), but may face criticism for lacking new standards.
Seniors and Residents: Elderly individuals in Medicare/Medicaid-funded care are directly impacted, with potential trade-offs between care access and quality.
States and Medicaid Programs: States would not need to implement new payment transparency reports, easing administrative loads but possibly reducing oversight of public funds.
Healthcare Workers: Nurses and aides might see no mandated increases in minimum staffing, affecting job opportunities or workloads.
Federal Government (HHS/CMS): Loses authority to enforce the rule, altering its role in national healthcare standards.
Taxpayers and Advocacy Groups: Could influence public spending on Medicaid (which covers about 60% of nursing home residents) and spark involvement from groups focused on elder care or fiscal responsibility.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

Legal: The bill uses congressional authority under the Constitution's Spending Clause to control federal funding for Medicare and Medicaid, potentially preempting (overriding) an executive branch rule. If enacted, it could face lawsuits from advocates arguing it undermines public health protections, though it aligns with Congress's power to legislate on federal programs.
Constitutional: No direct challenges, but it highlights tensions between federal regulatory power (via agencies like CMS) and legislative oversight, reinforcing Congress's role in checking executive actions.
Political: Introduced in the 119th Congress with bipartisan co-sponsors but primarily Republican-led, it reflects debates over government overreach in healthcare. Passage could signal resistance to expanding regulations amid workforce shortages in elder care, influencing midterm elections or future appropriations for social programs. The bill's focus on "protecting access" frames it as pro-provider, potentially polarizing views on senior care priorities.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Fischbach, Michelle [R-MN-7]

Cosponsors (26)

Rep. Carter, Earl L. "Buddy" [R-GA-1], Rep. Houchin, Erin [R-IN-9], Rep. Moran, Nathaniel [R-TX-1], Rep. Estes, Ron [R-KS-4], Rep. Carey, Mike [R-OH-15], Rep. Van Duyne, Beth [R-TX-24], Rep. Johnson, Dusty [R-SD-At Large], Rep. Thompson, Glenn [R-PA-15], Rep. Timmons, William R. [R-SC-4], Rep. Finstad, Brad [R-MN-1], Rep. Tiffany, Thomas P. [R-WI-7], Rep. Kelly, Mike [R-PA-16], Rep. Moolenaar, John R. [R-MI-2], Rep. Pfluger, August [R-TX-11], Rep. Murphy, Gregory F. [R-NC-3], Rep. Miller, Carol D. [R-WV-1], Rep. Rose, John W. [R-TN-6], Rep. Norman, Ralph [R-SC-5], Rep. Yakym, Rudy [R-IN-2], Rep. Guest, Michael [R-MS-3], Rep. Mann, Tracey [R-KS-1], Rep. Hinson, Ashley [R-IA-2], Rep. Smith, Adrian [R-NE-3], Rep. Sessions, Pete [R-TX-17], Rep. Golden, Jared F. [D-ME-2], Rep. Kean, Thomas H. [R-NJ-7]

Recent Actions

2025-02-13: Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2025-02-13: Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2025-02-13: Introduced in House
2025-02-13: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

Protecting America’s Seniors’ Access to Care Act — issued 2025-02-13 — PDF (2 pages)