State of Men’s Health Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 7602
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 2
- Policy Area
- Health
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2026-02-20: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- Last Updated
- 2026-06-24T08:09:11Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
The "State of Men's Health Act" (H.R. 7602) aims to address growing health disparities faced by men in the United States by requiring a federal study on men's health issues and establishing a dedicated office within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to coordinate and promote efforts to improve men's health outcomes. It highlights risks like higher rates of premature death, shorter lifespans, and specific diseases among men, emphasizing the broader impacts on families, the economy, and government resources.
Key Provisions
- Findings (Section 2): Congress outlines 18 key facts supporting the need for action, including:
- Men face higher risks of premature death from top causes (e.g., 9 out of 10 leading causes), with a lifespan gap widening to 5.9 years (men: 73.2 years; women: 79.1 years).
- Men die at 1.4 times the rate of women overall, with elevated suicide rates (4 times higher than women, accounting for 80% of suicides).
- Specific disease burdens: Higher cancer mortality (e.g., prostate, lung, colorectal), diabetes (18.9 million men affected, more likely to be fatal), and other issues like HIV/AIDS, mental health, and osteoporosis.
- Economic costs: Over $142 billion annually in government expenses from premature male deaths and $156 billion to employers/society, plus impacts on widows and children.
- Calls for education on preventive care, screenings, and healthy habits, with special attention to veterans, military personnel, and fathers as role models.
- GAO Study and Report (Section 3):
- The Government Accountability Office (GAO, an independent agency that audits federal programs) must complete a study on men's health (including U.S. territories) within 1 year of enactment and submit a report to Congress.
- Report must cover: Health disparities; existing federal programs that could be optimized; recommendations for new programs; coordination improvements; potential office consolidations or leadership roles; male engagement in healthcare; research investment opportunities; and ways to raise public awareness.
- No new funding; uses existing appropriated amounts.
- Establishment of Office of Men's Health (Section 4):
- Amends the Public Health Service Act to create an Office of Men's Health within HHS, to be established within 18 months of enactment, considering the GAO study results.
- Activities include: Promoting programs to improve men's health; coordinating HHS efforts on awareness, education, and screenings (focusing on colorectal/prostate cancer, diabetes, high cholesterol, and mental health for at-risk men); and maintaining a database of best practices, guidelines, research, and funding.
- Requires a report to Congress within 2 years of establishment, detailing findings and recommendations.
- No new funding; uses existing HHS appropriations, excluding funds from women's health offices.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Adds a new section (229A) to Part A of Title II of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 202 et seq.), which governs general HHS functions, to formally establish the Office of Men's Health—mirroring structures like the existing Office of Women's Health but tailored to men.
- Introduces a one-time GAO study on men's health, which is not currently required under existing law, providing a foundation for future policy without mandating immediate new programs.
- Ensures no diversion of resources from women's health initiatives, maintaining balance in gender-specific offices.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: HHS gains a new office for coordination, potentially streamlining men's health efforts across federal programs (e.g., CDC, NIH), but must operate within existing budgets, which could strain resources. GAO's study may lead to recommendations for reallocating funds or combining offices, affecting efficiency in agencies like the Department of Veterans Affairs for military-related health.
- On Citizens: Could increase awareness and access to preventive care for men, potentially reducing mortality from diseases like cancer and suicide, benefiting families (e.g., fewer impoverished widows) and children through healthier fathers. Broader economic gains from lower healthcare costs and lost productivity (estimated at hundreds of billions annually).
- On International Relations: No direct impacts; the bill focuses solely on U.S. domestic health, including territories, without addressing global health or foreign aid.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Men and Their Families: Primary beneficiaries, especially those at higher risk (e.g., African-American men for prostate cancer, veterans for mental health, low-income groups across races).
- Healthcare Providers and Patients: Doctors, clinics, and organizations involved in screenings and education may see increased federal coordination and resources for men's issues.
- Government Entities: HHS (for the new office), GAO (for the study), Congress (for reports and oversight), and state/local governments (sharing costs of men's health crises).
- Broader Society: Women (as family members affected by men's deaths), employers (reduced productivity losses), and taxpayers (potential savings from preventive care).
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Strengthens the federal role in public health under the Public Health Service Act by addressing gender-specific disparities without creating enforceable rights for individuals; relies on existing funding to avoid appropriation debates.
- Constitutional: Aligns with Congress's authority to regulate public health and welfare (Commerce Clause), promoting equal protection by balancing attention to men's health alongside women's, without raising equal protection challenges.
- Political: Highlights a "men's health crisis" to advocate for equity in gender-focused health policy, potentially influencing future budgets and campaigns on preventive care, suicide prevention, and veteran support; may spark debates on resource allocation between genders but emphasizes non-diversion from women's programs.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (12)
Rep. Murphy, Gregory F. [R-NC-3], Rep. Suozzi, Thomas R. [D-NY-3], Rep. Onder, Robert F. [R-MO-3], Rep. Walkinshaw, James R. [D-VA-11], Rep. McDowell, Addison P. [R-NC-6], Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9], Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large], Rep. Van Drew, Jefferson [R-NJ-2], Rep. Sewell, Terri A. [D-AL-7], Rep. Harris, Andy [R-MD-1], Rep. Bacon, Don [R-NE-2], Rep. Landsman, Greg [D-OH-1]
Recent Actions
- 2026-02-20: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- 2026-02-20: Introduced in House
- 2026-02-20: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- State of Men’s Health Act — issued 2026-02-20 — PDF (10 pages)