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 c…
This resolution uses the Congressional Review Act to nullify a specific federal agency rule. If passed by Congress and signed by the President, the rule would be treated as having no force or effect. The law also prevents the agency from issuing a substantially similar rule in the future unless Congress enacts new legislation. The target is a Medicare home health payment and related policy rule.
The final rule titled "Medicare Program; Calendar Year (CY) 2025 Home Health Prospective Payment System (HH PPS) Rate Update; HH Quality Reporting Program Requirements; HH Value-Based Purchasing Expanded Model Requirements; Home Intravenous Immune Globulin (IVIG) Items and Services Rate Update; and Other Medicare Policies" (89 Fed. Reg. 88354, Nov. 7, 2024).
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)
Under the Congressional Review Act, disapproval resolutions are handled with expedited procedures; in the Senate they are not subject to a filibuster and require a simple majority to pass. As a joint resolution, it must pass both chambers and be signed by the President (or have any veto overridden) to take effect.
This joint resolution uses the Congressional Review Act to disapprove and nullify a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) final rule (89 Fed.
Reg. 88354) titled “Medicare Program; CY2025 Home Health Prospective Payment System (HH PPS) Rate Update; HH Quality Reporting Program Requirements; HH Value‑Based Purchasing Expanded Model Requirements; Home Intravenous Immune Globulin (IVIG) Items and Services Rate Update; and Other Medicare Policies.” If enacted, the rule would have no force or effect.
Simple, narrow rollback appeal in House but substantial Senate and final-enactment hurdles make ultimate success unlikely absent broad agreement.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused Congressional Review Act disapproval resolution that clearly identifies the targeted CMS rule and applies the standard statutory remedy (nullification).
Whether CRA repeal is appropriate vs. targeted regulatory fixes
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Whether CRA repeal is appropriate vs. targeted regulatory fixes
Likely skeptical of using the Congressional Review Act to erase a CMS rule without legislative debate.
Concerned this eliminates regulatory updates affecting home health payments, quality reporting, VBP expansion, and IVIG reimbursement, and could harm beneficiaries or disrupt care continuity.
Because the resolution text does not state the rule’s directional changes, impacts are uncertain.
Wary of a blunt CRA nullification without clear, targeted fixes.
Sees value in congressional oversight, but prefers measured adjustment of problematic provisions instead of wholesale repeal.
Will look for cost, beneficiary access, and provider stability analyses before deciding.
Likely supportive: treats the resolution as reining in federal regulatory overreach and protecting providers from adverse payment or reporting mandates.
Views CRA as appropriate tool to overturn rules viewed as harmful or insufficiently vetted.
Support contingent on seeing the rule as burdensome.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Simple, narrow rollback appeal in House but substantial Senate and final-enactment hurdles make ultimate success unlikely absent broad agreement.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Whether CRA repeal is appropriate vs. targeted regulatory fixes
Simple, narrow rollback appeal in House but substantial Senate and final-enactment hurdles make ultimate success unlikely absent broad agre…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused Congressional Review Act disapproval resolution that clearly identifies the targeted CMS rule and applies the standard statutory remedy (nullification).
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.