Following last week's hair-raising election, a weary and divided U.S. Congress reconvened this week to address unfinished business. The legislative backlog includes five of 13 essential budget bills for the 2001 fiscal year, amended Medicare reimbursements to healthcare providers, and other bills that affect the radiology community directly.
However, with both the future president and future Senate leadership in doubt, all bets are off as to what, if anything, the 106th Congress will be able to accomplish in its final days. While shying away from predictions, the American College of Radiology's government relations director, Josh Cooper, explained the options.
"Either they're going to sit around until Christmas hemming and hawing and going back and forth at each other, or they're going to get an agreement with the White House to pass what's called a continuing resolution (CR). It would probably be a lengthy one of six months or so, and then they'll go home and let all the presidential stuff filter out," Cooper said.
At press time, a continuing resolution seemed likelier, with the House scheduled to vote on a bill that would continue federal spending at current levels. However, that course of action could kill the final passage of S. 1110, a bill that would create an imaging institute at the National Institutes of Health, according to a staff member in the office of Sen. Trent Lott, (R-MS), the bill's principal sponsor.
"Senator Lott is very interested in getting this bill done, but unfortunately we don't know exactly what's going to happen with the lame duck session -- if they're going to pass an extended continuing resolution, or if we're going to get things done and pass an omnibus [spending bill] late in the year," the staff member said. "The likelihood is that if we pass an omnibus, where they roll several bills into one, then it will be more than likely that it will [pass], but if we pass an extended CR then it may have to wait until next year."
The CARE Act
Also caught in the turmoil is H.R. 5274, known as the Consumer Assurance of Radiologic Excellence (CARE) Act. The bill requires the U.S. government to establish educational and credentialing standards for personnel who provide radiation therapy and perform all types of medical imaging procedures except ultrasound.
While the bill was not expected to pass this year, last week's election has forced proponents to look for new leadership on the issue. Specifically, First Lady Hillary Clinton's Senate win over the bill's principal sponsor, Rep. Rick Lazio (R-NY) means the bill will need new principal sponsors.
Considering the broad bipartisan support the legislation enjoys, sponsorship won't be a problem, according to William Uffelman, public affairs director of the Society of Nuclear Medicine in Reston, VA. The SNM is a founding member of the Alliance for Quality Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy, a group that is working to ensure the act's passage.
"With [so many] co-sponsors, someone's arm will get twisted enough," to sign on as principal sponsor, Uffelman said. "There's a good chance the bill will be reintroduced."
The sentiment is shared by DuVonne Campbell, director of government relations for the Albuquerque-based American Society of Radiologic Technologists, another founding member of the 15-member AQMIRT.
"With regard to Mr. Lazio's defeat, there are still 17 committed co-sponsors in the House of Representatives for the CARE bill," Campbell said. "Our goal is to target all of those 17, plus the entire House of Representatives -- at least educating them and making them aware of the CARE bill."
However, it's too early to target the new Congress for lead sponsorship, she said. It will be at least mid-January before the 107th Congress picks its speakers, and the chairs of the committees who will hear the legislation, i.e., the Commerce Committee in the House, and the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee in the Senate.
Campbell said the choice of sponsor may well hinge on which party ends up controlling the Senate in January.
"But we are also very cognizant that we want bipartisan support for this bill. It's not a partisan issue. It's an issue that affects patient care," she said. "We intend to make a strong response for reintroduction of the CARE bill in this next session, and we think it's an important issue."
Finally, the ACR believes that legislative bottleneck could be a good thing for two bills that are being considered for inclusion in Medicare's "giveback" payments to healthcare providers. The Medicare Access to Digital Mammography Act of 2000 (H.R. 5172 and S 3112) and the BRIGHT Future for Women Act (H.R. 5088) would increase Medicare reimbursement for those who offer mammography screening with new technologies such as full-field digital mammography systems and computer-aided diagnosis workstations.
"The ACR is opposed," Josh Cooper told AuntMinnie.com. "We feel that all components of mammography screening need to be addressed, including technology. We're not saying 'no,' we're saying 'not yet.' It is our goal in the next Congress to sit down with all interested parties, the consumer groups, the professional groups, and the manufacturers, and come up with a plan to take to Congress -- and hopefully get a package where all components are addressed appropriately."
By Eric BarnesAuntMinnie.com staff writer
November 14, 2000
Related Reading
Bill mandating technologist standards introduced in House, September 28, 2000
Imaging institute bill passes U.S. House; heads for Senate, September 28, 2000
House committee approves imaging institute; bill moves to final vote, September 15, 2000
Imaging institute hearing a success; legislation heads to full committee, September 14, 2000
Radiology accelerates drive for imaging institute in 2000, January 11, 2000
Copyright © 2000 AuntMinnie.com
