Latest action: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Referred to one or more standing committees for review, hearings, and possible markup.
Specific committees not parsed from action data.
The committee may hold hearings, amend the bill, or let it die without action.
Next: Reported
Full chamber floor — Speaker / Majority Leader controls scheduling
Increases competition among health insurance companies operating across state lines.
The problem
Health insurance markets in some states have limited options. Few companies dominate certain areas, potentially reducing consumer choice and competition.
The proposal
Allows health insurance companies to sell plans across state borders more easily. Reduces state-level restrictions on insurance company operations and requirements.
The impact
Consumers gain more insurance options. Insurance companies can expand into new markets. State governments lose some regulatory control over health insurance sold within their borders.
Consumers in areas with few insurance options would have more plans to choose from. More competition often leads to lower prices and better coverage options.
Increased competition between insurance companies typically pushes prices down. Consumers might pay less for health coverage if more insurers compete for their business.
Insurance companies can expand into new states without as many regulatory barriers. This could create jobs and economic activity in the insurance industry.
People gain freedom to choose insurance plans from companies nationwide. Reduces dependence on locally-available options only.
State insurance rules protect residents with coverage requirements and complaint processes. Allowing companies to operate across states might reduce these protections in some cases.
States lose ability to regulate insurance sold to their residents. This makes it harder for states to ensure companies follow local healthcare standards.
Large national companies might dominate and push out smaller competitors. This could eventually reduce choices rather than increase them.
Companies might avoid high-cost areas or areas with sicker populations. This could leave vulnerable communities with fewer options than promised.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.