Bill · H.R. 9336· House(119-HR-9336)
Better Care, Better Cost Act
- Introduced
- 6/18/2026
- Last activity
- 6/18/2026 — Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- Sponsored by
- Craig Goldman
- Cosponsors
- - 1 - 2
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The "Better Care, Better Cost Act" amends the Social Security Act regarding the Medicaid program. It requires States to consider the performance scores of managed care entities when assigning individuals to them. States must create a system to evaluate these entities based on cost, outcomes, and individual satisfaction. Additionally, States must publish an annual report on enrollment differences and estimated expenditure reductions. This bill would take effect for enrollments on or after January 1, 2028.
Yes· 3 of 27
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?+5
Directly benefits low-income individuals by ensuring their Medicaid providers are evaluated on quality and satisfaction.
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?+5
States are required to publish annual reports on enrollment differences and expenditure reductions.
Would people with disabilities be better off under this?+4
People with disabilities are high users of Medicaid and will benefit from higher quality managed care.
The opposite
Does this leave more decisions to the states?-2
It restricts State autonomy in how they assign individuals to managed care entities.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Performance-Based Assignments: Because States must use performance scores to assign individuals to managed care entities (Section 2(a)(1)), people may be placed with entities that provide better care.
-
Focus on Care Quality: The use of measures like avoidable hospital readmissions, avoidable emergency department visits, and avoidable hospital admissions (Section 2(a)(2)(ii)(II)-(IV)) encourages entities to improve health outcomes.
-
Accountability through Satisfaction: Including individual satisfaction measures and the rate at which people terminate enrollment (Section 2(a)(2)(ii)(V)) ensures that the patient's experience is considered in the performance score.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No negative impacts for individuals are explicitly stated in the provided text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Low Income Households+5Good For People With Disabilities+4Good For Retirees+3Good For Seniors+3Good For African Americans+2Good For Asian Americans+2Good For Children+2Good For Hispanic Americans+2Good For L G B T Q Community+2Good For Men+2Good For Middle Aged+2Good For Native Americans+2Good For Rural Residents+2Good For Urban Residents+2Good For Veterans+2Good For White Americans+2Good For Women+2Good For Young Adults+2
- Economy And Finance
- Improves Fiscal Responsibility+3Improves Consumer Protection+2Reduces Government Spending+2Reduces National Debt+1
- Healthcare
- Improves Healthcare Access+4Reduces Hospital Costs+3
- Governance And Ideology
- Improves Government Transparency+5Increases Federal Power+2Increase States Rights-2
- Social Issues And Justice
- Improves Poverty Reduction+1
- 7/20/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 6/18/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
Donald NorcrossDemocrat · New Jersey
August PflugerRepublican · Texas
Jimmy PanettaDemocrat · California