Overview

Title

To amend title 10, United States Code, to ensure that medical records of the Department of Defense indicate the organizational affiliation of certain health care providers.

ELI5 AI

The Private Smither Act of 2024 wants doctors' notes used by the military to show if a doctor is a regular worker or just helping out, like a visiting helper.

Summary AI

H.R. 9186, known as the “Private Smither Act of 2024,” aims to modify title 10 of the United States Code. The bill requires the Department of Defense to include information about the organizational affiliation of certain healthcare providers in its medical records. This applies to healthcare providers who are not affiliated with the military or government, such as private contractors or volunteers, ensuring transparency in the medical records handled by the Department.

Published

2024-07-30
Congress: 118
Session: 2
Chamber: HOUSE
Status: Introduced in House
Date: 2024-07-30
Package ID: BILLS-118hr9186ih

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
3
Words:
359
Pages:
3
Sentences:
10

Language

Nouns: 118
Verbs: 23
Adjectives: 24
Adverbs: 0
Numbers: 19
Entities: 36

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.30
Average Sentence Length:
35.90
Token Entropy:
4.44
Readability (ARI):
20.07

AnalysisAI

Overview

House Bill 9186, introduced during the 118th Congress, proposes an amendment to Title 10 of the United States Code. The primary objective of the bill is to mandate that the Department of Defense (DoD) includes the organizational affiliations of certain healthcare providers in their medical records. Specifically, this pertains to healthcare providers who are not directly employed by the DoD or other federal government agencies. The bill has been titled the "Private Smither Act of 2024."

Key Issues

Lack of Clear Justification

One of the significant issues with the bill is the absence of a compelling explanation for why recording the organizational affiliations of non-DoD healthcare providers is necessary. Without a clear rationale, questions arise regarding the intent behind this requirement and its potential impact on privacy and administrative processes.

Ambiguities in Provider Definition

The bill defines "covered health care providers" by stating who they are not, rather than who they are. This method could lead to confusion and inconsistent application, as healthcare administrators might struggle to identify precisely who is covered under this provision.

Potential Administrative Burden

Implementing the changes mandated by the bill could impose an increased administrative workload on healthcare providers. Accurately documenting organizational affiliations requires careful record-keeping, which might shift focus away from patient care. Moreover, this change could necessitate updates to existing medical record systems, leading to significant costs and potential disruptions.

Lack of Oversight Mechanisms

The bill does not mention any oversight or auditing mechanisms to ensure compliance with the new requirements. This omission could lead to inconsistencies in how the law is applied across different healthcare providers and facilities, reducing its effectiveness.

Ambiguity in Bill Title

The bill's title, "Private Smither Act of 2024," provides no insight into the bill's contents or its intended beneficiaries, potentially causing confusion among stakeholders. A more descriptive title could improve understanding and communication about the bill's purposes and effects.

Impact on the Public

The bill could have several broad impacts on the public. On the one hand, it might improve transparency by revealing the organizational affiliations of non-DoD healthcare providers, potentially increasing accountability within the healthcare system. On the other hand, the increased administrative demands and potential system upgrades required by the bill might lead to higher healthcare costs or affect the quality of service delivery.

Impact on Stakeholders

Healthcare Providers

Healthcare providers might face additional administrative tasks without clear benefits, potentially straining resources and detracting from patient care. The requirement to record organizational affiliations could necessitate time-consuming updates to medical records, increasing overall workloads.

Department of Defense

The DoD could incur significant costs related to updating medical record systems to comply with the new requirements. These updates might also disrupt ongoing operations and delay service delivery.

Patients

Patients might indirectly experience the effects of this bill through changes in how healthcare services are delivered. While increased transparency could benefit patients, interruptions due to administrative changes might temporarily affect their access to medical care.

In summary, while the bill aims to ensure transparency regarding the affiliations of non-DoD healthcare providers, its various ambiguities and lack of a clear implementation strategy present challenges. The potential administrative burden and costs must be carefully weighed against the intended benefits to determine its overall impact and efficacy.

Issues

  • Section 2: The ambiguity in defining 'covered health care provider' may lead to confusion and inconsistent application. The definition through exclusion leaves uncertainty about who exactly falls under this provision, potentially affecting a significant number of healthcare providers.

  • Sections 2 and 1091a: There is no clear justification presented for why the inclusion of organizational affiliations in medical records is necessary, raising questions about the intent behind this requirement and its potential impact on privacy and administrative efficiency.

  • Sections 2 and 1091a: Implementing this change might require extensive updates to existing medical record systems, leading to significant costs for the Department of Defense and potential disruptions in healthcare service delivery.

  • Sections 2 and 1091a: The increased administrative workload on healthcare providers to document organizational affiliations, without a clear benefit, could strain resources and shift focus away from patient care.

  • Sections 2 and 1091a: The lack of oversight or auditing mechanisms to ensure compliance with this new requirement raises concerns about accountability and the consistent application of this provision.

  • Section 1: The title 'Private Smither Act of 2024' is not descriptive, leading to ambiguity about the Act's purpose and who benefits from its provisions, potentially causing confusion among stakeholders.

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

1. Short title Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The first section of the bill specifies that it can be referred to as the "Private Smither Act of 2024."

2. Identification in patient medical records of affiliation of certain non-Department of Defense health care providers Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section added to Chapter 55 of title 10 of the United States Code mandates that the Secretary of Defense must ensure that medical records include the organizational affiliation of non-Department of Defense healthcare providers. This applies to providers who are not members of the military, employees of the Department of Defense or other federal agencies, personal services contractors, or volunteers.

1091a. Identification in patient medical records of affiliation of certain non-Department of Defense health care providers Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section requires the Secretary of Defense to include the organizational affiliation of certain non-Department of Defense health care providers in patient medical records. These providers are those who are not part of the uniformed services, DoD employees, federal employees loaned to the DoD, personal service contractors, or volunteers under specific sections.