I 
109TH CONGRESS 
2D SESSION 
H. R. 4949 
To amend title 10, United States Code, to prohibit increases in fees for 
military health care. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MARCH 14, 2006 
Mr. EDWARDS
(for himself, Mr. JONES
of North Carolina, Mrs. 
CHRISTENSEN, Mr. LARSON of Connecticut, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, 
Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. BOUCHER, Mr. SCOTT of Virginia, Mr. BISHOP of 
Georgia, Mr. ALLEN, Mrs. MCCARTHY, Ms. BORDALLO, Mr. BERRY, Mr. 
DEFAZIO, Mr. FORD, Mr. BISHOP of New York, Mr. VAN HOLLEN, Mr. 
ABERCROMBIE, Mr. RYAN of Ohio, Mr. HONDA, Mr. ROTHMAN, Mr. TAY-
LOR of Mississippi, Mrs. CAPPS, Mr. LARSEN of Washington, Mr. JEF-
FERSON, Mrs. MALONEY, Mrs. DRAKE, Mr. LYNCH, Mr. GENE GREEN 
of Texas, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Mr. HINCHEY, Mr. FILNER, Mr. CHAN-
DLER, Mr. CLEAVER, Mr. GINGREY, Mr. BARROW, Mr. FRANK of Massa-
chusetts, Mr. FARR, Mr. GOODE, Mr. SIMMONS, Mr. BONNER, Mrs. 
DAVIS of California, Ms. HERSETH, Mr. GORDON, Mr. MCCOTTER, Mr. 
HIGGINS, Mr. PAYNE, and Mr. BILIRAKIS) introduced the following bill; 
which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 
A BILL 
To amend title 10, United States Code, to prohibit increases 
in fees for military health care. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
00:38 Mar 16, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4949.IH
H4949
jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Military Retirees’ 
Health Care Protection Act’’. 
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND SENSE OF CONGRESS. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 
(1) Career uniformed service members and their 
families endured unique and extraordinary demands 
and sacrifices over the course of a 20- to 30-year ca-
reer in protecting freedoms for all Americans. 
(2) The extent of these demands and sacrifices 
are never so evident as in wartime—not only in to-
day’s Global War on Terrorism, but also over the 
last six decades of hot and cold wars when today’s 
retired service members were on continuous call to 
enter into harm’s way when and as needed. 
(3) The demands and sacrifices are such that 
few Americans are willing to accept them for a 
multi-decade career. 
(4) The primary offset for enduring the ex-
traordinary sacrifices inherent in a military career is 
a system of extraordinary retirement benefits, in-
cluding health care coverage considerably better than 
that afforded civilian workers, that a grateful Nation 
provides for those who choose to subordinate much 
of their personal life to the national interest for so 
many years. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
00:38 Mar 16, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4949.IH
H4949
jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
(5) Many private sector firms are curtailing 
health benefits and shifting significantly higher costs 
to their employees. 
(6) One effect of such curtailment is that re-
tired members who work for such employers are 
turning to use of the TRICARE coverage they 
earned by their military service. 
(7) In some cases, civilian employers establish 
financial incentives for TRICARE-eligible employees 
to use TRICARE rather than the civilian employers’ 
coverage. 
(8) While the Department of Defense has made 
some efforts to constrain TRICARE program costs, 
a large part of the Department’s effort is to shift a 
larger share of cost burdens to retired service mem-
bers. 
(9) The cumulative increases in enrollment fees, 
deductibles, and co-payments being proposed by the 
Department of Defense far exceed the 31-percent 
growth in military retired pay since the retired mem-
bers’ fees were established 10 years ago. 
(10) The beneficiary cost increases being pro-
posed by the Department of Defense fail to recog-
nize adequately that career service members paid 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
00:38 Mar 16, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4949.IH
H4949
jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
enormous in-kind premiums through their extended 
service and sacrifice. 
(11) A significant share of the Nation’s health 
care providers refuse to accept new TRICARE pa-
tients because TRICARE pays them significantly 
less than commercial insurance programs and im-
poses unique administrative requirements. 
(12) The significant majority of the savings the 
Department of Defense associates with the proposed 
fee increases is expected to come from deterring a 
large portion of TRICARE beneficiaries from using 
their earned military health benefits. 
(13) The Department of Defense has chosen to 
count the accrual deposit to the Department of De-
fense Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund 
against the Department of Defense’s budget, con-
trary to the amendments made by section 725 of 
Public Law 108–375. 
(14) Department of Defense leaders have re-
ported to Congress that counting such deposits 
against the Department of Defense’s budget is im-
pinging on other readiness needs, including weapons 
programs—an inappropriate situation which section 
725 of Public Law 108–375 was intended expressly 
to prevent. 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
00:38 Mar 16, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4949.IH
H4949
jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con-
gress that— 
(1) the Department of Defense and the Nation 
have a committed health benefits obligation to re-
tired uniformed service members that exceeds the 
obligation of corporate employers to civilian employ-
ees; and 
(2) the Department of Defense has many addi-
tional options to constrain the growth of health care 
spending in ways that do not disadvantage bene-
ficiaries and should pursue any and all such options 
rather than seeking large fee increases for bene-
ficiaries. 
SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON INCREASES IN CERTAIN HEALTH 
COSTS FOR MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED 
SERVICES. 
(a) PROHIBITION ON INCREASE IN CHARGES UNDER 
CONTRACTS FOR MEDICAL CARE.—Section 1097(e) of 
title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 
end the following: ‘‘A premium, deductible, copayment, or 
other charge prescribed by the Secretary under this sub-
section may not be increased after December 31, 2005.’’. 
(b) PROHIBITION ON INCREASE IN AMOUNT OF COST 
SHARING REQUIREMENT UNDER PHARMACY BENEFITS 
PROGRAM.—Section 1074g of title 10, United States 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
00:38 Mar 16, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4949.IH
H4949
jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
Code, is amended by adding at the end of subsection 
(a)(6)(A) the following: ‘‘After December 31, 2005, the 
dollar amount of a cost sharing requirement (whether es-
tablished as a percentage or a fixed dollar amount) may 
not be increased.’’. 
(c) PROHIBITION ON INCREASE IN CHARGES FOR IN-
PATIENT CARE.—Section 1086(b)(3) of title 10, United 
States Code, is amended by inserting after ‘‘charges for 
inpatient care’’ the following: ‘‘, except that in no case 
may the charges for inpatient care for a patient exceed 
$535 per day.’’. 
(d) PROHIBITION
ON
INCREASE
IN
PREMIUMS 
UNDER TRICARE COVERAGE FOR CERTAIN MEMBERS 
IN THE SELECTED RESERVE.—Section 1076d(d)(3) of 
title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 
end the following: ‘‘After December 31, 2005, the monthly 
amount of the premium may not be increased above the 
amount in effect for the month of December 2005.’’. 
Æ 
VerDate Aug 31 2005 
04:54 Mar 16, 2006
Jkt 049200
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6301
E:\BILLS\H4949.IH
H4949
jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS