HB307, the “Amputation Reduction and Compassion Act of 2025” or “ARC Act of 2025,” would expand federal coverage for peripheral artery disease (PAD) screening and related prevention efforts. The bill directs the Department of Health and Human Services, through CDC and CMS, to create a PAD education program to inform clinicians and the public about PAD, with a focus on reducing amputations in at-risk populations. It also authorizes $6 million annually from fiscal years 2026 through 2030 for education and outreach.
The bill amends Medicare and Medicaid statutes to cover PAD screening tests for specified at-risk beneficiaries without cost-sharing. For Medicare, it adds PAD screening tests to covered preventive services, defines eligible beneficiaries by age and risk factors, sets payment rules, exempts the tests from deductibles, and limits coverage to the frequency established by the Secretary. For Medicaid, it similarly requires coverage of PAD screening tests for eligible enrollees and bars state cost-sharing for those services. The bill also excludes overly frequent tests from coverage and secondary payer protection.
Beyond coverage, the bill requires HHS to develop and implement quality measures tied to nontraumatic lower-limb major amputations, using PAD screening and other diagnostics to encourage limb-sparing treatment such as revascularization. It also directs the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation to test an amputation-prevention pilot model for hospitals, ambulatory surgical centers, and office-based centers that would promote early screening, PAD treatment, risk modification, and care coordination.
The bill’s impact on state and federal law is primarily on federal health programs: it would amend titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security Act, changing Medicare and Medicaid benefit categories, payment rules, and cost-sharing protections. Because Medicaid is jointly administered, states would have to cover the specified PAD screening services under their plans or waivers without imposing cost-sharing, subject to the federal statutory changes. The bill also creates new federal programmatic and reporting responsibilities for HHS and CMS.
The available context suggests generally supportive framing, with the bill introduced under a prevention-and-amputation-reduction message and no recorded committee votes or opposition in the provided materials. The findings emphasize serious PAD-related harms, disparities affecting minority populations, and the cost-effectiveness of screening, indicating a public health and equity-oriented rationale. No formal contention is documented in the transcript or voting history provided, but the main policy issues inherent in the bill are likely the scope of mandatory screening, federal spending, and the extent of required coverage and implementation for Medicare and Medicaid.
HB307 would amend the Social Security Act to require Medicare and Medicaid coverage of PAD screening tests for defined at-risk populations, eliminate beneficiary cost-sharing for those services, and set related payment and coverage rules. It would also create a new PAD education program, require quality-measure development tied to amputation prevention, and authorize a Medicare Innovation Center pilot model. For states, the principal effect is on Medicaid administration: state plans and waivers would need to cover the specified screening tests without cost-sharing, and related conforming amendments would update Medicaid statutory references and coverage rules.
The bill is presented in strongly supportive, prevention-focused terms, with findings emphasizing the prevalence of PAD, the risk of amputation and death, and disparities affecting minority communities. The available context shows no recorded votes, no committee transcript debate, and no formal opposition in the materials provided. Overall sentiment appears favorable and public-health oriented, centered on early detection, reduced amputations, and improved care coordination.
No specific contention is documented in the provided voting history or committee materials. Based on the bill text, the most likely areas of policy debate would be the federal cost of expanded screening and education, whether Medicare and Medicaid should mandate no-cost coverage for a broader set of beneficiaries, how often screening should be provided, and how much discretion the Secretary should have in defining additional covered tests and implementation standards. The bill also implicitly raises questions about state Medicaid financing and provider compliance, but those concerns are not reflected in the supplied discussion record.