Resident Physician Shortage Reduction Act of 2025
HB3890, the Resident Physician Shortage Reduction Act of 2025, would expand Medicare-supported graduate medical education by creating a new process for distributing additional residency positions to hospitals from fiscal years 2026 through 2032. The bill directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to allocate up to 2,000 new residency slots per year, with a goal of reaching 14,000 total additional positions over the period. It sets application rounds, prioritizes certain hospitals and regions, and allows unused positions to roll forward if not awarded in a given year.
The bill gives special consideration to hospitals already training above their current resident caps, rural hospitals, sole community hospitals, hospitals near sole community hospitals, hospitals in health professional shortage areas, and hospitals affiliated with new or expanding medical schools. It also reserves priority for hospitals connected to historically Black medical schools and other schools listed in the Higher Education Act that establish medical colleges. Hospitals receiving slots must agree to actually increase their training positions, and some recipients face a cap of 75 additional positions across the relevant Medicare residency expansion programs unless the Secretary determines more capacity is available.
In addition to the residency-slot expansion, the bill amends Medicare’s indirect medical education payment rules so that teaching hospital payments reflect the new residency positions distributed under this program. It also requires the Government Accountability Office to study strategies for increasing diversity in the health professional workforce, including pathways for rural, lower-income, and underrepresented minority communities, and report recommendations to Congress within two years.
The bill further creates two new grant programs under the Public Health Service Act: a Rural Residency Planning and Development Program to help create new rural residency programs or rural training sites, and a Technical Assistance Program to support applicants and awardees. These grants can support primary care, high-need specialties, maternal health, obstetrics, and other pathways approved by the Secretary, with authorized funding of $12.7 million annually from fiscal years 2026 through 2030.
Overall, the bill’s impact would be to expand federal support for physician training, especially in underserved and rural areas, while also steering some of the new positions toward hospitals and institutions intended to improve access and workforce diversity. Because the bill was only introduced and referred to committee, there is no recorded vote or formal committee debate in the provided materials, so the available sentiment is inferred from the bill’s structure: it appears broadly supportive of addressing physician shortages, rural access, and diversity in medical education.
HB3890 would amend sections of the Social Security Act governing Medicare graduate medical education and indirect medical education payments, adding a new subsection that authorizes the distribution of additional residency positions and revising payment formulas to account for those positions. It would also add a new section to the Public Health Service Act establishing rural residency planning, development, and technical assistance grant programs. The bill would affect hospitals, residency programs, medical schools, rural health providers, and HHS administration of Medicare residency caps and teaching-hospital payments.
No committee transcripts or votes were provided, so there is no direct record of debate or roll-call support in the materials. Based on the bill text, the measure appears to have a generally positive policy orientation toward physician workforce expansion, rural health access, and diversity in training pipelines. The inclusion of targeted priorities for rural hospitals, health professional shortage areas, and historically Black medical schools suggests an intent to build broad coalition support around shortage reduction and equity goals.
The main policy tensions likely involve how the new residency slots are allocated and which institutions benefit most. Hospitals already above their resident caps, rural facilities, hospitals in shortage areas, and schools tied to historically Black or newer medical schools are all given preference, which could draw competing claims from large academic medical centers or other hospitals seeking slots. Another possible point of contention is federal spending and administrative discretion, since the bill authorizes new grants and gives the Secretary significant authority over distribution criteria, timing, and extensions.