Investigating RFK Jr., Fixing Surprise Billing Law May Be On Agenda For New Congress

Analysts say a Democratic-controlled Congress expected to take office next year may scrutinize Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and consider changes to the No Surprises Act and Medicaid policy. The ideas are possible priorities raised after the election, not an announced legislative agenda, and their prospects are constrained by the Senate’s lack of a veto-proof Democratic majority.

Bruce Mirken, communications co-chair at Defend Public Health, said the new Congress should investigate Kennedy’s record and examine how the administration and HHS handled money Congress had appropriated. Mirken argued that oversight should cover effects on disease monitoring, food safety and health research. He also said Congress should consider whether its findings warrant impeachment proceedings; that is his position, not a decision by lawmakers.

Other possible measures include addressing what analysts described as flaws in the No Surprises Act, the federal law on surprise medical bills, and strengthening health care price transparency. Thomas Campanella, a health care consultant and professor emeritus of health economics at Baldwin Wallace University, also named site-neutral hospital payments, antitrust enforcement involving hospital systems, oversight of the 340B drug discount program, and investment in primary and rural care as areas lawmakers could examine.

Edwin Park, a research professor at Georgetown University’s Center for Children and Families, said lawmakers might seek to repeal Medicaid and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program cuts enacted in a reconciliation bill last summer, or delay some cuts if repeal fails. Congress also faces expiring Medicaid provisions, including funding for Disproportionate Share Hospitals, which support hospitals serving many low-income patients. Park expects scrutiny of how the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services is implementing the changes.

Potential Oversight and Cost Changes

The proposals touch both health care costs and the scope of federal health programs. Changes to surprise billing protections or price transparency rules could affect patients’ exposure to unexpected charges and their ability to compare services, while Medicaid decisions may influence coverage and funding for hospitals. The source report does not specify what amendments or replacement policies lawmakers would pursue.

Oversight could also test Congress’s authority over agencies and federal spending. Mirken said lawmakers should investigate how HHS used appropriated funds; Park raised questions about CMS implementation of Medicaid provisions. These are calls for scrutiny and concerns expressed by the sources, not findings of wrongdoing established in the report.

Election Results Set the Agenda

The MedPage Today report, published November 4, 2026, describes a range of health policy possibilities following an election that is expected to leave Democrats controlling Congress next year. It draws on views from public health advocates, health policy analysts and a Georgetown researcher; it does not report a formal agenda released by congressional leaders.

Tom Miller, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, cautioned that election results do not establish exactly what voters want on health care beyond a general preference for more care at lower prices. He predicted limited reforms rather than broad rollbacks, pointing to possible adjustments to the No Surprises Act and targeted action on health sector costs. The analysts noted that Democrats would not have a veto-proof Senate majority, a constraint on enacting legislation over a presidential veto.

“Congress needs to dig in quickly and [fix the] damage done to disease monitoring and tracking, food safety, and health research.”

— Bruce Mirken, communications co-chair at Defend Public Health

Legislative Plans Remain Unsettled

No specific bills, sponsors, committee investigations or timetable were identified in the report. It is not clear whether Democratic leaders will adopt the proposals, what changes they would seek to the No Surprises Act, or whether they will pursue repeal or delay of Medicaid cuts. The report also provides no details establishing the extent or consequences of the alleged agency actions raised by Mirken and Park.

Even if lawmakers advance measures, the balance of power and the possibility of a presidential veto could prevent enactment. Miller warned that competing priorities and the approaching 2028 presidential campaign could leave substantive legislation difficult to pass. The report does not establish whether any proposal has bipartisan backing beyond Campanella’s stated observation about primary and rural care investment.

Congressional Priorities Take Shape

When the new Congress assumes office next year, its leaders and committees will determine whether these issues become hearings, investigations or legislation. The immediate developments to watch are any formal Democratic agenda, proposals concerning Medicaid provisions due to expire next year, and oversight of CMS’s implementation of the reconciliation law.

For now, the source report presents expert expectations and recommendations rather than confirmed action. Whether lawmakers can convert those ideas into bills—and whether any bills can secure enough support to become law—remains open.

Key Questions

Is Congress confirmed to investigate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.?

No. Bruce Mirken called for an investigation and argued it should consider impeachment, but the report does not say congressional leaders have announced one.

Could the new Congress change the No Surprises Act?

Analysts said lawmakers may consider targeted adjustments to the law. No specific amendment or legislative plan was reported.

Could Medicaid cuts be repealed or delayed?

Edwin Park said Congress could try to repeal cuts enacted in last summer’s reconciliation bill or, if that fails, seek to delay some of them. These are possibilities, not confirmed commitments.

What could limit the proposed health care agenda?

The report notes that Democrats will lack a veto-proof majority in the Senate. Miller also cited competing demands and the approaching 2028 presidential campaign as obstacles to passing substantial legislation.

Source: medpagetoday.com