This bill would amend Title XIX of the Social Security Act to add renal medullary carcinoma (RCC) education as an incentivized effort for individuals with sickle cell disease who receive Medicaid. Specifically, it inserts RCC into the list of items and services in Section 1903(a)(3)(E)(ii) so that education about RCC risk accompanies other covered education or incentive activities.
The amendments apply to items and services furnished on or after the date of enactment. The overall aim is to formalize RCC risk education within Medicaid offerings for a high-risk population, through a mechanism tied to existing program incentives rather than creating a new entitlement or program.
At a Glance
What It Does
Amends Section 1903(a)(3)(E)(ii) of the Social Security Act to insert 'renal medullary carcinoma' after 'stroke' in the list of conditions addressed under Medicaid education incentives. The changes take effect for items and services furnished on or after enactment.
Who It Affects
Primarily individuals with sickle cell disease enrolled in Medicaid (Title XIX). State Medicaid agencies and providers delivering education on RCC risk to this population are positioned to implement the change.
Why It Matters
By explicitly including RCC education in Medicaid’s incentive framework, the bill recognizes RCC as a relevant risk for a high-need group and embeds targeted education into covered services, which could support earlier awareness and potential surveillance for RCC among sickle cell patients.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Byron Nash Renal Medullary Carcinoma Awareness Act of 2023 would modify the federal Medicaid statute to require education about the risk of renal medullary carcinoma for people with sickle cell disease who receive Medicaid. The key technical change is to insert RCC into the list of items and services for which education or related incentives are provided under the Medicaid program.
This insertion occurs specifically in Section 1903(a)(3)(E)(ii) by placing 'renal medullary carcinoma' immediately after 'stroke' in the enumerated list. The bill states that these amendments apply to items and services furnished on or after the date of enactment, meaning the RCC education provision would become effective when the law takes effect.
The overarching intent is to formalize RCC risk education within Medicaid, ensuring that high-risk individuals have access to timely information as part of their ongoing medical assistance.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill amends Section 1903(a)(3)(E)(ii) to insert 'renal medullary carcinoma' after 'stroke' in the Medicaid list of covered incentives.
Education on RCC risk is designated as an incentive for individuals with sickle cell disease receiving Medicaid.
The amendments apply to items and services furnished on or after the date of enactment.
The primary beneficiary group is Medicaid-eligible individuals with sickle cell disease.
No explicit funding or new program is created; the change reframes existing incentive mechanisms to include RCC education.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short Title
This Act may be cited as the Byron Nash Renal Medullary Carcinoma Awareness Act of 2023. The short title provision names the bill for reference in legal and policy discussions.
Providing RCC education incentives under Medicaid
Section 1903(a)(3)(E)(ii) of the Social Security Act is amended by inserting 'renal medullary carcinoma' after 'stroke' in the list of items and services covered under Medicaid education incentives. The amendments are to apply to items and services furnished on or after the date of enactment. In practical terms, this changes the set of eligible education activities to include RCC risk information for the sickle cell population enrolled in Medicaid, aligning RCC awareness with other education incentives under the program.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Healthcare across all five countries.
Explore Healthcare in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Medicaid beneficiaries with sickle cell disease receive RCC risk education as part of their covered services, improving access to targeted information.
- State Medicaid agencies gain a clear statutory basis to implement RCC education initiatives within existing education incentive programs.
- Hospitals, clinics, and hematology/oncology departments serving Medicaid patients can integrate RCC education into patient encounters without creating new CPT-reported services.
- Public health organizations collaborating with Medicaid programs can align RCC awareness campaigns with federal incentives to reach high-risk populations.
Who Bears the Cost
- Medicaid programs may incur administrative costs to implement RCC education materials, provider training, and program monitoring.
- Healthcare providers providing RCC education may incur time and resource costs to deliver these targeted education activities.
- State health departments or Medicaid agencies could face oversight and evaluation costs to ensure compliance with the new incentive structure.
- Organizations developing or distributing RCC education materials may incur initial development and dissemination expenses.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
Balancing the desire to increase RCC awareness among a high-risk, relatively small population with the potential budgetary and administrative burden on Medicaid programs creates a tension between targeted public health benefits and the practical limitations of program implementation and funding.
The bill creates a targeted education incentive for a specific high-risk group but does not specify funding levels or detailed implementation mechanics. States will need to operationalize what constitutes RCC education and how it is integrated into existing incentives, which could lead to uneven adoption across jurisdictions.
Because RCC is a relatively rare cancer, the practical impact depends on how aggressively education is delivered and evaluated. The legislation also does not outline definitions, performance metrics, or penalties for noncompliance, leaving important questions about measurement, funding, and long-term sustainability to future rulemaking and agency discretion.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.