US House Bill Introduced to Stop ICD-10

A bill has been introduced into the US House of Representatives that would stop the implementation of ICD-10-CM/PCS.

The bill, H.R. 2126, “Cutting Costly Codes Act of 2015,” would “prohibit the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) from replacing ICD-9 with ICD-10 in implementing the HIPAA code set.” Introduced by Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX-2) on April 30, H.R. 2126 has been referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Ways and Means.

Rep. Poe is a long-time opponent of the ICD-10 implementation. In 2013 he introduced the same bill into the House of Representatives on April 24, 2013, H.R. 1701, that also called for prohibiting HHS from replacing ICD-9 with ICD-10.  That bill failed to gain traction and was never taken up by the referred House committees, according to

H.R. 2126 could face similar difficulty getting through the committee process and to the House floor for a vote. Rep. Poe is not on either referred committee, so would need to get a critical mass number of co-sponsors to support the bill, or find a champion on one of the two committees, for H.R. 2126 to even be considered by the Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means Committees.

The Committee on Energy and Commerce already held an ICD-10 related hearing in February, with several senior committee members stating their support for ICD-10. It could be unlikely the committee would hold another hearing on ICD-10. In addition, the Ways and Means Committee historically has been supportive of ICD-10 implementation, which may hinder support for H.R. 2126, according to Margarita Valdez, senior director of congressional relations at AHIMA.

If taken up by one of the committees, a hearing would take place to debate the bill and possibly add amendments or modifications. If the bill still has support, it would be sent to the House floor for a vote.

H.R. 2126 is co-sponsored by Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-TX), Rep. Mike D. Rogers (R-AL), Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL), Rep. Morgan H. Griffith (R-VA), Rep. Tom Price (R-GA), and Rep. David P. Roe (R-TN).

AHIMA and the Coalition for ICD-10 have called on ICD-10 supporters to continue their advocacy efforts and contact their representatives and senators to prevent any future delay of ICD-10. To aid with this effort, AHIMA has pointed supporters to its Advocacy Assistant at


  1. It should not be delayed any further. If ICD-10 have to implement it should be now. If rest of the world has deployed ICD-10 than there is no point for USA to stand behind. It should be on OCT 1st.

    Post a Reply
    • Rest of the world doesn’t benefit from ICD-10 nor some even bother with ICD-9 either such as Newsland. ICD-10 is an unnecessary, costly and destructive burden to small businesses and patient access in such a difficult time. It must be stopped or amended for small practices to still use ICD-9. Cost to small practices which are already down is unacceptable and blindly impractical. This is a business decision to advocate bigger practices and we all know that.

      Post a Reply
    • NO, to delaying ICD-10 implementation. YES, to 2 year non-penalty phase post October 1, 2015 implementation. YES, to new bill has been introduced into the US House of Representatives that calls for a required ICD-10 transition period following the code set’s implementation on October 1. The bill, H.R. 2247, the Increasing Clarity for Doctors by Transitioning Effectively Now Act (ICD-TEN Act), would “require the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to provide for transparent testing to assess the transition under the Medicare fee-for-service claims processing system from the ICD-9 to the ICD-10 standard, and for other purposes.”
      The bill, introduced on May 12 by Rep. Diane Black (R-TN-6), would not halt or delay the October 1, 2015 implementation deadline for using ICD-10-CM/PCS, nor would it require the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to accept dual coding—claims coded in either ICD-9 or ICD-10. However, the bill would require HHS to conduct “comprehensive, end-to-end testing” to assess whether the Medicare fee-for-service claims processing system based on the ICD-10 standard is fully functioning. HHS would be required to make the end-to-end testing process available to all providers of services and suppliers participating in the Medicare fee-for-service program.
      Not later than 30 days after the date of completion of the end-to-end testing process the HHS Secretary would be required to submit to Congress a certification on whether or not the Medicare fee-for-service claims processing system based on the ICD-10 standard is fully functioning.
      HHS would need to prove that it is processing and approving at least as many claims as it did in the previous year using ICD-9. If the transition is not deemed “functional” based on this benchmark, HHS would need to identify additional steps that it would take to ensure ICD-10 is fully operational in the near future, according to the bill.
      During an 18-month transition period and any ensuing extensions, no reimbursement claim submitted to Medicare could be denied due solely to the “use of an unspecified or inaccurate subcode,” according to the bill.

      Post a Reply
    • Well, USA’s ICD-10 is behind 10 year, the implementation of it must be stopped, and wait to implement ICD-11 on 2016, it would be a redundancy on costs.

      Post a Reply
      • I am attending Kaplan University for an Associates Degree in the Science of Health Information Technology and I have been taught the Legal Aspects of Healthcare Information and I have been taught about HIPPA and ICD-10-CM/PCS. Meaningful Use held a fair campaign to improve Medicare and help the Providers. All security must be up-to-date and this was part of the agreement. The United States taxpayers paid to make healthcare advancements to improve healthcare and healthcare security. If amendments need to be made to HIPPA, so be it. Why should we take steps backwards? We should keep moving forward and catch up with the rest of the world.

        Post a Reply


  1. H.R. 2126: Another New Bill About ICD-10. Again. | Appeal Academy - […] According to Margarita Valdez, Senior Director of Congressional Relations at AHIMA, there appears to be little support for the…
  2. ICD-10 Implementation Freeze Proposed by House Bill – RevCycleIntelligence | Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services IT News - […] Services (HHS) from replacing ICD-9 with ICD-10 within HIPAA code set standards implementation, confirms the American Health Information Management…
  3. MDS of Kansas | US House Bill Introduced to Stop ICD-10 - […] Dimick, Editor-in-chief  at the Journal of AHIMA. This article was originally published on the Journal of AHIMA website on…
  4. ICD-10 two-year grace period proposed to congress June 8, 2015 | Health Tec Systems - […] was introduced by Rep. Diane Black (R-TN-6) calling for an ICD-10 transition period. On April 30, H.R. 2126, the…

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *