To amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, title XXVII of the Public Health Service Act, and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require group health plans and health insurance issuers offering group or individual health insurance coverage to provide for 3 primary care visits and 3 behavioral health care visits without application of any cost-sharing requirement.

What happened and its current status: On June 11, 2026, Rep. Underwood (D-IL-14) introduced HR9257. The bill was referred to three committees: Energy and Commerce, Education and Workforce, and Ways and Means. It has only 1 cosponsor. Action history shows identical referral entries—this is an early-stage procedural action. No hearings or markups scheduled.

The money trail: HR9257 authorizes zero federal spending. It imposes a coverage mandate on private health plans and employers. The funds come from premiums and employer contributions, not from government appropriations. Actual cost to the system depends on utilization rates and negotiated provider rates. The Congressional Budget Office would score this as a private-sector mandate, likely increasing premiums or reducing employer willingness to offer coverage. Since no funding is appropriated, there is no direct line to any federal contract or grant.

Structural winners and losers: Losers are health insurance carriers with large commercial membership—UnitedHealth Group is the largest. Smaller insurers like Humana ($HUM) or Cigna ($CI) are similarly exposed but not in the provided data. Primary care and behavioral health providers (HCA, Acadia, etc.) benefit from increased patient volumes, but the margin impact is diluted by insurance reimbursement rates. Employers self-funding plans also bear costs but are not publicly traded entities. The bill does not affect drug manufacturers ($JNJ, $LLY) directly.

Competitive landscape: Without real market data, we assess structural positioning. has the largest commercial and MA book—it faces the biggest absolute cost increase but also has Optum to capture downstream volume. The bill's early stage means no immediate stock impact. Historical precedent for similar benefit mandates (e.g., ACA preventive services) shows insurers eventually raised premiums to compensate, but the initial market reaction is negative.

Timeline: HR9257 faces a long path. Referral to three committees increases procedural hurdles. No companion bill in the Senate. With a divided 119th Congress and an election year, passage in current form is unlikely. Next steps: committee hearings (if scheduled) before full House vote. If it advances, it would need Senate companion and Presidential signature. Earliest possible enactment is late 2026 or 2027.