Washington, D.C., March 19, 2026 – On Wednesday, the House Ways and Means Health Subcommittee held a hearing examining advances in kidney care, Medicare payment reforms for End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD), and the importance of health care solutions tailored to the needs of patients, including facilitating transplantation and home dialysis. The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) praised the subcommittee for highlighting the desperate need for innovation and reform in the kidney care space, and cautioned that the Restore Protections for Dialysis Patients Act (The RESTORE Act), is both redundant and misguided and could drive up premiums, making care more costly.
“With more than 150 million people receiving health insurance through their employer, plan sponsors are continually seeking out innovative treatments and better outcomes for individuals with kidney disease. Similarly, employers also take their existing legal obligations seriously to ensure that patients have access to health coverage and continuity of benefits,” said Melissa Bartlett, Senior Vice President of Health Policy for ERIC. “Those laws, some of which have been on the books for more than 50 years, are why the RESTORE Act is not only misnamed but misstates and misrepresents the roles and responsibilities of the employers who are helping patients and their families navigate ESRD care. Instead, the RESTORE Act threatens to drastically increase health insurance costs and worsens the affordability crisis for working families.”
In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court in Marietta Memorial Hospital v. DaVita rejected DaVita’s claim, ruling that a group health plan does not violate the law by offering low reimbursement rates for outpatient dialysis, as long as the plan treats all patients equally, whether or not they have ESRD. In its decision, the court retained other patient protections, including the requirement that group health plans must cover dialysis as the primary payer for 30 months, and that employers cannot terminate coverage, limit benefits, or raise premiums due to an ESRD diagnosis or Medicare eligibility. Kidney care providers have erroneously claimed the decision will lead to less care by employers – a claim that has been repeatedly disproven by market surveys. In response to the Supreme Court loss, the dialysis industry drafted the RESTORE Act, which has failed to advance in Congress in part because congressional scorekeepers have found that it would increase health care costs on working families by tens of billions of dollars.
Bartlett added, “DaVita and Fresenius, which together operate roughly 80% of all kidney treatment facilities, argue that the RESTORE Act provides a remedy for the Marietta decision, which they falsely claim is prompting employers to drop coverage for patients with ESRD. The reality is that the RESTORE Act is little more than snake oil being used to manipulate policymakers into thinking that they have to solve a problem that does not and will not exist. If passed, dialysis companies would receive higher reimbursements and increased profits, while families on employer-sponsored health plans would face higher premiums. Families can’t afford the RESTORE Act. Instead, Congress and the Federal Trade Commission should look into the consolidated dialysis care market, and consider remediating actions.”