On Wednesday, lawmakers and health policy experts gathered in Washington D.C. for the House health subcommittee’s hearing on the use of AI in healthcare.
Below are three of the main topics they discussed during the hearing.
Expanding practical uses of AI in healthcare
In his opening remarks, Representative Morgan Griffith (R-Virginia), who chairs the House health subcommittee, focused on the importance of supporting providers and reducing red tape.
He mentioned several areas where AI is already demonstrating promise in healthcare. On the research side of things, Griffith noted that AI can accelerate drug discovery and speed up clinical trial recruitment, which could help patients gain access to new therapies more quickly.
As for administrative use cases, he highlighted tools that allow for more accurate claims processing for payers and reduce the paperwork burden on clinicians. Griffith argued that these types of improvements could free up clinicians to spend more time focusing on their patients rather than being mired in back-office tasks.
Representative Nick Langworthy (R-New York) also emphasized AI’s potential to close care gaps in rural communities. He noted that the technology is starting to expand diagnostic capabilities in these areas, as well as give patients access to specialty expertise without having to drive for hours.
Additionally, Representative Diana Harshbarger (R-Tennessee) discussed how AI could improve care coordination between pharmacists and physicians, particularly in rural areas where pharmacists are people’s most accessible providers.
She argued that better data sharing, powered by AI, could help pharmacists play a larger role in managing chronic disease and ensuring patients’ medication adherence.
Concerns about oversight
Several members of Congress were adamant about the idea that AI should augment the work done by clinicians rather than replace it. They stressed that healthcare organizations need better oversight to ensure a human is always in the loop when it comes to clinical AI tools.
Representative Brett Guthrie (R-Kentucky) — who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which oversees the health subcommittee — framed this issue as a matter of patient trust, saying that “human judgment must remain at the center of care.”
Representative Diana DeGette (D-Colorado) echoed Guthrie’s remarks, warning that an overreliance on AI could erode the physician–patient relationship if the correct oversight mechanisms aren’t established.
Some leaders also raised doubts about whether the FDA currently has sufficient authority to effectively regulate AI-powered medical products.
Michelle Mello, a health policy scholar at Stanford University, pointed out that the FDA’s existing frameworks were designed for static technologies — not algorithms that continuously learn and evolve. Without stronger post-market surveillance, she said the industry risks “putting products into practice that drift away from their intended safety and effectiveness profiles.”
Worries about AI’s use in prior authorization
Lawmakers expressed caution about AI-powered prior authorization systems, especially within Medicare Advantage plans. Payers are increasingly using AI to automate claims reviews, which boosts their profits through predictive denials but often limits patients’ access to care.
CMS has initiated a pilot program to introduce AI into prior authorization for traditional Medicare services that have been identified as high-risk for abuse. However, Mello warned that requiring a human reviewer isn’t enough — she said “they could be ‘primed’ by AI to accept denials,” essentially just rubber-stamping machine decisions.
Representative Greg Landsman (D-Ohio) strongly criticized the pilot and called for it to be shut down until better guardrails are in place. He highlighted the perverse incentive for companies to deny more claims.
“You get more money if you’re that AI tech company if you’re able to deny more and more claims. That is going to lead to people getting hurt,” Landsman declared.
Photo: Mike Kline, Getty Images
