Now that the suspense around the Jan. 19 government funding deadline is easing, the focus for health care dealmakers is shifting to the new funding deadlines of March 1 and 8, Peter reports.

Why it matters: Assuming the CR passes this week, March could be the last chance for any significant health care provisions until the lame duck session.

• That means lawmakers will be jockeying for everything from PBM reforms to price transparency to a narrow site neutral hospital payment overhaul.

What they're saying: House Energy and Commerce Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers told Peter after a GOP conference meeting this morning that health care talks are occurring with the Senate, though there is no certain path forward yet.

• The site neutral provision, which applies only to physician-administered drugs, was included in the House's health cost transparency bill but faces a rocky outlook in the Senate. The Senate Finance Committee has not formally considered the policy and hospitals strenuously oppose it.
• As for site neutral chances in the Senate, Rodgers said: "We're in active negotiation, there's a lot of momentum, we're going to keep working it."

Between the lines: Senate HELP Chairman Bernie Sanders has also been championing significantly increased funding for community health centers, which could pose a stumbling block in negotiations with the House.

• The CR unveiled over the weekend included another temporary funding extension for the health centers, until March 8. A longer-term extension could come then, if lawmakers can agree on how much.
• Sanders's ambitious primary care bill with GOP Sen. Roger Marshall laid down a marker for a major funding increase, but that measure has long odds and still is not fully paid for.
• "It's a great idea; it's a great concept: expanding primary care opportunities for people across America," Marshall told Axios last week when asked about the bill's prospects. "But it's tough up here to find any money right now."

The bottom line: Some PBM changes and price transparency measures could be easier to agree on, though the Senate would go farther regulating PBMs than the House-passed transparency bill does.

• Doctors had also been pushing for relief this month from Medicare payment cuts that took effect at the start of the year. Now, it looks like that won't happen at least until March.
• Any asks that don't make it in March might have to wait until a post-election session in December, when expiring Medicare telehealth flexibilities could help force action.

CMS finalized a rule today aimed at streamlining the prior authorization process for medical goods and services — a perennial cause for physicians who say it imposes excessive administrative burdens and have repeatedly pressed Congress for relief, Axios' Adriel Bettelheim reports.

Why it matters: The new requirements could save about $15 billion over a decade and significantly reduce the cost of a Medicare Advantage prior authorization fix.

Driving the news: Under the rule, federally funded insurers starting in 2026 would have 72 hours to approve or deny urgent requests for procedures, services or prescriptions and seven days to consider standard requests. Some MA plans and Medicaid managed care plans now have up to 14 days for a standard decision.

• The payers also would be required to include a specific reason for denying a request, to facilitate resubmission of the request or an appeal.
• The rule also lays out technical standards to ensure a more efficient electronic prior authorization process.
• Managed care organizations would also have to publicly post prior authorization denial rates.

Flashback: The House in 2022 passed a prior authorization reform package that later stalled over cost concerns.

• Since then, there's been increased scrutiny of Medicaid managed care plans, some of which were found to have high rates of prior authorization denials.

The other side: Insurers say prior authorization is needed to control costs and make sure care is effective and efficient.

• AHIP, the big Washington trade group for health plans, backs electronic prior authorization as a way to improve the system.