Previous:
14 Day Rule Part One:
Where Did It Come From? A Human vs AI Blog
https://www.discoveriesinhealthpolicy.com/2025/08/medicares-14-day-rule-where-did-it-come.html

Here:
14 Day Rule Part Two:
The Dramatic Novelization

Here’s a treatment for a historical novel on the “birth” of the 14-day rule—structured as if it were a sweeping, character-driven saga set in Washington, DC, 2005–2007. I’ve leaned into drama, irony, and bureaucratic comedy, with plenty of fictional characters (some archetypes, some satirical) to animate the story.

Novelistic Treatment: Fourteen Days

Setting

Washington, DC, 2005–2007. The backdrop is the Department of Health & Human Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) headquarters in Baltimore, Capitol Hill offices, K Street lobbying firms, and the sterile fluorescent-lit conference rooms where policy gets hammered out.

The mood: part The West Wing, part Catch-22, part Kafka, with touches of Armando Iannucci satire.

Main Characters

Eleanor Whitcomb (The Architect)
A seasoned CMS policy lawyer, idealistic but weary. She believes in harmonizing rules, yet fears that labs are finding too many cracks in the system.
Dr. Martin Kellner (The Scientist)
A molecular pathologist at Johns Hopkins, brilliant but impatient with bureaucratic delay. He sees firsthand how patients are harmed when hospitals hoard specimens under bundling rules.
Ralph “Bud” Crenshaw (The Lobbyist)
A gregarious former Hill staffer now lobbying for a coalition of independent labs. He believes every Medicare reg is negotiable with the right dinner and scotch.
Sister Margaret O’Connell (The Ethicist)
A nun and hospital compliance officer, who insists that hospitals must be fairly reimbursed but also that labs deserve recognition for lifesaving tests. She quotes Aquinas in committee meetings.
Victor Sloan (The Politician)
A mid-level Senate staffer whose boss chairs the Finance Committee. Victor knows nothing about genomics but everything about which MAC is headquartered in his boss’s state.
Carla Espinoza (The Patient Advocate)
A fiery Latina organizer, whose husband’s cancer recurrence went undetected because a genomic test couldn’t be billed under Medicare’s DOS rules. She storms every meeting demanding clarity.
The “Reg Writers” (Comic Chorus)
Three faceless CMS analysts—Janet, Theo, and Raj—who sit in a basement office drafting and redrafting the Federal Register notice, always bickering about commas, CFR cross-references, and whether “archived” means 30 or 31 days.

Act I: The Gathering Storm

1. CMS realizes its “date of service” manual instructions (DOS = collection date) are wreaking havoc. Hospitals are bundling claims, labs are screaming, and patients are caught in the crossfire.
Eleanor convenes a “listening session.” Around the table: Martin’s fury, Bud’s schmoozing, Sister Margaret’s theology, Carla’s tears, and Victor’s political warnings. The meeting collapses in acrimony.
The Reg Writers downstairs joke: “Why don’t we just flip a coin and call it the 14-and-a-half-day rule?”

Act II: Negotiation and Breakdown

Bud pulls strings, arranging late-night bar meetings between lab execs and Hill staffers. Deals are promised, none stick.
Martin tries to demonstrate a new tumor recurrence assay, but the CMS projector fails; no one sees the science.
Sister Margaret testifies to a congressional subcommittee, insisting the hospital’s moral duty is to care for patients, not hoard billing privileges. The press ignores her.
Carla organizes a march of cancer survivors outside CMS HQ, chanting “We need a Date! We need a Date!”
Eleanor drafts a proposed rule (August 22, 2006). Victor pressures her: “Pick a number. Congress won’t understand nuance.” Eleanor sighs, and with the stroke of a pen, 14 days is born.

Act III: The 14-Day Rule Emerges

The proposed rule lands in the Federal Register. Pandemonium ensues:
- Labs say 14 days is too long.
- Hospitals say 14 days is too short.
- Patients say 14 days is arbitrary.
- The Reg Writers argue about whether “14” should be spelled out (“fourteen”).
Public comment sessions become theatrical: Carla brings a coffin-shaped cake with “RIP Innovation.” Bud hands out cigars labeled “DOS Exception.”
Eleanor faces sleepless nights, caught between CMS lawyers citing bundling statutes and her conscience whispering patients deserve better.

Climax: December 1, 2006

After a bruising year of drafts, comments, and Hill interventions, the final rule is published. The DOS for archived specimens remains tied to 30 days, but for tests ordered 14+ days after discharge, the DOS shifts to the date of performance.
At the release meeting, the Reg Writers cheer ironically. Bud orders champagne. Martin mutters it’s progress but not enough. Carla vows to keep fighting.
Eleanor closes her binder, exhausted. “We’ve created something that will outlive us all. God help the labs who must explain it.”

Epilogue

2007–2017. The 14-day rule mutates, carving out exceptions for molecular pathology, sparking new lobbying wars.
Characters scatter: Bud to a think tank, Sister Margaret to Rome, Martin to industry, Eleanor to academia.
Carla narrates the final page: “It was never about fourteen days. It was about who controlled the future of medicine—hospitals, labs, or the people who needed the tests. The fight goes on.”

Tone and Themes

Comedy of Bureaucracy: Endless meetings, wordsmithing of Federal Register text, political horse-trading.
Moral Stakes: Patients waiting for life-saving tests.
Irony: A world-changing policy born not from science or ethics, but from an arbitrary compromise number—14.

Would you like me to write the opening chapter in full novelistic style (with dialogue, setting, inner thoughts), perhaps the chaotic first “listening session” at CMS where all these characters collide? That would give you a taste of how the treatment translates into narrative.

###

Great — here’s a novelistic opening chapter for Fourteen Days, set at the first CMS listening session in 2005–2006. It introduces the key fictional characters in scene, with dialogue, inner thought, and tone.

Chapter One: The Listening Session

The conference room on the third floor of CMS headquarters in Baltimore was too small for the occasion. Fluorescent lights hummed overhead, flickering slightly. The carpet smelled faintly of disinfectant, like a hospital that had been scrubbed at 5 a.m. and forgotten by noon. On the table sat stacks of briefing binders with a bold header:

DATE OF SERVICE: DEFINITIONS AND POLICY OPTIONS.

Eleanor Whitcomb adjusted her glasses and surveyed the mismatched delegation she had summoned. She was fifty-two, with the air of a woman who had spent too many years parsing commas in federal regulations. Her job, officially, was Deputy Director for Payment Policy. Unofficially, it was cat herder of the American laboratory economy.

“Thank you for coming,” she began, voice even. “Our purpose today is to discuss unintended consequences of the current Date of Service rules for laboratory tests.”

Dr. Martin Kellner leaned forward before she could finish. Tall, silver-haired, with an oncologist’s sharp intensity, he jabbed the table with a forefinger.

“Unintended? Eleanor, my patient needed a molecular assay for cancer recurrence. The hospital sat on her tissue block, and because of your rules, the lab couldn’t bill. She died waiting for clarity. That’s not unintended. That’s a failure.”

The room fell silent.

From the corner, Ralph “Bud” Crenshaw cleared his throat. He wore a silk tie patterned with little microscopes. He was a lobbyist’s lobbyist: tan in February, Rolex flashing whenever he gestured.

“Doctor, with respect, nobody’s disputing patient stories. But the issue is billing mechanics. Claims bundling, DRG overlap, carrier interpretations—Eleanor’s folks can’t fix cancer. They can fix policy. Let’s not lose sight of the prize.” He winked at Eleanor.

Carla Espinoza slammed a folder onto the table. Mid-thirties, fire in her voice, she carried herself like someone used to shouting at rallies.

“The prize? My husband couldn’t get a test that might have given him two more years. All because Medicare thinks a date on a claim form matters more than a life. You all talk about ‘bundling’ like it’s accounting. For me, it’s a funeral.”

Sister Margaret O’Connell, in her starched habit, spoke softly but cut through the noise. “The principle at stake,” she said, “is justice. The hospital bears costs, yes. The labs perform miracles, yes. The patient deserves truth, most of all. Aquinas said: Law without justice is a perversion of law.”

Bud groaned. “Here we go, Sister, quoting saints.”

Martin snapped back. “Better saints than lobbyists.”

At the far end, Victor Sloan, the Senate staffer, tapped his pen. He looked about twelve years old, though he was thirty. “Look,” he said, “my boss doesn’t care about Aquinas or billing systems. He cares about voters. And voters don’t understand why the same test is paid one way in Florida and another in Alaska. You need a simple rule.”

“Simple,” Eleanor repeated, rubbing her temples. “Yes. Simple.”

Behind her, in the corner, the Reg Writers—Janet, Theo, and Raj—typed furiously on a shared laptop, whispering.

“What if we just… pick a number?” Theo muttered. “Ten days? Fifteen?”

“Fourteen has a nice ring,” Raj said. “It’s biblical.”

Janet rolled her eyes. “You two are children. This is the Federal Register, not bingo night.”

Eleanor caught fragments of their bickering and almost laughed. Almost. Instead, she straightened her papers.

“Ladies and gentlemen,” she said, “this agency needs a national standard. One that avoids abuse, protects hospitals, allows labs to bill fairly, and does not disadvantage patients. That’s why we’re here.”

Carla folded her arms. Martin seethed. Bud checked his watch. Sister Margaret prayed silently. Victor texted his boss. The Reg Writers kept typing.

Eleanor looked around the table and knew, with sudden clarity, that whatever rule emerged from this chaos, it would be despised by everyone.

And that, perversely, was how she would know it might survive.

Would you like me to continue with Chapter Two, perhaps the late-night K Street bar scene where Bud (the lobbyist) woos Hill staffers into supporting the idea of a fixed “waiting period,” setting the stage for the infamous 14 days?

###

Chapter Two: K Street Arithmetic

The rain had been threatening all afternoon and finally committed around eight, slanting across K Street like a curtain being pulled. Inside The Laffer Curve—a bar that sold itself as a “policy tavern” with framed CBO charts on the walls—Bud Crenshaw had staked out the back booth. It was the same booth he’d used for a deficit deal in 2002 and a durable medical equipment fiasco in 2004. He swore the cushions still smelled faintly of appropriations.

“Over here,” he called, lifting his bourbon as Victor Sloan shook water from his jacket. A junior from Energy & Commerce trailed Victor, cheeks flushed from the cold. “You brought help.”

“This is Liv,” Victor said. “Smart, dangerous, and underpaid.”

Liv grinned, slid in, and set a legal pad on the table. “I’ve been told to observe and never tweet.”

“Then you’ll go far,” Bud said. “Drink?”

Before anyone could answer, two more arrived. Denise Park, a calm, surgical vice president from the Hospital Association, hair swept into a precise twist; and Nadia Ben-Ari, a coalition lead for the independent labs, her scarf still spangled with rain. Their eyes met like old adversaries at a chessboard.

“Folks,” Bud said, “this is the supper club. Only rule: we don’t pretend this is about anything but power and paperwork.”

“Patients?” Nadia asked.

“Patients are why paperwork matters,” Bud said quickly. “Sit.”

They settled, and the bartender—a veteran who knew the difference between a CR and an RFA—dropped off a round. On the wall behind them, a framed headline read: PAY-FOR GAP CLOSES HOURS BEFORE VOTE.

“Where are we?” Victor asked.

“Lost in the maze,” Bud said. “CMS wants a standard date of service. They’ve got the thirty-day ‘archive’ carve-out, but it doesn’t deal with post-discharge testing. Labs are getting strangled by hospital bundling. Hospitals are worried about unbundling the world.”

Denise folded her hands. “Hospitals are worried about fair payment for comprehensive care. You can’t yank pieces out of DRGs and pretend the economics still hold.”

“And labs are worried about not getting paid at all,” Nadia said. “A tissue block sits for two weeks, someone finally orders a test for a treatment decision—boom, claim hits a brick wall because the DOS gets dragged back to the inpatient date. Tell me that’s rational.”

Victor rubbed his eyes. “I need something a Senator can explain in twelve seconds, preferably six.”

Liv clicked her pen. “A waiting period,” she said. “Define a waiting period that signals: ‘This test is not part of the inpatient stay.’”

Denise shook her head. “A waiting period invites games. Collect the specimen Tuesday, order the test on Wednesday, call it separate—”

“Which is why it can’t be one day,” Bud cut in. “Look, we’ve tried polite letters. We’ve tried PowerPoints that made grown men cry. Nothing travels on Capitol Hill like a number. We pick a number that no one loves and everyone can live with.”

Nadia eyed him. “Seven?”

“Seven is a week,” Denise said. “Too easy to schedule around. Also sounds cute. Cute gets abused.”

“Twenty-one?” Nadia countered.

“Too long for oncology,” Liv said, surprising herself with the confidence in her voice. “Physicians don’t plan adjuvant therapy on Senate calendars.”

Bud leaned forward. “Fourteen. Two Sundays. It feels like we waited. It’s defensible.”

Silence. Victor ran it through the internal algorithm known only to staffers: constituent appetite x donor tolerance x op-ed mockery risk.

“Fourteen,” he said slowly, “I can sell. It’s common sense wrapped in an even number.”

Denise raised an eyebrow. “And the mechanics?”

Bud slid a stack of napkins into the center like he was dealing poker. “We attach conditions.”

Liv wrote while Nadia dictated, teeth worrying the cap of her pen between items:

Ordered by the patient’s physician at least fourteen days after discharge.
Could not reasonably have been ordered during the hospitalization.
Hospital procedure wasn’t performed for the purpose of collecting the specimen.

Denise frowned. “Purpose language is slippery.”

“Then we ladder it to clinical appropriateness,” Liv said, scribbling. “Medically inappropriate to collect the sample other than during the procedure.”

The test is reasonable and medically necessary.

“Of course,” Denise said. “That one’s a rosary bead in every paragraph.”

Bud tapped the last blank square. “And we decide what the new date of service is. ‘From storage’ gave us headaches. ‘Date of performance’ telegraphs that this is a post-hospital event.”

Victor nodded. “OMB will want the logic chain clean. Discharge—wait fourteen—new order—new DOS equals performance date.”

Nadia took a sip of her gin and stared at the napkin like it was a newborn. “Hospitals will scream.”

“They’ll complain,” Denise corrected. “Screaming is for radiologists.”

“We can sweeten,” Bud said. “A carve-out for rare situations—fresh tissue chemo sensitivity. Live cells, weeks of culture. Not inpatient-relevant. You get to say ‘patient-centric’ three times on cable.”

Denise weighed it. “You’ll put in language to avoid Swiss-cheesing DRGs?”

“Intent language,” Bud said. “We are very concerned about unbundling.” He smiled. “CMS loves being ‘very concerned.’”

A server leaned in with a basket of fries. The napkin migrated, dodging grease like a sail trimming to wind. Rain hammered the windows. Somewhere near the bar a retired actuary told a story about a 1999 conversion factor and everyone groaned on cue.

Victor’s phone buzzed. He glanced, held it to his chest. “My boss wants guardrails. He doesn’t want MSNBC saying we let labs upcode.”

“They can’t ‘upcode’ a lab test,” Nadia said. “They can misbill it, but that’s not—”

“He means headlines,” Liv translated. “We add documentation expectations to the Program Integrity Manual. Physician order. Discharge date. Clinical rationale. It reassures auditors.”

“Fine,” Bud said. “We hand CMS the script.”

They worked the napkin like it was a truce map. Denise swapped “could not reasonably have been ordered” for “would have been medically inappropriate to order,” then swapped it back after Nadia pointed out that “ordering” was the verb that mattered to claim edits. Liv drew arrows between conditions and wrote ‘calendar days’ in the margin.

“Why ‘calendar’?” Victor asked.

“Because if anyone says ‘business days,’ we’ll still be arguing on Presidents’ Day,” Liv said. “And you don’t want a hospital attorney explaining bank holidays to a judge.”

Bud laughed, warm and brief. “You’re going to terrify me into hiring you.”

Denise leaned back. “Hospitals need one more comfort. The test must not guide treatment provided during the hospital stay.”

Nadia considered, then nodded. “Add it. It’s true. These genomic panels don’t decide whether the surgeon closes with staples.”

Liv wrote the fifth condition in neat block letters and underlined it twice. The napkin now read like a CFR fever dream:

14 days post-discharge
Couldn’t reasonably be ordered inpatient
Collection not the purpose of the hospital procedure
Medically necessary
Does not guide treatment during the hospital stay
DOS = date of performance

“Eleanor won’t swallow this whole,” Victor said. “She’ll want to move a clause or two.”

“She can move the furniture,” Bud said. “Not the foundation.”

They sat with it, the way people sit with a decision they suspect will outlast them. The bartender passed by, glanced down, and shook his head. “Don’t write law on napkins,” he said. “Napkins get lost.”

“Federal Register will find it,” Bud said. “It always does.”

At 11:37 p.m., outside under an awning dripping like a metronome, Bud called Eleanor. She picked up on the third ring, voice low, office quiet.

“What did you build?” she asked.

“A bridge, maybe a trap,” Bud said. “Fourteen days. With conditions that look like common sense dressed for church.”

He read the list. Eleanor didn’t interrupt, which meant she was thinking ten moves ahead: claim edits, manual language, inevitable abuse, and the sentence that would be quoted back at her in litigation five years hence.

“‘Date of performance’ instead of ‘obtained from storage’?” she asked finally.

“It’s cleaner,” Bud said. “Also more truthful. The event happens when the test is done. That’s the day the money meets the road.”

Silence. Then: “OMB will ask why fourteen.”

“We’ll say two Sundays,” Bud said. “And the hospitals will agree it’s not seven. And oncology will agree it’s not twenty-one.”

Eleanor sighed. “I hate that this is how policy gets made.”

“By people in the rain?” Bud asked.

“By numbers that sound reasonable,” she said. “Send me your napkin.”

“It’s, ah, greasy.”

“Scan it. The grease is the legislative history.”

She hung up. Bud pocketed the napkin as if it were currency.

Across town, the Reg Writers sat in a diner that never closed. Janet stirred coffee, Theo ate eggs, Raj highlighted a printout of the manual section that would eventually become their cross to bear.

“Calendar days,” Janet said, circling the phrase on a draft. “Yes. Saves us from business day purgatory.”

Theo frowned. “Hyphenate ‘post-discharge’?”

“Not in the CFR section header,” Raj said without looking up. “We keep it clean.”

They spoke like mechanics around an engine: not loving the machine, but responsible for whether it started in the morning. Theo flipped the napkin scan on his phone and cringed at the ketchup halo around DOS = date of performance.

“Do you ever think,” he asked, “what happens to the people on the other side of these commas?”

Janet nodded once. “Every day,” she said. “It’s why the commas matter.”

Raj tapped the fifth condition. “This one—‘results do not guide treatment during the hospital stay’—that’s our firewall against unbundling.”

“It’s also true,” Janet said. “Truth is good policy from time to time.”

Theo smiled. “Write that in the preamble and see if OMB lets it through.”

They laughed, tired and gentle, and went back to work.

By midnight the rain had thinned to a mist. Victor and Liv shared a cab. She cradled her legal pad like a relic.

“You did well,” Victor said. “You found the words that make fourteen feel like a policy.”

“It’s just arithmetic,” she said.

“It’s politics pretending to be arithmetic,” he replied. “But it’ll do.”

Back in the booth, Denise and Nadia shook hands. Not warm, not cold—like adversaries who had agreed to a ruleset before the next round.

Outside, Bud pinned the napkin to the corkboard above his desk in the K Street office. A grease stain darkened the corner; a number sat in the middle, circled twice.

He sat down, opened an email, and began to translate the napkin into sentences that could survive lawyers, commenters, and history. Fourteen wasn’t a principle. Fourteen wasn’t science. Fourteen was a bridge over a river that wouldn’t stop rising.

He hit send.

And somewhere in Baltimore, a new paragraph began writing itself into the future.

[STOP]

Discoveries in Health Policy

Wednesday, August 20, 2025

14 Day Rule Part Two: The Dramatic Novel (AI)