Dr. Mehmet Oz sought to reassure a skeptical Senate yesterday as he testified before the Finance Committee in support of his nomination to lead the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, a post that oversees health coverage for more than 150 million Americans. The hearing focused on the agency’s central responsibilities — controlling Medicare spending, protecting Medicaid access for low-income families, negotiating drug prices and regulating a sprawling marketplace of private plans and providers.

“I will put beneficiaries first,” Oz told the committee, stressing that his priorities would be patient access, fraud reduction and modernizing technology at the agency. He said he would “follow the science and the law” in decisions involving coverage and medical standards, and highlighted plans to expand telehealth and streamline enrollment for vulnerable populations.

Republican senators generally praised Oz’s communication skills and medical background, describing him as someone who could bridge public understanding and policy. “Dr. Oz has the energy and public presence to bring CMS into the 21st century,” one GOP member said. Democrats countered with sustained skepticism, pressing him on specifics and past statements that they argued signaled a lack of experience managing a complex federal agency.

Committee Democrats repeatedly asked for concrete policy positions on high-stakes questions: whether he would support robust Medicare negotiations to lower prescription drug prices, how he would enforce Medicaid’s requirement for essential services amid state variation, and what steps he would take to prevent churn in coverage during eligibility determinations. “We need real answers about whether you will defend beneficiaries’ access to care,” a Democratic committee member said, pointing to proposed rule changes and budget pressures that could narrow coverage.

Conflict-of-interest concerns framed many exchanges. Senators noted Oz’s decades as a television figure and private-sector relationships, asking for assurance that personal financial interests would not affect CMS policy. Oz pledged to divest or recuse where necessary and to comply with ethics requirements, but Democrats pressed for specifics, seeking documentation of proposed divestitures and a timeline for compliance.

Policy analysts said the hearing underscored the real-world stakes of the nomination. CMS sets reimbursement rates that influence hospital and physician behavior, shapes coverage rules that determine which treatments patients receive under Medicare and Medicaid, and oversees the Medicare Advantage marketplace that now enrolls a growing share of beneficiaries. Shifts in CMS policy on drug price negotiation, prior authorization, or state flexibility could directly affect premiums, out-of-pocket costs, provider networks and the fiscal outlook for federal and state budgets.

The partisan tenor of the hearing suggested a difficult road to confirmation. Committee debate is expected to proceed to a vote that could be closely divided along party lines, raising the prospect that confirmation may hinge on a narrow Senate majority. Congressional dynamics and the priorities of interest groups — from hospital associations to patient advocates and drug makers — will shape the next phase.

For beneficiaries, the immediate question is practical: will leadership changes at CMS yield clearer access, lower drug costs and fewer administrative hurdles, or will policy shifts increase financial strain? Senators pressed Oz on those tangible effects throughout the hearing, signaling that any nomination will be evaluated not on rhetoric but on detailed plans and enforceable commitments. The committee has requested additional documents, and lawmakers said further hearings or briefings may follow before a final Senate vote.