In 2024, more than a third of the bills presented came into conflict or doubled existing rules, which demonstrates that they were made without paying attention to the need for legislative innovation and the articulation with current public policies, including decrees and other regulations of the executive. Of 585 bills that are related to public health policies, 26% were classified as contrast situations and 11% as overlap, according to the Political Health Radar Study, presented by the Institute of Health Policy Studies (IEPs). 
The survey noticed the overlap and attributed it to a set of factors: the emptying of the role of the committees that evaluate the proposals; the lack of specialization of offices, which work on various topics; and the absence or difficulty of establishing dialogue with technical bodies, such as the advisors of ministries. With this set of difficulties, it tends to grow the number of meaningless propositions, which overlap or contradict public policies already implemented, which is considered waste of time and public resources, without integration with consolidated policies or the logic of operation of the Unified Health System (SUS), for example.
The study also shows that 40% of legislative proposals in the area complement existing public policies, but do not generate structural strengthening of SUS. Less than 10% of projects in each Legislative House are dedicated to structuring health system improvements.
This type of conflict is not only with matters that are processed in the house, but often with infralegal rules and rules of executive bodies, such as rules for authorizing high -cost drugs or programs that have been active years, regulated by decrees or other direct tools. “It is commendable that you want to turn into law a program that has worked, that we have seen that it has worked. But sometimes this process plays measures that would not need to be in laws. When you turn a measure into law, you cast the process, make these standards be harder to adapt to new evidence that arises,” explains Julia Pereira, IEPS Institutional Relations Manager.
The study also defends the view that the National Congress plays a central role in public policies, but should play a role as protagonist in the improvement of public health, and the excess proposal makes this performance difficult. “In addition to parliamentarians acting as spokespersons of local demands, at crucial times, such as during the pandemic, it is essential that Congress is agile in approving essential measures for the confrontation of challenges, such as the creation of emergency plans, aimed at a more structured approach,” Pereira, remembering the importance of the House by approving Law 8.080, which created important measures and measures. at crucial moments, such as Covid’s pandemic 19.
Specific conditions
The survey also evaluated those intended for proposals and identified that only 19% of projects focus on specific populations, with low attention to historically neglected groups such as blacks, indigenous and women. Only 249 of the 1,314 propositions analyzed were classified as aimed at specific audiences. Of them, 38 deal with women’s health (15%). Groups such as indigenous peoples, homeless population and traditional communities follow with residual presence, representing less than 3% of the total. The publication concluded that “the low legislative priority for these populations contrasts with structural inequalities that directly impact their health conditions.”
