NC bill seeks more public reporting of hospital charges and price guarantees for patients
A Senate bill would provide patients with more up-front information about hospital charges and would fine hospital CEOs whose facilities do not report their prices.
The Senate Health Committee on Wednesday approved Senate bill 316, called Lower Healthcare Costs.
'This bill is an attempt to shine a light on every part of the health care system to begin to see where the cost drivers truly exist and to start to tamp down on those costs,' said Sen. Amy Galey (R-Alamance), who is one of the bill's sponsors.
The bill focuses on hospitals and other health facilities.
Under the bill, hospitals would be largely prohibited from charging what are known as facility fees. Those are charges that may be added to bills when patients go to a hospital-owned clinics.
Health care facilities would have to send patients itemized lists of charges before sending unpaid bills to collections.
Hospitals and ambulatory care facilities would be required to provide quarterly reports on the costs of common procedures. CEOs would face fines of up to $2,000 a day for failure to comply.
In cases where patients are not experiencing health emergencies, health care facilities would have to provide them with 'good faith estimates' for each procedure. The final bills could not exceed the estimates by more than 5%.
A spokeswoman for the North Carolina Healthcare Association, which represents hospitals, said in an email that the organization is evaluating the bill and its potential impacts, and would communicate directly with senators.
Sen. Jim Burgin (R-Harnett), said greater price transparency will result in lower costs. People who don't need emergency medical care will have time to compare prices, he said.
'You ought to know what it's going to cost,' said Burgin, one of the bill sponsors. 'You ought to know if you're going to get a separate bill from the anesthesiologist, or the radiologist, or the lab, or anybody else.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
36 minutes ago
- CBS News
Medicaid cuts could devastate hundreds of rural hospitals in GOP states, Democrats say
Cuts to federal spending on Medicaid could affect hundreds of rural hospitals in many states that have elected Republican senators and voted for President Trump, Senate Democrats warned Thursday, citing a list they commissioned of rural hospitals in financial distress. "If Republicans plan to pass drastic cuts to Medicaid and Medicare and effectively repeal the Affordable Care Act, communities should know exactly what they stand to lose," Sen. Ed Markey, the top Democrat in the Senate's health committee, said in a statement. The warning from Senate Democrats, outlined in a letter sent to President Trump and Republican congressional leaders, comes as senators are now wrestling with the budget package that Mr. Trump dubbed the "big, beautiful bill," which narrowly passed the House last month. Budget analysts say a slew of changes that the House bill made to Medicaid provisions — which backers argue would target "excesses and abuses" in the program — could add up to reduced federal Medicaid spending by more than $800 billion over the next decade, resulting in 7.8 million more uninsured people. The American Hospital Association has warned Medicaid cuts being considered by Congress "could have a devastating impact on rural hospitals," which often face larger shares of patients without health insurance. "Rural hospitals serve as critical — and sometimes the sole — source of care for rural communities," the hospital lobbying group says. Democrats cited a list of at-risk rural hospitals that the University of North Carolina's Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research compiled at their request. "If your party moves ahead with these drastic health care cuts that will cut millions of people off their health insurance coverage, rural hospitals will not get paid for the services they are required by law to provide to patients. In turn, rural hospitals will face deeper financial strain," the Democrats' letter states. The center analyzed data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to compile a list of rural hospitals at the highest risk of financial distress, broken down by state and congressional district. "Republican health care cuts would be felt by rural hospitals across the country. In Louisiana, 32 rural hospitals — or a majority of rural hospitals in the state — are serving a high concentration of Medicaid patients. A total of 33 hospitals are at risk based on serving a high share of Medicaid patients, experiencing negative total margins, or both," Democrats wrote. Louisiana is the home state of Sen. Bill Cassidy, the top Republican on the Senate health panel. The letter also itemized rural hospitals at risk in Alaska, Kentucky, West Virginia, Alabama and Tennessee. "Substantial cuts to Medicaid or Medicare payments could increase the number of unprofitable rural hospitals and elevate their risk of financial distress. In response, hospitals may be forced to reduce service lines, convert to a different type of healthcare facility, or close altogether," wrote University of North Carolina researchers Mark Holmes, George Pink and Tyler Malone in their responses to the Democrats.
Bloomberg
2 hours ago
- Bloomberg
Republicans May Find They Need to Get Behind the ACA
House Republicans' reconciliation bill seeks to pay for $5 trillion of tax cuts by slashing health-care spending, potentially leaving millions of Americans uninsured. The job of averting this self-inflicted disaster now falls to the Senate. The legislation seeks to cut $793 billion from Medicaid, the health program for the poor. Half this sum will come from requiring beneficiaries under 65 to work, look for employment or volunteer, with some exemptions. The new rules are slated to start in late 2026 — moved up from 2029 — after some lawmakers objected that savings wouldn't materialize soon enough.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Cassidy in a bind as RFK Jr. blows up vaccine policy
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has put Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) in a political bind, squeezed by his loyalty to President Trump and commitment to medicine. Cassidy, the chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, publicly wavered over Kennedy's confirmation, sharply criticizing his views before eventually voting for him. Cassidy said he secured a series of promises about vaccine safety, including for Kennedy to not undercut public confidence in vaccines. 'If Mr. Kennedy is confirmed, I will use my authority … to rebuff any attempts to remove the public's access to lifesaving vaccines without ironclad, causational scientific evidence that can be defended before the mainstream scientific community and before Congress,' Cassidy said on the Senate floor in February, just after he voted to advance Kennedy's nomination out of committee. Cassidy said Kennedy also pledged to keep in place a pivotal independent advisory panel on vaccine policy. 'If confirmed, [Kennedy] will maintain the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) without changes,' Cassidy said. On Monday, Kennedy fired the entire 17-member panel, arguing a 'clean sweep' was needed to purge conflicts of interest and help restore trust in vaccinations and public health. The move was an unprecedented escalation in Kennedy's quest to reshape the nation's vaccine policy and seemingly ignored one of the key promises Cassidy said he extracted from the longtime anti-vaccine activist. However, the second-term Louisiana senator and medical doctor did not publicly confront the Kennedy this week, pointing to his political vulnerabilities as he runs for reelection in 2026 and hopes to survive the deep red state's GOP primary. Robert Hogan, department chair and political science professor at Louisiana State University, said it seems clear that Kennedy is playing Cassidy for a fool — but that won't matter to GOP primary voters. 'You would think that that would hurt him electorally, but … I think ultimately, what could have hurt him is if he had stuck with his professional standards and the standards of the medical community' and spoken out against Kennedy, Hogan said. 'Keep in mind that in Louisiana, just a few days ago voted to make ivermectin available without a prescription. … Republicans are all in on this kind of thing and in that kind of environment, especially in a nomination battle where they are going to be the vast majority of people voting … it doesn't pay at all to push Kennedy on these matters,' Hogan said. Cassidy spent three decades as a practicing gastroenterologist before being elected to the House in 2009 and the Senate six years later. He won his 2020 election in a landslide, but he committed a cardinal sin in today's Republican party when, in 2021, he voted to convict Trump of impeachment for trying to incite a riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6. After his vote against Trump, state Republicans changed the rules to create a closed primary, where only Republicans and people who aren't registered in any other party can vote. Since Trump's reelection, Cassidy has tried to make amends. He's supported every controversial Cabinet nominee and touted his visits to the White House to brief Trump. Cassidy reported raising $1.36 million during the first quarter of 2025 with $7.5 million cash on hand. His campaign said it was the most ever by an incumbent Louisiana senator at this early stage in the campaign. Trump has so far largely stayed quiet on the race, but The Associated Press reported last month that Trump and Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry (R) have discussed having the president support Rep. Julia Letlow (R) as a primary challenger to Cassidy. State Treasurer John Fleming (R), a former House member who is also a medical doctor, has already launched his primary campaign against Cassidy. Hogan said Fleming is a formidable opponent. 'If it comes down to, they're equal on every other dimension except [Fleming] did not vote to impeach Trump? That's the message, I think that will come through very clear to Republican voters,' Hogan said. Cassidy declined to comment for this article. He hasn't said much about Kennedy's latest move, telling reporters only that he is having conversations with the secretary. He also wouldn't say if Kennedy violated their agreement and instead pointed to a social media post. 'Of course, now the fear is that the ACIP will be filled up with people who know nothing about vaccines except suspicion,' Cassidy wrote on the social platform X. 'I've just spoken with Secretary Kennedy, and I'll continue to talk with him to ensure this is not the case.' Firing ACIP members is far from the first time Kennedy has flouted Cassidy's guardrails. Earlier this month, Kennedy bypassed ACIP entirely when he declared pregnant women and healthy children don't need COVID-19 vaccines. He canceled hundreds of millions of dollars in mRNA vaccine contracts and forced out the head of the Food and Drug Administration's vaccines division. As part of his commitment to Cassidy, Kennedy agreed to testify upon request on a quarterly basis. Yet he declined to do so when Cassidy requested a hearing in April following massive layoffs at HHS. Instead, he testified weeks later during a budget hearing on the HHS appropriations request. Cassidy pointed out it was the first time 'in at least two decades' an HHS secretary testified to the HELP Committee about a budget request. Before the start of the hearing, Cassidy gave Kennedy a clear sign of support when he walked to the front of the hearing room and shook Kennedy's hand in front of a barrage of cameras. While Cassidy largely avoided the issue of vaccines during the hearing, Democrats did not. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) accused Kennedy of misleading senators and the public about his support for vaccines. 'If I were the chairman, who believes in vaccines and voted for you because he believed what you said about supporting vaccines, my head would be exploding,' Murphy said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
