Bills that would give more power to Broward health districts are going nowhere — this year
With less than two weeks left in Florida's Legislative session, proposed bills that would have given sweeping new powers to Broward County's public health districts have no chance of advancing.
The bills would have allowed Broward County's two taxpayer-supported hospital districts — Broward Health and Memorial Healthcare System — to go into a for-profit or not-for-profit business together without fear of violating state or federal antitrust laws.
Neither the House version (HB 1253) nor the Senate version (SB 1518) of the health district bills were heard by a committee, which is required before they can move to the full House and Senate for debate and a vote. Only a bill that passes both chambers is sent to the Governor for consideration.
In Tallahassee and Broward County, the bills had strong opposition. Close to 1,800 Memorial Healthcare System employees, physicians, and residents signed an online petition expressing their objection. Additionally, competitor HCA Florida, which has five hospitals in Broward County, hired a lobbyist in Tallahassee to oppose the proposed bills.
The health districts had lobbyists pushing for the bills, including Ron Book, who said the bills are needed so the Broward health districts can compete in the changing marketplace. On Wednesday, Book said, 'The bills are largely not in play right now, but nothing is dead until it's dead. Sometimes it takes more than one session to pass something.'
Added Book: 'The enemy of Broward taxpayers is HCA. They think they should be the only ones who have the ability to compete, irrespective of the quality of healthcare the two districts provide, and regardless of people's ability to pay. The districts are the most complete providers of healthcare in the community and when do not allow them to compete together, you've done nothing but hurt the community, and that is what HCA is doing.'
Broward is the only county in Florida with two public health districts and a mandate to care for all patients regardless of their ability to pay. Within the county, Broward Health's district is roughly north of Griffin Road and Memorial's is south.
Sen. Bryan Avila, R-Hialeah, who sponsored the Senate version of the health district bill, claims circumstances, not politics, are to blame for its failure in the 2025 session.
'It's the legislative process,' Avila said. 'I was activated for the presidential support mission in D.C., so I was away for a little bit. You also had the week that (Tallahassee) was snowed in. A lot of things got kind of jammed up … Typically legislation takes anywhere from three to four years.'
'I think just having that initial conversation is a step forward, and next year we'll take another step forward,' he said.
Rep. Hillary Cassel, R-Dania Beach, who sponsored the House version, did not respond to a request for comment. Cassel previously told the South Florida Sun Sentinel that she introduced the House bill after conversations with leadership at Broward's health systems, considering it a way to allow the safety-net hospitals that serve disadvantaged communities to be more innovative and collaborative.
However, the board chairs of both the North Broward Hospital District (Broward Health) and the South Broward Hospital District (Memorial Healthcare System) told the South Florida Sun Sentinel they had not read the bills before they were proposed and were not fully aware of the intent.
The bills have sparked a furor among Memorial employees, in part because they surfaced soon after a round of layoffs and demotions. An online petition at change.org to stop the bills titled 'Say NO to HB 1253 / SB 1518' has been signed by close to 1,800 people, many fearful of losing their jobs. The petition asserts that the bills would give Shane Strum 'unchecked authority' and allow him 'to transform a public healthcare system into a corporate machine.'
Seven months ago, Strum, CEO of Broward Health, became the interim CEO of Memorial. His short tenure at the helm of Memorial has been tumultuous, with directors demoted, employees laid off, physician contracts shortened and a new performance plan initiated. Employees claim that Strum is dismantling the health system and eroding morale.
One of those firings has led to a lawsuit. Dr. Aharon Sareli, Memorial Executive Vice President and Chief Medical Officer, whom Strum terminated in February, has sued Memorial Healthcare System for breach of contract, unilaterally eliminating his position, duties and compensation and not providing the agreed-upon severance. The health system's attorneys have not yet responded to the lawsuit, but Memorial Board Chair Elizabeth Justen said Sareli had resigned.
Justen has repeatedly said Strum is carrying out the board's directive to eliminate redundancies and make Memorial more efficient. 'That's what well-run companies do,' she said.
'People get comfortable, and they were comfortable with us not moving forward,' she said. 'It is our job to look to the future and to see where we go next, and we are trying to do it as transparently as we can.'
Justen said the bills' failure does not prevent collaboration. 'It will not stop us from doing what we already have in our charter,' she said. 'We're going to continue working together with Broward Health. We are going to move forward with everything we can do together.'
Employees express fear that Strum wants to merge the two independent, long-standing, publicly funded health systems.
For decades, Memorial has been financially stable and operated without competition, unlike Broward Health, which has significant competition and has struggled financially, Memorial employees say. In their petition, they note that Memorial just had its best year in its financial history.
In an opinion piece for the South Florida Sun Sentinel, Strum defended the proposed bills and his goals. 'Legislative proposals being discussed in Tallahassee don't merge our systems; that would require a lengthy public process. Instead, they expand what we're already doing, which is working together to stretch resources further,' he wrote. 'At Memorial, we've trimmed redundancies, affecting 0.5% of our 17,500-strong team, while protecting physician roles and adding new facilities. Growth, not cuts, defines our path.'
Steve Sampier, a retired community services director for Memorial Healthcare System, said the proposed bills would have met with less resistance locally if Strum was not leading both health systems.
'It's hard for one person to be loyal to both systems at the same time,' Sampier said. 'Memorial and Broward Health already have partnerships, and if they want to do more, bring in a healthcare professional to be CEO of Memorial with expertise in partnerships. Then it might make sense, but this looks like a political game.'
South Florida Sun Sentinel writer Steve Bousquet contributed to this report.
Do you have comments or insights on Memorial Healthcare System or Broward Health? Contact South Florida Sun Sentinel health reporter Cindy Goodman at cgoodman@sunsentinel.com or 954-304-5908.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Hamilton Spectator
31 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Permitless concealed carry in North Carolina faces uphill battle after some GOP pushback
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — A bill to let adults carry concealed handguns without a permit cleared the North Carolina legislature on Wednesday, however the path to joining the majority of U.S. states with similar laws remains uncertain. The GOP-backed legislation faces a likely veto from Democratic Gov. Josh Stein, as well as pushback from a handful of Republicans who voted against the legislation in the state House. House Speaker Destin Hall acknowledged those concerns after Wednesday's vote. 'I would imagine that — math being math — that it's probably a low percentage relative to other bills,' Hall told reporters. If the bill becomes law, North Carolina would become the 30th state in the country to legalize permitless carrying of a concealed handgun, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. North Carolina would also be one of the last states in the Southeast to implement that legislation. The legislation allows for eligible people with valid identification over the age of 18 to carry a concealed handgun. More than half of states with permitless concealed carry set their age limit at 21 and older, while the rest have the legal carrying age at 18, according to the NCSL. Currently, a person must be 21 and older to obtain a concealed handgun permit in North Carolina. To qualify, an applicant must pass a firearms safety training course and not 'suffer from a physical or mental infirmity that prevents the safe handling of a handgun,' according to state law. Approving permitless concealed carry has been a goal of gun-rights activists in North Carolina for years, with House Republicans historically supportive of the idea. Some see it as the next step after Republican lawmakers successfully eliminated the permit system that required sheriffs to conduct character evaluations and criminal history checks for pistol applicants in 2023. Conservative advocates for the bill say it would strengthen Second Amendment rights for North Carolinians. Republican lawmakers also disputed that the bill would make the state more dangerous, as 'law-abiding citizens' would be the only people that would benefit from the permit elimination, not criminals, Republican Rep. Brian Echevarria said. 'Rights to keep and bear arms are constitutionally inseparable,' Echevarria said. 'If a person cannot own a firearm, they cannot bear a firearm.' The bill's passage tees up one of the first opportunities for a likely veto from Stein if he stays aligned with his fellow Democrats in the legislature. Stein has a more powerful veto stamp than his predecessor Roy Cooper , after Republicans lost their House supermajority last year that allowed them to override vetoes and enact their legislative agenda with relative ease. Now, House Republicans would need to count on a Democrat to join in their override efforts. Reaching that goal seems especially daunting, considering all of the present House Democrats — and two Republicans — voted against the bill. The governor's office didn't respond to a request for comment on the legislation, but House Deputy Democratic Leader Cynthia Ball said in a committee Tuesday that Stein was opposed to it. Several Democratic legislators said it would make communities unsafe by loosening who can carry a concealed handgun without training. Democrats also raised issue with the age limit set in the bill, saying it would put guns in the hands of young people who aren't yet mature enough to have one. 'Do you not remember when you were 18? We are prone and so susceptible to peer pressure, we are hotheaded, we are emotional,' Democratic Rep. Tracy Clark said on the House floor after retelling her personal experience of losing two friends in college to gun violence. Those seeking a permit for their concealed handgun — such as for the purpose of traveling with a firearm to a state that requires a permit — would still be able to do so. The bill also heightens the felony punishment for those who assault law enforcement officers or first responders with a firearm. A separate bill that makes gun safety courses available at North Carolina community colleges for people 18 and up passed in a near-unanimous House vote directly after the concealed carry permit repeal legislation was approved. ___ Associated Press writer Gary D. Robertson in Raleigh contributed to this report. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Permitless concealed carry in North Carolina faces uphill battle after some GOP pushback
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — A bill to let adults carry concealed handguns without a permit cleared the North Carolina legislature on Wednesday, however the path to joining the majority of U.S. states with similar laws remains uncertain. The GOP-backed legislation faces a likely veto from Democratic Gov. Josh Stein, as well as pushback from a handful of Republicans who voted against the legislation in the state House. House Speaker Destin Hall acknowledged those concerns after Wednesday's vote. 'I would imagine that — math being math — that it's probably a low percentage relative to other bills," Hall told reporters. If the bill becomes law, North Carolina would become the 30th state in the country to legalize permitless carrying of a concealed handgun, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. North Carolina would also be one of the last states in the Southeast to implement that legislation. The legislation allows for eligible people with valid identification over the age of 18 to carry a concealed handgun. More than half of states with permitless concealed carry set their age limit at 21 and older, while the rest have the legal carrying age at 18, according to the NCSL. Currently, a person must be 21 and older to obtain a concealed handgun permit in North Carolina. To qualify, an applicant must pass a firearms safety training course and not 'suffer from a physical or mental infirmity that prevents the safe handling of a handgun,' according to state law. Approving permitless concealed carry has been a goal of gun-rights activists in North Carolina for years, with House Republicans historically supportive of the idea. Some see it as the next step after Republican lawmakers successfully eliminated the permit system that required sheriffs to conduct character evaluations and criminal history checks for pistol applicants in 2023. Conservative advocates for the bill say it would strengthen Second Amendment rights for North Carolinians. Republican lawmakers also disputed that the bill would make the state more dangerous, as 'law-abiding citizens' would be the only people that would benefit from the permit elimination, not criminals, Republican Rep. Brian Echevarria said. 'Rights to keep and bear arms are constitutionally inseparable,' Echevarria said. 'If a person cannot own a firearm, they cannot bear a firearm." The bill's passage tees up one of the first opportunities for a likely veto from Stein if he stays aligned with his fellow Democrats in the legislature. Stein has a more powerful veto stamp than his predecessor Roy Cooper, after Republicans lost their House supermajority last year that allowed them to override vetoes and enact their legislative agenda with relative ease. Now, House Republicans would need to count on a Democrat to join in their override efforts. Reaching that goal seems especially daunting, considering all of the present House Democrats — and two Republicans — voted against the bill. The governor's office didn't respond to a request for comment on the legislation, but House Deputy Democratic Leader Cynthia Ball said in a committee Tuesday that Stein was opposed to it. Several Democratic legislators said it would make communities unsafe by loosening who can carry a concealed handgun without training. Democrats also raised issue with the age limit set in the bill, saying it would put guns in the hands of young people who aren't yet mature enough to have one. 'Do you not remember when you were 18? We are prone and so susceptible to peer pressure, we are hotheaded, we are emotional,' Democratic Rep. Tracy Clark said on the House floor after retelling her personal experience of losing two friends in college to gun violence. Those seeking a permit for their concealed handgun — such as for the purpose of traveling with a firearm to a state that requires a permit — would still be able to do so. The bill also heightens the felony punishment for those who assault law enforcement officers or first responders with a firearm. A separate bill that makes gun safety courses available at North Carolina community colleges for people 18 and up passed in a near-unanimous House vote directly after the concealed carry permit repeal legislation was approved. ___ Associated Press writer Gary D. Robertson in Raleigh contributed to this report.

USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Major student loan changes just came one step closer to becoming law
Major student loan changes just came one step closer to becoming law A 71-page bill released by Senate Republicans would cut down on repayment plans and deem certain college programs ineligible for federal financial aid. Show Caption Hide Caption Senators grill Education Secretary Linda McMahon over proposed cuts Education Secretary Linda McMahon testified to Congress over proposed budget cuts. WASHINGTON – Congress is closer than it's been in a long time to massively reforming college financial aid. On June 10, GOP lawmakers in the U.S. Senate proposed their version of the higher education section of President Trump's tax and spending megabill. The 71-page portion of the so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" would set new caps on student loan borrowing while drastically cutting the number of repayment plans. Read more: Republicans propose massive overhaul of student loans, Pell Grants The Senate's version of the legislation is less aggressive than the bill that Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives introduced in late April. While it will likely be further watered down due to congressional budget rules, the scope of the legislation indicates big changes will be enacted soon to how Americans pay for college. Student loan caps proposed When President Donald Trump asked Republicans to find billions of dollars in federal spending cuts, GOP lawmakers in the House drew up measures to eliminate or dramatically curb many student loan programs. In April, they proposed cutting subsidized loans altogether for undergraduates. When students take out a federal direct subsidized loan, the government pays the interest while they're in school (and for a short grace period after the students complete their studies). That idea didn't survive in the Senate version of the bill, which was expected to be slightly more moderate than the House proposal. Read more: Could Trump fail on tax bill? Why going 'big' doesn't always work out as planned Other elements of the House version remain, however. Like the House bill, the Senate measure proposes cutting the number of student loan repayment plans to just two. That change would kill President Joe Biden's Saving on a Valuable Education, or SAVE, program, which former Education Secretary Miguel Cardona repeatedly called the "most affordable repayment plan ever." SAVE has been stalled in court for months, placing roughly 8 million people in forbearance. The Senate bill would also dramatically curb lending for graduate students and parents (though at lower caps than House Republicans wanted). Ben Cecil, a senior education policy advisor at Third Way, a center-left think tank, said he was pleased to see the bill appeared to make compromises. "These loan limits are much more reasonable," he said. Melanie Storey, president of the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators, said she was "relieved" some of the "most harmful" provisions of the House bill had been nixed. "Still, there are several concerning aspects of this bill that would ultimately make college less affordable for students," she said, including changes that "may drive borrowers to riskier private loans, which are not available to all borrowers." Less concern over Pell Grants One of college access groups' biggest criticisms of the initial bill was a significant change to Pell Grants, federal subsidies that help lower-income students pay for college. House Republicans wanted to increase the number of credits students would need to take each semester to be eligible for Pell Grants. The Center for American Progress, a progressive think tank, estimated that two out of three Pell recipients could've lost their grants or received smaller ones if that requirement were enacted. The Senate version takes a softer approach, codifying a provision to more fully exclude higher-income students qualify for Pell funds. At the same time, the bill expands Pell Grants in ways that could waste money, according to critics such as Sameer Gadkaree, president of The Institute for College Access & Success, a college affordability group. 'While the Senate nixed most of the House's proposed cuts to the Pell Grant program and averts a looming funding shortfall, it regrettably threatens the program's long-term stability by extending Pell eligibility to unaccredited programs that are unlikely to pay off for students," Gadkaree said in a statement. New accountability rules One of the biggest distinctions between the House and Senate versions of the bill is that they lay out two entirely different sets of new accountability rules for colleges. The House proposal would fine colleges for leaving students on the hook for unpaid student loan debt. The Senate's framework suggests taking federal financial aid away from college programs if they can't prove that students who graduate are earning more than they would have without a degree. Mike Itzkowitz, who served in the Education Department under President Barack Obama, said that concept has bipartisan support. "I don't know anyone who would be willing to fork over their time to take on loans to earn less than a high school graduate," he said. But it's possible that particular provision won't survive special Senate rules. To avoid needing the support of Democrats, Republicans are trying to pass Trump's "Big, Beautiful Bill" using the budget process. That strategy comes with challenges. However, the bill must only make changes that spend money or save money. Significant reforms to college oversight might go too far, said Jon Fansmith, the senior vice president of government relations at the American Council on Education, the main association for colleges and universities. "This process isn't designed to do complicated policymaking," he said. "I really do worry about rushing something through without understanding what we're doing." Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@ Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @