Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hospital Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate approves three‑year hospital assessment to secure federal matching funds
Summary
The Senate approved Senate Bill 273, a three‑year hospital assessment intended to generate federal matching funds to offset Medicaid shortfalls and help hospitals (including rural and pediatric providers). The bill passed after debate on fiscal impacts and assurances it would not be added to patient bills.
Senators voted to pass Senate Bill 273, authorizing a hospital assessment to generate state revenue that would be used to draw federal matching dollars to support hospitals and Medicaid reimbursement. Sponsor Senator Hilliard said the assessment is carefully drafted with a three‑year sunset and restrictions to ensure funds are used to help hospitals. "The money will be used strictly to help hospitals," he said, adding the measure would mitigate recent Medicaid reductions and help maintain services, especially at rural hospitals.
Supporters described the assessment as a mechanism many states use to maximize federal matching funds and as a way to blunt cost shifting and rising patient bills. Senator Bramble, who disclosed a conflict of interest (service on an Intermountain Healthcare board), said hospitals requested the assessment and that it is not an added fee on patient bills. Opponents and some members expressed concern that the measure amounted to reintroducing a previously repealed "hospital tax." Senator Dayton explained his no vote: he described the measure as a hospital‑level assessment that he opposed on principle despite sympathy for hospitals.
The Senate adopted floor amendments designed to clarify language and remove or rework fiscal-note items raised earlier; the sponsor said the fiscal note concerns had been addressed. On final passage, the Senate roll call recorded 24 yeas, 2 nays and 3 absences. Proponents said the assessment would be used to reimburse hospitals for Medicaid services and to reduce pressure on patient costs; opponents warned of long‑term tax implications and reiterated that similar measures had been repealed in prior years.
The bill now moves to the House for consideration.
