A Democratic bill with 2 Democratic cosponsors · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, Ways and Means, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Health Over Wealth Act aims to amend the Public Health Service Act to increase oversight of for-profit corporations that own health care systems. It requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to implement strict reporting mandates for covered firms, including those affiliated with private equity funds. The bill establishes a task force to monitor market consolidation and the role of private equity in health care. It also creates a licensing system for private equity firms wishing to invest in health care entities. Additionally, the legislation includes new requirements for hospitals regarding the discontinuation of services or full closures.
Yes· 3 of 11
- Scored +8
Does this make health care easier to get in general?
The bill proactively mitigates risks of hospital closures and protects essential services to maintain healthcare access.
- Scored +7
Does this give the federal government more power?
The bill expands federal oversight of healthcare ownership and private equity activities.
- Scored +7
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill mandates detailed public reporting of financial and staffing data from covered healthcare firms.
The opposite
- Scored -5
Would business owners be better off under this?
The bill imposes significant new reporting requirements and oversight on healthcare-related corporations and private equity firms.
- Scored -5
Would billionaires be better off under this?
The bill introduces strict licensing and potential penalties for private equity firms.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Transparency: The Secretary would require covered firms to submit detailed reports regarding debt, fees, and financial status, making this data publicly available (SEC. 3402(a)(1)(3)).
-
Protection of Essential Services: The bill establishes a mechanism to mitigate risks for covered firms, which may include requiring escrow accounts to cover operating costs for up to 5 years if a provider closes or reduces services (SEC. 3403(a)(2)(A)).
-
Preventing Financial Weakening via Real Estate: The bill prohibits health care entities from entering into sale or lease agreements with real estate investment trusts if the terms would weaken the entity's financial status or risk public health (SEC. 3403(b)(1)).
-
Oversight of Private Equity Investing: The Secretary would issue licenses for private equity firms to invest in or purchase health care entities, with the power to deny or revoke licenses if the firm engages in practices like price gouging or understaffing (SEC. 3403(c)(2) and (4)(A)(i)).
-
Mitigation of Hospital Closures: For applicable hospitals, the bill requires a notification period and the submission of mitigation plans to preserve access to essential services during a closure or reduction of services (SEC. 3405(1) and (3)).
-
Bankruptcy Protections for Regional Access: The bill directs courts, when confirming a bankruptcy plan for a health care business, to give substantial weight to maintaining regional access, quality, and staff retention (SEC. s 4(b)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Administrative Burdens: While the bill directs the Secretary to reduce administrative burdens, it still requires covered firms to submit extensive data including debt levels, political spending, and staffing ratios (SEC. 3402(a)).
-
Mandatory Financial Contributions: The Secretary may require covered firms to provide financial contributions to mitigate the impact of potential closures, workforce shortages, or reductions in care quality (SEC. 3403(a)(2)(C)).
-
Restrictions on Real Estate Transactions: Health care entities seeking to enter sale or lease agreements with real estate investment trusts must submit those terms to the Secretary for review (SEC. 3403(b)(2)(A)).
-
Potential for Financial Penalties: Private equity firms that violate licensing requirements may be subject to civil monetary penalties equal to the amount of Federal funding received by the health care entity (SEC. 3403(c)(5)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — The bill prioritizes maintaining regional healthcare access and stability. Would union members be better off under this? — The bill includes requirements for transparency regarding workforce issues and protects against service reductions that affect employees. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Protecting essential services helps ensure low-income communities maintain local healthcare access. Would retired people be better off under this? — Protecting the stability of healthcare providers assists retirees in maintaining continuity of care. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — By protecting hospital services and access, the bill benefits the elderly demographic that relies heavily on these services. Would billionaires be better off under this? — The bill introduces strict licensing and potential penalties for private equity firms. Would business owners be better off under this? — The bill imposes significant new reporting requirements and oversight on healthcare-related corporations and private equity firms.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill mandates detailed public reporting of financial and staffing data from covered healthcare firms. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands federal oversight of healthcare ownership and private equity activities.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill increases oversight of private equity firms to prevent price gouging and ensure transparency in healthcare markets. Does this strengthen the rights of workers to organise? — The bill includes protections for health workers and requires transparency regarding staffing and labor-related issues.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — The bill proactively mitigates risks of hospital closures and protects essential services to maintain healthcare access.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — The bill mandates monitoring of disparities that may arise from market consolidation.
- 7/23/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, Ways and Means, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Yvette ClarkeDemocrat · New York
Christopher DeluzioDemocrat · Pennsylvania