A Democratic bill with 2 Democratic cosponsors · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
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 "Take Back Our Hospitals Act of 2026" amends the Social Security Act to stop Medicare payments to hospitals and skilled nursing facilities owned or controlled by certain firms. These "covered firms" include private equity funds, corporations controlled by private equity funds, and real estate investment trusts. Facilities already owned by these firms at the time of enactment have three years to comply. Violators are entitled to notice, a hearing, and judicial review. Additionally, the covered firms and their affiliates are jointly and severally liable for any penalties resulting from these violations.
Yes
- Scored +3
Does this give the federal government more power?
Increases federal authority to regulate the ownership structure of healthcare providers receiving Medicare payments.
- Scored +2
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
The bill explicitly provides for notice, hearing, and judicial review for facilities in violation.
The opposite· 3 of 10
- Scored -6
Would business owners be better off under this?
Directly targets and penalizes ownership by specific business structures like private equity and REITs.
- Scored -5
Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this?
Negatively impacts the investment returns of high-net-worth individuals invested in private equity funds.
- Scored -5
Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this?
Negatively impacts the investment returns of ultra-high-net-worth individuals invested in private equity funds.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Restriction of Ownership: By prohibiting Medicare payments to facilities owned by private equity funds and real estate investment trusts, the bill limits the role of these specific firms in operating hospitals and skilled nursing facilities (Section 2(p)(1)(A)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Loss of Medicare Participation: Hospitals and skilled nursing facilities owned by covered firms will be barred from receiving Medicare payments (Section 2(p)(1)(A)), which could affect the availability of these facilities for patients.
- Financial Liability: Covered firms and their affiliates face joint and several liability for penalties or obligations resulting from violations of the payment prohibition (Section 2(p)(3)).
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 business owners be better off under this? — Directly targets and penalizes ownership by specific business structures like private equity and REITs. Would billionaires be better off under this? — Negatively impacts billionaire investors and fund managers in the private equity sector. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — Negatively impacts the investment returns of high-net-worth individuals invested in private equity funds. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — Negatively impacts the investment returns of ultra-high-net-worth individuals invested in private equity funds. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Rural areas often have fewer hospitals, so the loss of any Medicare-participating facility is more impactful. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — People with disabilities using skilled nursing facilities may face reduced access to care. Would retired people be better off under this? — Retirees heavily depend on Medicare for skilled nursing and hospital care. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Seniors rely heavily on Medicare, and the loss of facility participation could reduce their access to care.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — Barring Medicare payments to private-equity owned facilities may reduce the number of available hospitals and nursing homes.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Increases federal authority to regulate the ownership structure of healthcare providers receiving Medicare payments. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The bill explicitly provides for notice, hearing, and judicial review for facilities in violation. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Imposes federal restrictions on the types of firms that can own local healthcare facilities.
- 3/12/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
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.
Richard BlumenthalDemocrat · Connecticut
Jeff MerkleyDemocrat · Oregon