Challenges and Solutions for Rural Hospitals: Legislative Proposals and Program Fixes

Capitol Hill Lawmakers Introduce Proposals to Address Rural Hospital Closures

In the face of ongoing concerns about rural hospital closures, Capitol Hill lawmakers have introduced a series of proposals aimed at fixing a federal program designed to maintain lifesaving services in small towns across the country.

One such town feeling the impact is Anamosa, Iowa, home to a 22-bed hospital run by Eric Briesemeister. Despite the hospital’s modest income and patient numbers, Briesemeister is hesitant to convert the facility into a rural emergency hospital, which would provide additional federal funding in exchange for certain requirements.

While only a small number of eligible hospitals have opted to become rural emergency hospitals, the closure of rural hospitals continues to be a pressing issue. In response, federal lawmakers have put forth various legislative solutions, including bills that would allow older closed facilities to reopen and grant rural emergency hospitals access to the 340B federal drug discount program.

The 340B program, created in 1992, allows eligible hospitals and clinics to purchase drugs at a discount and then bill insurance companies at market rates, with hospitals keeping the difference. Many small hospitals rely on these discounts to cover operational costs and provide care to uninsured and underinsured patients.

Despite the potential benefits, some opponents argue that the 340B program can be exploited by hospitals that do not serve enough vulnerable patients. However, supporters, including the American Hospital Association and the National Rural Health Association, believe that rural emergency hospitals should have access to the program due to their role as safety net providers in underserved communities.

As the debate over the 340B program continues, the issue of rural hospital closures remains a critical concern for lawmakers, healthcare providers, and patients alike. With proposals on the table and bipartisan negotiations ongoing, the future of rural healthcare access hangs in the balance.