Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
This bill (Rural Health Care Access Act of 2025) amends section 1820 of the Social Security Act to allow States to designate facilities located in rural areas as critical access hospitals (CAHs) without any mileage limitations. It removes mileage-based subclauses in subsection (c)(2)(B)(i) and adds language relating to redesignations made before the Act's enactment.
Liberals emphasize access and equity; conservatives emphasize cost and market distortion.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory amendment that clearly identifies and effects a change to Medicare critical access hospital designation criteria by removing mileage limitations.
This bill (Rural Health Care Access Act of 2025) amends section 1820 of the Social Security Act to allow States to designate facilities located in rural areas as critical access hospitals (CAHs) without any mileage limitations.
It removes mileage-based subclauses in subsection (c)(2)(B)(i) and adds language relating to redesignations made before the Act's enactment.
The effective date provision applies the amendment to any designation or redesignation made on or after enactment.
Technically narrow and broadly appealing but carries budget implications and must clear procedural hurdles in the Senate; more likely as part of larger package.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory amendment that clearly identifies and effects a change to Medicare critical access hospital designation criteria by removing mileage limitations. It specifies the statutory provisions to be edited and an effective date, but it is terse and omits fiscal, administrative implementation detail, and accountability safeguards.
Liberals emphasize access and equity; conservatives emphasize cost and market distortion.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize access and equity; conservatives emphasize cost and market distortion.
Likely supportive because it expands rural health access and keeps local hospitals viable.
Seen as advancing equity for rural residents who face long travel times for care.
Generally favorable but cautious.
Appreciates improved rural access and state discretion while wanting fiscal and implementation safeguards to limit unintended costs.
Skeptical overall.
Values rural access and state flexibility but concerned this expands federal Medicare payments and creates market distortions.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically narrow and broadly appealing but carries budget implications and must clear procedural hurdles in the Senate; more likely as part of larger package.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize access and equity; conservatives emphasize cost and market distortion.
Technically narrow and broadly appealing but carries budget implications and must clear procedural hurdles in the Senate; more likely as pa…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory amendment that clearly identifies and effects a change to Medicare critical access hospital designation criteria by removing mileage li…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.