Oregon 2025 Regular Session

Oregon Senate Bill SB716

Introduced
1/13/25  
Refer
1/17/25  
Refer
4/15/25  

Caption

Relating to urgent care centers.

Impact

The bill is expected to influence state laws regarding the reimbursement of urgent care services by health insurance providers. It establishes obligatory coverage for services from registered urgent care centers by various health plans, including those offered by the Public Employees' Benefit Board and the Oregon Educators Benefit Board. Insurers are required to reimburse services from these centers at a rate 20% higher than equivalent services provided by unregistered facilities, consequently promoting the use of certified urgent care services across the state and encouraging compliance with established medical standards.

Summary

Senate Bill 716, titled 'Relating to urgent care centers,' introduces a structured approach for the registration and regulation of urgent care centers in Oregon. It mandates the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) to develop rules and establish criteria for registering these centers, ensuring they meet specific operational standards. Key requirements for registered urgent care centers include on-site medical examination services, expanded operating hours, and necessary emergency equipment. The bill aims to streamline urgent care services in Oregon, facilitating better access to non-emergency medical care for patients who seek prompt treatment without needing emergency services.

Sentiment

The overall sentiment surrounding SB716 appears to be positive among healthcare advocates and providers who believe that registered urgent care centers will enhance access to timely medical care. Supporters argue that the bill will lead to better healthcare outcomes by ensuring that urgent care centers maintain high operational standards. Conversely, there are concerns about potential increased costs for insurance premiums as a result of mandated higher reimbursement rates, which some critics perceive as a burden on the insurance market and an indirect cost to consumers.

Contention

A notable point of contention centered around the reimbursement structure outlined in the bill, with opponents suggesting it could lead to rising insurance costs. Additionally, some stakeholders worried about the feasibility of meeting the proposed operational standards and whether smaller clinics would be able to comply without compromising their financial viability. The debate highlighted a broader concern about balancing quality healthcare access with economic constraints faced by providers.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

TN HB1270

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4; Title 8; Title 9, Chapter 8; Title 29, Chapter 20 and Title 49, relative to freedom of speech.

TN SB0937

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4; Title 8; Title 9, Chapter 8; Title 29, Chapter 20 and Title 49, relative to freedom of speech.

CA AB332

Employment: agricultural workers.

AR HB1468

To Amend Arkansas Law Concerning Claims Against Home Improvement Contractors, Residential Building Contractors, And Suppliers.

TX HB632

Relating to a pilot program for the recovery of delinquent state obligations owed to certain state agencies.

CA SB597

Labor-related liabilities: direct contractor and subcontractor.

NJ A4719

Requires certain notifications to subcontractors listed on bid for State contract by prime contractor.

CA SB61

Private works of improvement: retention payments.