Skip to main content

SB 6159

In Committee

Senate

Public hospitals

Strengthening public hospitals.

This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.

How does a bill become law?
  1. Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
  2. Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
  3. Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
  4. Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
  5. Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
  6. Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
Introduced: January 14, 2026
Last Action: January 15, 2026
Status: S Health & Long-

AI Analysis

This analysis was generated by AI and may contain errors. It is not legal advice. Always refer to the official bill text for authoritative information.
People & CommunitiesPeople-leaningCorporate & Wealthy Interests

This bill strengthens Washington’s public hospitals by allowing them to collaborate more freely and by creating a new funding stream to support major construction or modernization projects. It does this by permitting noncompetitive cooperative agreements among public hospitals and by imposing a $0.75 per member per month assessment on health insurers and prepaid health plans—revenues from which go to a dedicated account for public hospital infrastructure.

  • Authorizes public hospital districts to enter cooperative agreements—without competitive bidding—with other public hospitals and publicly owned health care entities to share services, equipment, and contracts.
  • Expands the definition of 'participant' eligible to join the Washington Health Care Facilities Authority to include any publicly owned or operated health care entity.
  • Creates a new $0.75 per member per month assessment on insurers and prepaid health plans, due annually by March 1 starting in 2027.
  • Establishes penalties (up to 20%) and interest for late or unpaid assessments, and authorizes the insurance commissioner to suspend or revoke licenses of noncompliant insurers.
  • Creates the 'Public Hospital Infrastructure Account' in the state treasury to fund capital projects (e.g., new construction or major modernization) at public hospitals and publicly owned health care entities.
  • Prohibits insurers from passing the assessment cost to enrollees through higher premiums or changed benefits.

Who is affected

  • Public hospital districtsPublic hospital districts in Washington will be allowed to form cooperative agreements with each other and other public health entities to share services, equipment, and contracts—without competitive bidding—which may improve financial stability and service coordination.
  • Health insurers and prepaid health plansInsurers and health plans that provide coverage in Washington will be required to pay an annual assessment of $0.75 per covered member per month, and may face penalties and license suspension for noncompliance.
  • Publicly owned health care entitiesPublicly owned or operated health care entities (e.g., city or county-run clinics or hospitals) may receive state funding for major construction or modernization projects through the new Public Hospital Infrastructure Account.
  • Patients relying on safety-net hospitalsPatients—especially those who are low-income, uninsured, or have complex medical needs—may benefit from improved access to care as public hospitals stabilize operations and expand or modernize facilities.
Effective: July 1, 2026Fiscal impact: The bill creates a new $0.75 per member per month assessment on insurers and prepaid health plans, expected to generate approximately $120–$150 million annually (based on ~1.2 million covered members in 2026). These funds will be deposited into the new Public Hospital Infrastructure Account and used for capital projects at public hospitals.
Model: Intel/Qwen3-Coder-Next-int4-AutoRoundGenerated: Mar 19, 2026 at 9:42 PM

Pro/Con Analysis

Stronger case for benefits

Potential Benefits (4)
  • The $120–$150M annual dedicated funding stream for public hospital infrastructure directly supports safety-net hospitals that serve disproportionately high shares of low-income, uninsured, and Medicaid-enrolled patients—helping prevent closures and expand access to care where private providers have withdrawn.

    HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 5 & Sec. 4(7)
  • Allowing noncompetitive cooperative agreements among public hospitals enables system-wide coordination (e.g., shared equipment, centralized procurement, service line specialization), reducing duplication and administrative overhead—benefiting public hospitals and the communities they serve, especially in rural or underserved areas.

    HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 2 (amending RCW 70.44.450)
  • Expanding eligibility for the Washington Health Care Facilities Authority to include “any publicly owned or operated health care entity” broadens access to capital for city/county clinics and community health centers undergoing modernization—strengthening primary care infrastructure in underserved jurisdictions.

    HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 3(4)(c) & Sec. 5
  • The statutory prohibition on insurers passing the assessment to enrollees protects consumers from premium spikes tied to this new infrastructure investment—preserving affordability for middle- and low-income households who rely on private insurance.

    HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 4(8)
Potential Concerns (4)
  • The $0.75 per member per month assessment on insurers and prepaid health plans increases regulatory and administrative costs for health plans, which may lead to reduced profitability or consolidation in the insurance market—particularly affecting smaller regional insurers and managed care organizations that serve Medicaid or subsidized populations.

    Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 4(8)
  • The assessment is legally prohibited from being passed to enrollees, but insurers may respond by reducing benefits, narrowing provider networks, or increasing administrative fees elsewhere—potentially degrading coverage quality for consumers, especially those on narrow or high-deductible plans.

    HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 4(8) & Sec. 5
  • The expansion of eligible participants to include “any publicly owned or operated health care entity” may create ambiguity in funding allocation, potentially diverting resources away from smaller, rural public hospital districts toward larger urban systems if the state prioritizes scale over equity in project selection.

    Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 2 (amending RCW 70.44.450)
  • Penalties (up to 20%) and license suspension for noncompliance impose significant financial and operational risk on insurers, especially small or out-of-state plans with limited Washington market share—potentially discouraging new market entrants or reducing competition.

    Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 4(3) & (5)

Who Is Most Affected

Public hospital districtsPositive Impact

Public hospitals—especially those in rural or high-need urban areas—will gain financial stability and access to capital for facility upgrades, directly supporting their mission as safety-net providers. This reduces risk of closure and improves capacity to serve vulnerable populations.

Health insurers and prepaid health plansNegative Impact

Health insurers and prepaid plans will bear a new $0.75/member/month cost (~$9–$12/year per member), with penalties and license risks for noncompliance. While the cost is modest per member, it adds to regulatory burden and may reduce margins—especially for smaller or Medicaid-focused plans.

Patients relying on safety-net hospitalsPositive Impact

Patients relying on public hospitals—especially low-income, Medicaid-enrolled, or uninsured individuals—will benefit from improved access, continuity of care, and reduced risk of service disruption due to hospital closures or underinvestment.

Local governments (city/county health departments)Mixed Impact

City and county governments that operate clinics or health centers may gain access to state capital funding for facility modernization, strengthening local primary care infrastructure—though competition for limited funds could create winners and losers.

Healthcare workers in public hospitalsPositive Impact

Workers in public hospitals (nurses, technicians, support staff) may benefit from improved facilities, better equipment, and greater operational stability—potentially reducing turnover and improving working conditions.

Sponsors

Senator Dhingra(Democrat)District 45Primary
Senator Cleveland(Democrat)District 49Secondary
Senator Bateman(Democrat)District 22Secondary
Senator Cortes(Democrat)District 18Secondary
Senator Lovelett(Democrat)District 40Secondary
Senator Nobles(Democrat)District 28Secondary
Senator Robinson(Democrat)District 38Secondary
Senator Saldaña(Democrat)District 37Secondary
Senator Shewmake(Democrat)District 42Secondary
Senator Valdez(Democrat)District 46Secondary
Senator Wellman(Democrat)District 41Secondary