Technically, Colorado Hospital Association didn't oppose free-standing ER bill. Technically.

9NEWS at 6 p.m. 2/9/17.

KUSA - We messed up. We’re totally willing to fess up to it.  

No, the Colorado Hospital Association did not technically oppose Colorado Senate Bill 64 on Wednesday, as we suggested during our Wednesday afternoon broadcast.

See here:

Of course, we’d also be remiss if we didn’t tell you there’s a little more to the story surrounding the state’s latest effort to bring more transparency to the burgeoning freestanding emergency room industry in Colorado.

Wednesday, we reported on the bill that would have, among other things, forced freestanding emergency rooms to post their facility fees online.

Our “BuyER Beware” series has found facility fees can range anywhere from $700 to $6,200 inside any of the state’s 45 freestanding ERs.

Three years ago, there were less than 10.

SB 64 died on a party-line 3 to 2 vote on Wednesday inside a Republican-led committee.

During testimony, a representative of the Colorado Hospital Association told the committee the CHA was “monitoring the bill” with “significant concerns.”

We incorrectly reported CHA opposed the bill.

There might be a reason for that, however.

Particularly because during testimony, the representative from CHA said the bill “goes too far” while creating “unintended consequences”.

“We do have some significant concerns,” said the CHA representative.

Sounds like opposition?  Not to CHA.

So, yes, CHA didn’t like the bill, and it clearly didn’t support the bill.

But it also didn’t technically oppose the bill.

It’s important to note that in the last three years, a time in which freestanding ERs have popped up all over the Front Range, many hospitals have jumped head first into the freestanding ER game.

And it’s not exactly good for business to let patients know of the potential for $6,200 facility fees in advance either.

We’re told by a CHA spokesperson, the CHA is very much interested in telling patients more about potential freestanding ER costs. Within the last month, it’s spearheaded a campaign to help patients learn more about what an ear infection, for example, might cost in an ER versus an urgent care.

But this bill was not its bill.

So, yes, CHA didn’t support it, but it didn’t oppose it either.

Now that that’s clear, we’ll let you know if CHA finds another freestanding ER bill to support, or oppose, or just simply monitor.

RELATED:

First effort to regulate free-standing emergency rooms dies in Colorado Legislature

BuyER Beware: Separate billing, surprise costs

How much have you paid for an ER visit?

Freestanding ER bill passes Colorado House committee

© 2017 KUSA-TV


JOIN THE CONVERSATION

To find out more about Facebook commenting please read the
Conversation Guidelines and FAQs

Leave a Comment