Environment
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
StateOregonIntroduced
SB 1575: Relating to hospice licensure; and declaring an emergency.
Deb Patterson
SB 1575 status: Introduced — Effective date, April 7, 2026 (updated Apr 14, 2026).
Source
OpenStates
Confidence
Low
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
01
What this bill does
Official summary alongside an AI-generated read on where it stands and why.
Overall Score
68OUT OF 100
Score:68/100 civic fit
Risk:Moderate Risk
Impact:Moderate Impact 45/100
Constitutionality90%
Bipartisan70%
Public opinion75%
Bill summary
Adds new requirements for obtaining an initial license to operate and maintain a hospice program. [ Requires a hospice program to apply for a new initial license after a change in ownership. ] Prohibits individuals who have been excluded from participation in Medicare or Medicaid or have been found liable for fraud or abuse from holding an ownership interest in a hospice program. Requires the Oregon Health Authority to complete rulemaking within 24 months. Subject to exceptions, prohibits the authority from issuing new hospice licenses until rulemaking is complete. Declares an emergency, effective on passage.
02
Impact analysis
✦ AI analysisModeled effects across six domains, estimated from bill text and comparable legislation.
Economy
Positive outlook
60%
Benefits
- Reduced risk of industry-wide fraud
- Clearer ownership standards
- Enhanced market legitimacy
Risks
- Higher compliance costs for operators
- Increased barriers to market entry
- Complexity in hospice M&A activity
Society
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
Technology Industry
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
Civic Accountability
Positive outlook
75%
Benefits
- Strengthened OHA oversight authority
- Mandated rulemaking transparency
- Direct fraud prevention mechanisms
Risks
- Risk of agency-led bureaucratic delay
- Reliance on OHA rulemaking capacity
- Limited public participation in rules
Public Health & Safety
Positive outlook
70%
Benefits
- Exclusion of fraudulent operators
- Higher quality of care oversight
- Enhanced patient safety protocols
Risks
- Potential limited access during moratorium
- Risk of disruption during transitions
- Administrative strain on health services
03
How trustworthy & consequential it is
Sourcing already shown above, this is what the analysis found worth flagging.
Source
OpenStates
Official bill text or data from OpenStates.
Confidence
Low
Information is limited or incomplete.
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
Source used for this bill's analysis.
Source note
LegiScan returned a PDF-only document. PDF extraction is not enabled in this build, so the pipeline used a safer fallback.
Analysis scope
Source provided is a brief summary, not full bill text.
04
Where it stands
Official record- IntroducedCurrent
- CommitteeUpcoming
- Chamber votesUpcoming
- Final agreementUpcoming
- GovernorUpcoming
- EnactedUpcoming
05
How it affects your district
✦ Personalized
Set your location
Add your district to see how this bill may affect your community and who to contact.
Your Representatives
Your representatives appear here once you add your location.
06
Take action
Contact your representatives
Let them know how you feel about this bill.
Share your view
Join the discussion and see what others are saying.
Track this bill
Stay updated on progress and changes.