That kind of billing mystery is exactly what Senators John Hickenlooper (D-CO) and Roger Marshall (R-KS) say they want to end. The two represent a rare example of genuine cross-aisle collaboration — a Democrat and Republican standing together on a proposal that would fundamentally change how hospitals communicate with patients.
Under current law, hospitals are supposed to follow price transparency rules — but the White House recently sent warnings to hundreds of hospitals that weren't complying with those existing requirements. The Patients Deserve Price Tags Act would go further: post all standard charges publicly, or face fines and lose debt-collection authority.
What we have right now is no one can see any of the pricesJohn Hickenlooper, Senator, Colorado Democrat
The Bill's Key Provisions — Supporters vs. Opponents
| What Supporters Say | What Opponents Say | |
|---|---|---|
| Effect on prices | Transparency creates competition, driving costs down | Administrative burden increases hospital operating costs |
| For patients | Estimated $1,000/month in potential savings | Prices may still vary by insurance negotiation |
| Enforcement | Fines and loss of debt-collection rights for non-compliant hospitals | American Hospital Association warns of increased administrative load |
| Political support | Bipartisan Senate sponsors; aligns with White House priority | Hospital industry lobbying against the measure |
The divide over this bill maps onto a familiar tension in American health care: the push for market transparency versus the operational realities hospitals say they face. The American Hospital Association argues the legislation would increase administrative burden on hospitals and health systems — costs that could ultimately be passed along to patients.
But the bill's sponsors argue that the status quo is already costing patients far more. The White House's recent warnings to non-compliant hospitals signal that the executive branch sees price transparency not as a burden, but as a baseline expectation.
A thousand a month, that's what we think this bill can saveRoger Marshall, Senator, Kansas Republican
The Road to the Patients Deserve Price Tags Act
- 2019 — Trump administration issues first hospital price transparency executive order
- 2021 — Federal price transparency rules take effect — hospitals required to post prices
- Ongoing — White House warns hundreds of hospitals for failing to comply with existing rules
- 2025–2026 — ACA enrollment projected to drop by 5 million as health costs spike
- 2026 — Patients Deserve Price Tags Act introduced with bipartisan Senate support
How Much Do You Know About Hospital Pricing?
Four questions. Test what you actually know before the bill changes everything.
The White House recently took what action related to hospital price transparency?
- Passed a new law requiring price posting — Not yet — that's what the Patients Deserve Price Tags Act would do. The White House acted under existing rules.
- Warned hundreds of hospitals they weren't following existing rules — Correct. The White House sent warnings to hundreds of hospitals that were not complying with existing price transparency requirements — showing enforcement was already a problem before the new bill.
- Ordered hospitals to freeze prices for one year — No price freeze was issued. The White House focused on transparency — requiring hospitals to disclose what they already charge.
- Cut Medicare reimbursements to non-compliant hospitals — Reimbursement cuts weren't the mechanism here. The White House warnings focused on compliance with price disclosure requirements.
Under the Patients Deserve Price Tags Act, what happens to hospitals that fail to comply?
- They face fines only — Fines are part of it, but the bill goes further — non-compliant hospitals would also lose the ability to collect debts from patients. That's a significant financial consequence.
- They are temporarily closed by federal inspectors — Temporary closure isn't the enforcement mechanism. The bill uses financial penalties and debt-collection restrictions to incentivize compliance.
- They face fines and lose the ability to collect debts — Correct. The bill pairs traditional fines with the loss of debt-collection authority — a meaningful penalty that directly affects hospitals' ability to pursue unpaid bills.
- Their federal funding is immediately suspended — Federal funding suspension wasn't specified in the bill's provisions. The enforcement tools are fines and restriction of debt-collection rights.
Which organization formally stated that the bill would increase administrative burden?
- American Medical Association — The AMA wasn't cited in this debate. The formal opposition statement came from the American Hospital Association, which represents hospitals rather than physicians.
- American Hospital Association — Correct. The American Hospital Association wrote that the bill would increase the administrative burden placed on hospitals and health systems — making it the most prominent institutional voice against the legislation.
- National Institutes of Health — NIH is a research agency — it doesn't typically take positions on hospital billing legislation. The opposition here came from the hospital industry's primary trade group.
- Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services — CMS administers health programs but wasn't cited as an opponent here. The American Hospital Association is the organization that published the formal concern.
Senator Roger Marshall estimated the bill could save patients roughly how much money?
- About $200 per year — That figure significantly understates Marshall's estimate. He projected savings of a thousand dollars a month — not a year — driven by price competition between hospitals.
- A thousand dollars a month — Correct. Senator Marshall (R-KS) said 'a thousand a month, that's what we think this bill can save' — an estimate grounded in the competitive pricing effect transparency advocates predict.
- Around $5,000 per hospital visit — The savings estimate was framed as a monthly figure, not per-visit. Marshall's projection reflects ongoing competition across health care spending, not a single-encounter discount.
- Up to 50% of annual premiums — A premium percentage reduction wasn't the framing Marshall used. His estimate was a thousand dollars per month in savings from the pricing competition the bill would create.
What's True About Hospital Price Transparency
Hospitals are already required to post their prices.
Verdict: mixed
Federal rules requiring price disclosure already exist — but the White House recently warned hundreds of hospitals that they were not complying. The Patients Deserve Price Tags Act would strengthen enforcement with fines and debt-collection restrictions.
The Patients Deserve Price Tags Act has only Democratic support.
Verdict: false
The bill is explicitly bipartisan. Senator Roger Marshall (R-KS) and Senator John Hickenlooper (D-CO) are among the cross-party sponsors, making it a rare collaboration in the current political climate.
The bill would only require hospitals to provide estimates.
Verdict: false
The legislation specifically requires hospitals to advertise all of their most standard charges — not estimates — and to do so free of charge. The distinction between real prices and estimates is central to the bill's design.
Price transparency has been a priority for the current White House.
Verdict: true
Price transparency is described as a priority of President Trump, and the White House recently sent enforcement warnings to hospitals that weren't following existing transparency rules — increasing the likelihood this legislation could become law.
What makes this moment different from previous transparency pushes is the political alignment. Price transparency has been a stated priority for President Trump, which means a bipartisan Senate bill lands in unusually favorable territory. That combination — Republican White House buy-in and cross-party Senate sponsors — is what elevates the Patients Deserve Price Tags Act above most health care legislation in terms of realistic chances.
For the 71% of middle-income Americans who say their income simply can't keep up with the cost of living, the promise of knowing what a procedure costs before agreeing to it isn't an abstract policy goal. It's the difference between a medical decision made with full information and one made in the dark — with a surprise bill waiting on the other side.
The Cost of Living — By the Numbers
- 71% — Middle-income Americans falling behind
- $1,000 — Projected monthly savings from bill
- 5M — Projected ACA enrollment loss
- 4.2% — National unemployment rate
What Happens If the Bill Passes — And What You Can Do Now
- Hospitals post all standard charges publicly — Under the bill, hospitals must advertise their actual standard charges — not estimates — and make them freely accessible to patients before care is received.
- Non-compliant hospitals face fines and lose debt-collection rights — The bill's enforcement teeth come from two directions: financial penalties and the loss of the ability to pursue patients for unpaid bills if prices weren't posted.
- Patients can compare prices across hospitals before choosing — Visible, standardized pricing creates the conditions for comparison shopping — the mechanism supporters say will drive prices down through competition.
- Contact your senators to weigh in — The bill is in the Senate. Reaching out to your senators — whether to support or oppose — is the most direct way to influence its path forward.
Background: Why Price Transparency Is So Hard to Get
Hospital pricing in the United States operates largely as a negotiation between providers and insurance companies — a system that historically kept list prices opaque. What a hospital charges an uninsured patient, a commercially insured patient, and a Medicare patient for the same procedure can differ dramatically.
Federal rules requiring some price disclosure were put in place, but compliance has been inconsistent. The White House's recent warnings to hundreds of hospitals signal that even existing rules haven't produced the transparency advocates hoped for. The Patients Deserve Price Tags Act would add financial consequences sharp enough to change that calculus for hospitals.
The American Hospital Association, representing hospitals, argues that posting comprehensive price lists creates significant administrative overhead. Hospitals maintain complex charge structures across thousands of procedures, and making all of those publicly accessible and updated is not a trivial task — though supporters counter that patient savings more than justify the effort.
Make Your Voice Heard on Health Care Costs
- Find Your U.S. Senators: The Patients Deserve Price Tags Act is in the Senate. Use the official Senate website to find and contact your two senators about this bill.
- Read the Scripps News Coverage: Full reporting by Joe St. George on the bipartisan push behind this legislation and what it would mean for patients.