To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to prevent hospitals or skilled nursing facilities that are owned by certain firms from participating in the Medicare program.

HR7920, the 'Take Back Our Hospitals Act of 2026', was introduced on March 12, 2026 by Rep. Scanlon (D-PA) with 10 Democratic cosponsors. The bill would amend the Social Security Act to prohibit Medicare payments to hospitals or skilled nursing facilities 'owned or controlled by a covered firm or an affiliate of a covered firm'—defined broadly to include private equity firms and any entity that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with a PE firm. Current facilities get a 3-year phase-out period. The bill has been referred to both Ways and Means and Energy and Commerce committees. An identical companion bill, S4085, has been introduced in the Senate and referred to Finance. The money trail here is straightforward: the mechanism is a statutory ban on payments, not a funding authorization. There are no taxpayer dollars appropriated by this bill—it works by denying existing Medicare funds to non-compliant facilities. For a typical hospital, Medicare accounts for 40-50% of revenue; for SNFs, it's often 60-80% of payer mix. The economic impact on affected facilities would be existential—they would either need to divest PE ownership within 3 years or lose the majority of their revenue. Structural winners and losers: The clearest winners under this bill are non-PE-owned operators. For-profit chains already free of PE ties (some HCA/UHS facilities, Community Health Systems) gain a competitive advantage as PE-owned rivals must restructure or exit. Publicly traded REITs with SNF exposure (OHI, SBRA, VTR) face a second-order risk: if their tenants are PE-affiliated and lose Medicare, those tenants cannot pay rent. However, REITs are not directly prohibited—only the operating facilities are. REITs could restructure by taking back facilities and finding non-PE operators. Ensign Group (ENSG), which operates SNFs directly, faces risk if any of its 300+ facilities have PE-linked minority stakes or management agreements that fall under the bill's broad 'control' definition. Real market data analysis: Over the 30 days since introduction, HCA dropped -7.99% (from ~$473 to $435), UHS dropped -4.81% (from ~$179 to $170). This suggests the market is pricing in some downside risk for the acute hospital operators, possibly overinterpreting the bill's reach. Meanwhile, SNF-focused REITs have actually gained: OHI +7.3% (to $47.02), SBRA +6.14% (to $20.41), VTR +7.56% (to $87.97), and NHC +7.81% (to $175.07). This divergence is striking—it suggests the market either (a) does not believe this bill will pass, (b) has not connected the tenant risk to REITs, or (c) is treating the REIT gains as a function of falling interest rates and yield demand. Given that the bill is early-stage with a minority-party sponsor, option (a) is most plausible. However, if this bill gains committee support or a GOP co-sponsor, expect significant repricing in REITs. The legislative timeline: the bill is at the very earliest stage (referred to committee). No hearings, markups, or votes have occurred. The 119th Congress runs through January 2027. For this bill to pass, it must clear Ways and Means and Energy and Commerce in the House, then Finance in the Senate, then survive a presidential veto. Given Democratic sponsorship in a divided government (Republican House majority, 53-47 Senate split, Republican president), passage in this Congress is highly unlikely. However, the 10 co-sponsors and identical companion bill indicate a growing coalition. If a Republican co-sponsor joins—particularly a healthcare-focused member like Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-KY, Chair of Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee)—passage probability would increase. For now, this is a monitoring risk, not an active investing thesis.