PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 21, 2015
This bill amends the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007, as amended by other specified federal law, with respect to the five-year moratorium begining April 1, 2014, on the establishment of long-term care (LTC) hospitals and LTC satellite facilities and on the increase of LTC hospital beds in existing LTC hospitals or satellite facilities for purposes of title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act.
A technical correction is made to an exception to this moratorium for certain LTC hospitals that:
began their qualifying period for Medicare payment on or before April 1, 2014;
have a binding written agreement as of that date with an outside, unrelated party for the actual construction, renovation, lease, or demolition for an LTC hospital, and have expended, before that date, at least 10% of the project's estimated cost (or, if less, $ 2.5 million); or
have obtained on or before that date an approved certificate of need in a state where one is required.
This bill applies the exception to any similar moratorium.
People & committees
Rep. Boustany, Charles W., Jr. [R-LA-3] · R–LA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.441 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.441 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.441 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.441 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.