With corporate owners buying up medical clinics around the country, Oregon lawmakers are looking to block the practice in the Beaver State.
On Wednesday, the state House passed Senate Bill 951, the latest effort to expand Oregon’s prohibitions on corporate ownership in local care providers.
“When large corporate entities purchase clinics, we routinely see higher costs, worse patient outcomes, and increased physician burnout with no improvements to quality, access or equity,” House Majority Leader Ben Bowman, D-Tigard, a chief backer of the bill, said on the House floor.
Oregon law currently requires licensed physicians to hold at least a 51% ownership stake in many medical practices. The thinking is that health care clinics should be driven by patients’ best interests rather than pure profit.
But proponents of SB 951 say that the law has become increasingly ripe for abuse.
A loophole allows corporations to employ physicians who also serve, on paper, as clinic owners, and so buy the kind of control that’s supposed to be banned. Sometimes that control is exerted through a management services organization, or MSO, a corporate entity brought in to help health care providers complete payroll, accounting, and other back-office tasks.
“These physicians sometimes don’t practice at the clinic,” Bowman said. “Sometimes they haven’t even visited the clinic, and often they don’t even live in Oregon.”
SB 951 would institute new limits on how MSOs can operate in the state, walling off their ability to wield control. It would also limit the use of non-compete agreements, sometimes used by owners to prevent care providers from leaving for another practice.
The bill has been a priority for Bowman in the last two sessions. An earlier version only failed in 2024 on a technicality, after Republican maneuvering ensured the bill couldn’t receive a vote before lawmakers adjourned.
But SB 951 had support in both parties. State Rep. Cyrus Javadi, a Tillamook Republican and dentist, was among its more forceful proponents.
“I’m not saying that all corporate involvement is bad,” Javadi said Wednesday. “But when the folks that are handling the logistics start making medical decisions — deciding how many patients a doctor must see per hour, which treatments are worth offering, or whether your town still pencils out for a clinic — that’s no longer support. That’s control.”
“If you think that this problem isn’t happening in Oregon, you’re wrong,” Javadi added. ”It’s happening repeatedly.”
People posing concerns about a surge in corporate ownership over health care providers nationwide say it can lead to cost-cutting that maximizes profits at the expense of medical professionals and patients. They point to an exodus of doctors from one Eugene clinic after a corporate takeover there caused many to bristle at new mandates.
But the bill has led to opposition from corporations like Amazon and from some providers, who worry they may need corporate investment to keep their practices open in the future.
In written testimony, the Oregon Ambulatory Surgery Center Association said it was concerned the bill would drive corporate investment away from Oregon.
“This will mean that in our small state, clinics will not be able to acquire the very, very expensive multi-million dollar surgical equipment that is leading to revolutionary advances in patient care and patient outcomes,” the organization wrote.
State Rep. Ed Diehl, R-Scio, was the only lawmaker to speak against the bill before Wednesday’s vote, arguing SB 951 would have “serious unintended consequences.”
“It will stifle innovation, drive out private investment and limit access to care, especially in rural and underserved communities,” Diehl said.
Bowman and others pointed out that corporate interests could still invest in medical practices under the law — just not control their business and care decisions.
After a 41-16 vote in the House, the bill is headed to Gov. Tina Kotek.
