As Rhode Island families face unaffordable health care costs and limited access to timely care, state lawmakers have a clear opportunity to enact meaningful reform that prioritizes patients.
The truth is our healthcare system is burdened by outdated regulations that constrain health care supply, suppress innovation, and limit patient choice.
At the heart of this issue are the state’s “Certificate of Need” (CON) laws. CON laws are mandates that require healthcare providers to secure government approval before opening new facilities, expanding services, or buying major medical equipment.
Originally, these laws were intended to control costs and coordinate care, but sadly, in practice they have become barriers that slow progress and protect existing providers from competition. When it became clear that they were not achieving their original goal of reducing healthcare costs, the federal government promptly repealed the original mandate. Since the 1980s, eight presidential administrations have called for the repeal of CON laws.
Today, providers must prove to regulators that a proposed service is truly “needed” before moving forward. This process can drag on for months, or even years, requiring extensive paperwork, legal resources, and regulatory review. Often, existing providers can challenge new proposals, causing additional delays and discouraging investment. Instead of fostering growth, the system keeps it artificially constrained.
The consequences are felt most by patients. When providers face obstacles to expanding services or entering the market, options shrink. Families encounter longer wait times, reduced access to specialized care, and higher costs. For working families, especially those in underserved or rural communities, these hurdles can mean the difference between receiving timely care and going without it. Elderly patients or those with chronic conditions are particularly vulnerable, often forced to travel long distances or delay necessary treatments.
H.7143 and S. 2865 would eliminate these unnecessary requirements, allowing providers to respond quickly and directly to patient demand. By removing government gatekeeping, Rhode Island can encourage new facilities, expanded services, and greater investment in healthcare infrastructure, particularly in communities that have historically lacked access to care. Over time, this can create a more resilient healthcare system capable of meeting the needs of a growing population.
Experience from other states shows that scaling back or eliminating CON laws can increase service availability and foster competitive pricing. When providers are free to innovate and expand without restrictive oversight, patients gain more options, better quality, and more affordable care. Competition drives efficiency, innovation, and accountability, outcomes every healthcare system should prioritize.
Critics argue that CON laws help control costs and prevent overbuilding. But limiting supply does not eliminate demand; it restricts access and drives prices upward. A system that allows providers to compete and adapt is better suited to meet the needs of a growing and evolving population. By encouraging providers to invest in new technologies, expand preventive care, and reach underserved communities, Rhode Island can improve both the quality and the equity of healthcare delivery.
Importantly, passing H. 7143 and S. 2865 does not remove essential protections for patients. Providers would still be held to strict licensing requirements, safety regulations, and quality standards. The legislation simply removes a redundant, often politicized process that stands in the way of progress.
Rhode Island has a chance to modernize its healthcare system and put patients at the center of decision-making. By passing the proposed H. 7143 and S. 2865, lawmakers can expand access, encourage innovation, and reduce costs for families across the state.
When healthcare affordability and accessibility are top concerns, the solution is clear: remove unnecessary barriers, empower providers, and ensure that all Rhode Islanders can get the care they need, when they need it. Doing so is not only good policy, it’s the right thing for families, workers, and the communities that depend on timely, high-quality care.
