Nursing home construction measure passes Senate

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Senate passed a bill Thursday that would limit the number of state nursing homes that could be built.

Senate Bill 173 would prohibit the State Department of Health from approving the development of new nursing homes built after June.

The approval of comprehensive care beds being added to current facilities would also be prohibited.

But continuing care retirement homes and assisted living would be exempt from the bill.

Sen. Patricia Miller, R-Indianapolis, who authored the bill, said the nursing home industry is the ninth largest employer in Indiana and brings in over $300 million in state and local taxes.

Nursing homes are “unique to Indiana because they take care of Medicaid patients,” who make up 83 percent of the cost, Miller said. The remaining 17 percent are privately paid.

Miller said while “the nursing home facility industry has an important place in our economy,” there are currently 13,000 empty beds.

Sen. Lindel Hume, D-Princeton, said he was concerned the bill would keep people from getting into a nursing home.

But Miller disagreed.

“Anyone who qualifies for Medicaid today would get care through a nursing home under Medicaid,” she said.

However she said someone cannot get into a nursing home without prior authorization. A person must be unable to complete three activities of daily living, such as dressing or bathing oneself, and a physician must order the person into the nursing facility, among other requirements.

“Building new facilities will add more unneeded beds at a time when utilization of skilled nursing facilities is decreasing,” Miller said.

The bill now moves to the House for consideration.


  • House of Cards
    Turn(er) over every stone...Pay to play players go back years allowing MCHH and the ASC's to swim in the pools of cash...Change is coming...Where's the DOJ?
  • RE: What market?
    The moratorium is about the free market. Indiana already has a moratorium on Medicaid beds, as it has in the past. The only way to improve the "83% of the cost" is have well designed and pleasant care facilities the private pay market would want to live in as opposed to blocking that development with government interference to protect the facilities unwilling and unable to provide better provisions for their residents (and one day we'll be in those dated, aged facilities).
  • What a Joke
    Gee, wonder who keeps posting these "anonymous" comments against the bill under several different names with all sorts of insider details. Sounds like someone is bitter they don't have the Medicaid backstop for their overbuilt, empty new nursing homes. This is becoming comical.
    • Free Market
      What has happened to the concept of free markets. Let the law of supply and demand determine how many nursing homes we need. The marketplace will make any corrections that are needed. This is not the concern of our legislature.
    • Thieves
      Look at who she took campaign contributions from http://votesmart.org/candidate/campaign-finance/4522/patricia-miller The established healthcare industry that wants no competition is getting their way. Also, if you want to save money, elimintate the taxpayer subsidy for Marion County Health and Hospital nursing home operations. For the same room they get a higher payment than the private sector just for being government owned. They "buy" homes to get this higher reimbursement then hire the same operators to run them and then split the extra proceeds. This happens with hospitals and nursing homes all over the state. It is one of the biggest boondoggles in the market. Same care but higher reimbursement because they are "government owned". Where is IBJ in researching and highlighting this issue!
    • News to me
      Nursing homes are “unique to Indiana because they take care of Medicaid patients” according to Miller. I had no idea that nursing homes were unique to Indiana. Is that really true?
    • What market?
      The moratorium isn't about the free market, because, as noted above, "83% of the cost" is for people on Medicaid. Indiana is attempting to shift more emphasis to home and community-based care(which includes assisted living facilities) which often costs less and is preferred by the consumer. Senator Miller is looking after the interests of older Hoosiers and Indiana taxpayers.
      • There goes the market
        How could a good Republican like Rep. Miller presume to know what the private market will bear?

      Post a comment to this story

      We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
      You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
      Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
      No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
      We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

      Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

      Sponsored by

      facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

      Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
      Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
      Subscribe to IBJ
      1. Of what value is selling alcoholic beverages to State Fair patrons when there are many families with children attending. Is this the message we want to give children attending and participating in the Fair, another venue with alooholic consumption onsite. Is this to promote beer and wine production in the state which are great for the breweries and wineries, but where does this end up 10-15 years from now, lots more drinkers for the alcoholic contents. If these drinks are so important, why not remove the alcohol content and the flavor and drink itself similar to soft drinks would be the novelty, not the alcoholic content and its affects on the drinker. There is no social or material benefit from drinking alcoholic beverages, mostly people want to get slightly or highly drunk.

      2. I did;nt know anyone in Indiana could count- WHY did they NOT SAY just HOW this would be enforced? Because it WON;T! NOW- with that said- BIG BROTHER is ALIVE in this Article-why take any comment if it won't appease YOU PEOPLE- that's NOT American- with EVERYTHING you indicated is NOT said-I can see WHY it say's o Comments- YOU are COMMIES- BIG BROTHER and most likely- voted for Obama!

      3. In Europe there are schools for hairdressing but you don't get a license afterwards but you are required to assist in turkey and Italy its 7 years in japan it's 10 years England 2 so these people who assist know how to do hair their not just anybody and if your an owner and you hire someone with no experience then ur an idiot I've known stylist from different countries with no license but they are professional clean and safe they have no license but they have experience a license doesn't mean anything look at all the bad hairdressers in the world that have fried peoples hair okay but they have a license doesn't make them a professional at their job I think they should get rid of it because stateboard robs stylist and owners and they fine you for the dumbest f***ing things oh ur license isn't displayed 100$ oh ur wearing open toe shoes fine, oh there's ONE HAIR IN UR BRUSH that's a fine it's like really? So I think they need to go or ease up on their regulations because their too strict

      4. Exciting times in Carmel.

      5. Twenty years ago when we moved to Indy I was a stay at home mom and knew not very many people.WIBC was my family and friends for the most part. It was informative, civil, and humerous with Dave the KING. Terri, Jeff, Stever, Big Joe, Matt, Pat and Crumie. I loved them all, and they seemed to love each other. I didn't mind Greg Garrison, but I was not a Rush fan. NOW I can't stand Chicks and all their giggly opinions. Tony Katz is to abrasive that early in the morning(or really any time). I will tune in on Saturday morning for the usual fun and priceless information from Pat and Crumie, mornings it will be 90.1