Lawmakers Look to Regulate Pharmacy Benefit Managers
Pharmacy benefit managers contract with health insurers, self-insured employers and governments to play such roles as negotiating drug prices with manufacturers, establishing pharmacy networks and paying claims.
April 24, 2023 at 11:33 AM
4 minute read
After the Senate passed its version of the plan last week, the House moved forward with a proposal that would increase regulations on pharmacy benefit managers.
The issue has drawn heavy lobbying as pharmacy benefit managers play a central — and big-dollar — role in the health care system. The legislation could affect a wide range of people and interests, including patients, pharmacies, health insurers, drug manufacturers and employers.
Pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs, act as something of a middleman. They contract with health insurers, self-insured employers and governments to play such roles as negotiating drug prices with manufacturers, establishing pharmacy networks and paying claims.
Critics, such as many independent pharmacies, have long blasted the PBMs, saying they have too much leverage in the market and have not reduced drug costs for patients.
The House Appropriations Committee on Friday approved a bill (HB 1509) that would make a series of changes to regulate PBMs. The Senate unanimously passed its version (SB 1550) on Wednesday.
"We've done it their [PBMs'] way," House sponsor Linda Chaney, R-St. Pete Beach, said. "It hasn't worked. It's time for change."
But lawmakers said the issue is extremely complicated, with some raising concerns that parts of the proposal could end up increasing costs. For example, they said they do not have an estimated financial impact of the proposed changes on the health-insurance program for state employees. That program contracts with a major pharmacy benefit manager, CVS Caremark, to administer its prescription-drug plan, according to a House staff analysis.
"There is no question that there are problems today. I'm not sure any of the stakeholders would disagree with that," House Health & Human Services Chairman Randy Fine, R-Brevard County, said during the Appropriations Committee meeting. "But what we can't do is, when we try to solve a problem, create a whole bunch of new ones."
Under current law, PBMs are required to register with the state Office of Insurance Regulation, and contracts between PBMs and insurers and health-maintenance organizations need to include limits on patient cost-sharing for drugs, according to the House staff analysis.
But the House bill would significantly expand regulation of the industry. Examples of proposed changes in the bill include:
• Increasing the OIR's authority over PBMs, making them subject to regulation as what are known as insurance "administrators."
• Largely preventing a practice known as "spread pricing," which involves PBMs getting reimbursed a certain price for a drug by an insurer or employer but paying pharmacies a lower price to dispense the drug. "In other words, the PBM retains some portion of the plan sponsor [insurer or employer] reimbursement as earned income," the House staff analysis said.
• Placing restrictions on PBMs that have affiliated pharmacy businesses. The bill would prevent such PBMs from only having affiliated pharmacies in their pharmacy networks.
• Preventing PBMs frogm requiring patients to receive prescriptions by mail.
Melodie Shrader, vice president of state affairs for the Pharmaceutical Care Management Association, said her PMB-industry group appreciates that lawmakers are trying to address rising health care and drug costs.
But she said her group thinks the bill "will decrease access and will not increase affordability," pointing to new requirements on PBMs and their customers.
But Chaney said she thinks the changes would increase competition and give consumers more choices, which would end up reducing costs.
"The issue here is this is such an opaque industry that we really cannot follow the money," Chaney said. "We really have no idea where the PBMs are maximizing their profits at the detriment of patients. And what we know is that prices have gone up year over year. What we know is that this is a fully integrated industry … and that these businesses are charged with maximizing profits at every level of their business."
The bill needs approval from the Health & Human Services Committee before it could go to the full House.
Jim Saunders reports for the News Service of Florida.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAmid Growing Litigation Volume, Don't Expect UnitedHealthcare to Change Its Stripes After CEO's Killing
6 minute readFreeman Mathis & Gary Taps Orlando for Third New Florida Office This Year
3 minute readFla.'s Statute of Limitations and Statutes of Repose in Med Mal Cases: It's Not Over Until It's Over
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Judicial Conduct Watchdog Opposes Supreme Court Justice's Bid to Withdraw Appeal of Her Removal
- 2Lessons in Mediation & Negotiation: Attorneys' Reflections on Jimmy Carter
- 3Legal Issues to Watch in the US Appeals Courts in 2025
- 4Ex-MoviePass CEO Submits to Ban, Settling SEC Allegations
- 5Baker McKenzie, Jones Day, Reed Smith Make 2025 Partner Promotions
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250