pills-384846_960_720-300x200-4567758In the name of lowering drug costs, state lawmakers are on the brink of passing hastily drafted and ill-considered legislation that would risk driving those costs even higher.

The bill in question, A. 2836/S. 6531, seeks to regulate pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs, which act as middlemen in the complex transactions among health plans, drug manufacturers and pharmacies. Their role typically includes negotiating the rebates collected from manufacturers and the fees paid to pharmacies, as well as managing formularies and processing claims.

The companies’ controversial tactics and opaque finances have made them a target for regulation by many other states. But the bill pending in Albany – sponsored by Assembly Health Chairman Dick Gottfried (D-Manhattan) and Senate Insurance Chairman Neil Breslin (D-Albany) – includes onerous and self-contradictory rules that would make it hard for PBMs to function at all.

One provision declares that PBMs would have a duty to act “for the best interests primarily of the covered individual, and the health plan and the provider” – which is puzzling, since the interests of those three groups are often at odds.

Another section gives providers and health members the right to sue PBMs “for any injury or loss … caused by any violation of such duties, obligations or requirements,” a vague standard that seems guaranteed to trigger a flood of litigation.

The bill also prohibits PBMs from substituting one drug for another “except with the approval of the prescriber or as explicitly required or approved by law.” This would seem to create a chilling effect on the common cost-cutting practice of substituting generic equivalents for brand-name drugs.

Another issue is that the legislation appears to cover PBMs’ dealings with all types of health plans, including self-insured plans operated by large businesses and labor unions, which are exempt from state regulation by federal law. This leaves the measure vulnerable to being challenged and possibly overturned in court.

The proposal spent most of the session as a one-house Assembly bill. On Friday night, however, it was amended with new language subjecting PBMs to licensing and oversight by the Department of Financial Services – a concept that Governor Cuomo proposed as part of his budget, but which was left out of the final product in early April. The licensing section includes reporting requirements and other regulations that overlap with rules spelled out in the rest of the bill, which could lead to confusion in enforcement.

That same night, a matching bill with both sections was introduced by Breslin in the Senate.

The Senate approved the legislation on Monday night, barely satisfying the constitutional three-day waiting period, and the Assembly is expected to take it up later this week.

The Gottfried-Breslin bill is one of several PBM-related measures advancing in the closing days of the legislation session.

On Monday, the Assembly passed bill that would prohibit mid-year changes to drug formularies, and the Senate approved a measure that would limit the ability of health plans (and PBMs) to require the use of mail-order pharmacies for certain prescriptions.

Earlier this year, as part of the state budget, the Legislature prohibited PBMs from using a practice known as “spread pricing” in contracts with Medicaid managed care plans. A bill that would extend that ban to private health plans, among other provisions, was also passed by the Senate on Monday night.

PBMs play a central role in a drug pricing system that’s dysfunctional in many ways, and some regulation may be warranted. If the state is going to intervene, it should have a well-vetted plan, not heavy-handed legislation that was cobbled together in Albany’s last-minute rush.

 

About the Author

Bill Hammond

As the Empire Center’s senior fellow for health policy, Bill Hammond tracks fast-moving developments in New York’s massive health care industry, with a focus on how decisions made in Albany and Washington affect the well-being of patients, providers, taxpayers and the state’s economy.

Read more by Bill Hammond

You may also like

The Attorney General’s MFCU SNAFU

Attorney General Letitia James' latest fight with the Trump administration focuses on New York's Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, a federally funded agency housed in James' office. On T Read More

Healthcare Revelations in the Enacted Budget Financial Plan

The state financial plan published on June 10 disclosed key information about healthcare revenue and spending that lawmakers had not made public when approving the annual budget two weeks before. Read More

Federal Suit Traces Medicaid Fraud to the Top of NYS Government

The Trump administration's latest salvo against Medicaid fraud takes aim at a different kind of target – two high-ranking New York officials along with a major state contractor. A Read More

Healthcare Highlights in the New State Budget

Governor Hochul's focus on affordability seems to have skipped over the healthcare portions of the new state budget. The deal finalized May 27 Read More

Lawmakers Consider Hiking Fees for Filling Prescriptions

UPDATE: The proposal discussed below passed the Assembly Friday evening by an unofficial vote of 133-0. Having previously been approved by the Senate, the bill will head to Governor Hochul's desk for her signature or ve Read More

Budget Deal Reportedly Earmarks $100M for 1199 and Extends MCO Tax

As Governor Hochul and legislative leaders rush to finalize the overdue state budget, outlines of some healthcare-related deals have begun to emerge from the closed-door negotiations. Read More

Albany Wavers on Shutting Down a Medicaid Racket

As Washington threatens to crack down on fraud and abuse in New York's Medicaid program, state legislators are doing their best to demonstrate why federal intervention is needed. A Read More

Getting to the Bottom of the 340B Drug Discount Boondoggle

Some of New York's largest and most prosperous hospitals are reporting rapidly growing amounts of revenue from pharmacy sales – most of it apparently flowing from a controversial drug discount program known as 340B. Read More