Michigan Senate Bill SB1179

Michigan 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 12/4/24
• Refer: 12/4/24
• Report Pass: 12/12/24
• Refer: 12/12/24
• Report Pass: 12/13/24
• Engrossed: 12/13/24
• Refer: 12/13/24

Caption

Health: pharmaceuticals; drug manufacturers from engaging in certain conduct with pharmacies participating with a 340B program; prohibit. Amends 1978 PA 368 (MCL 333.1101 - 333.25211) by adding sec. 17757c. TIE BAR WITH: SB 0952'24

Impact

If enacted, SB1179 will directly influence regulations surrounding pharmaceutical distributors and their interactions with healthcare providers. It establishes a framework whereby 340B entities must provide annual reports detailing their compliance with federal requirements, as well as the impact of the 340B program on the communities they serve. This legislation reinforces the role of the 340B program in ensuring that vulnerable populations access affordable healthcare, while also placing the onus on manufacturers to adhere to these regulations, thereby fostering a more accountable and equitable healthcare system.

Summary

Senate Bill 1179 aims to protect the integrity of the 340B drug pricing program in Michigan by prohibiting manufacturers and wholesalers from limiting the acquisition of 340B drugs by 340B entities and their contracted pharmacies. The bill amends the Public Health Code and introduces new reporting requirements that will enhance transparency and oversight of the program. Specifically, it prevents manufacturers from engaging in discriminatory practices that could undermine the ability of these entities to provide essential medications to underserved populations, maintaining the objectives of the 340B program to support healthcare access.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding SB1179 appears to be supportive among healthcare advocates and organizations that rely on the 340B program for sustaining their operations. Proponents argue that the bill is crucial in safeguarding access to low-cost medications for underserved communities. However, there may be concerns from manufacturers and some industry groups about the potential regulatory burdens and constraints imposed by the new requirements, suggesting a need for balancing interests between manufacturers and healthcare providers within the legislative framework.

Contention

While SB1179 is aimed at enhancing protections for the 340B program, it is not without contention. Critics may raise questions regarding the enforcement of its provisions and the feasibility of the annual reporting requirements, especially for smaller 340B entities that might struggle with compliance costs. Additionally, there may be debates over how these regulations could impact drug pricing and availability within the state, indicating that the bill's implications for both the healthcare system and pharmaceutical industry could be complex and multifaceted.