Ohio 2025-2026 Regular Session

Ohio Senate Bill SB198

Caption

Prohibit certain actions re: reimbursing 340B covered entities

Impact

The proposed legislation, if enacted, would fundamentally alter the way drug manufacturers interact with 340B covered entities, preventing practices that limit these entities' ability to procure drugs at reduced prices. This change is expected to bolster the mission of 340B grantees, which includes community health centers and hospitals that serve economically disadvantaged patients. Supporters argue that these amendments will strengthen healthcare access for vulnerable populations by ensuring that these entities can effectively purchase and provide affordable medications without facing discriminatory practices from manufacturers.

Summary

Senate Bill 198 (SB198) seeks to amend various sections of Ohio's Revised Code to specifically prohibit certain actions by drug manufacturers relating to reimbursements made to 340B covered entities. The bill outlines restrictions on how drug manufacturers and pharmacy benefit managers can limit the access of these entities to crucial medications at discounted prices facilitated through the federal 340B program. The legislation aims to enhance transparency and promote better accessibility to medications for low-income populations by ensuring that 340B grantees can acquire necessary drugs without undue barriers imposed by manufacturers.

Sentiment

The overall sentiment around SB198 is one of cautious optimism among healthcare advocates who view it as a necessary step towards safeguarding access to affordable drugs within the framework of the 340B program. However, there are concerns among opponents, particularly from drug manufacturers and associated entities, who argue that the bill imposes excessive regulatory burdens and could disrupt existing pharmaceutical market dynamics. This dichotomy in sentiment underscores a significant tension between the goals of health equity advocates and the interests of the pharmaceutical industry.

Contention

Notable points of contention revolve around the potential implications for drug pricing and the operational viability of healthcare entities. Critics of the bill express worry that restrictions on drug manufacturers could lead to decreased investment in drug development and adverse impacts on the overall pharmaceutical supply chain. The debate thus highlights broader issues regarding the balance between ensuring access to affordable medications and maintaining a robust market for pharmaceutical innovations.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB913

Pharmacy benefit managers.

CA SB362

Chain community pharmacies: quotas.

LA HB432

Provides for the regulation of pharmacy services administrative organizations (OR +$88,000 SG EX See Note)

MS HB1125

Pharmacy services; prohibit insurers and PBMs from requiring persons to obtain exclusively through pharmacies that they own.

LA HB387

Provides for the regulation of pharmacy services administrative organizations

CA AB401

Pharmacy: remote dispensing site pharmacy: telepharmacy: shared clinic office space.

AR SB593

To Amend The Arkansas Pharmacy Benefits Manager Licensure Act; And To Create The Pharmacy Services Administrative Organization Act.

CA AB690

Pharmacies: relocation: remote dispensing site pharmacy: pharmacy technician: qualifications.