[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6624066,"mediaKeyId","2768648-18837cdf9507712d3ff93210658bb0e3","parentId",2768648,"title","Pharmacists, patients and insurers clash in committee over alternative funding programs; bill moved to next year for revision","audioSeconds",1118,"startMs",8460000,"endMs",9578000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2768648-18837cdf9507712d3ff93210658bb0e3&start=8460&end=9578","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2768648-18837cdf9507712d3ff93210658bb0e3/thumbnail_8460000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6624066/Tennessee/Pharmacists-patients-and-insurers-clash-in-committee-over-alternative-funding-programs-bill-moved-to-next-year-for-revision","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6624066-c0190fb6a6ce345cab419cdf964fee1e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771207157&Signature=KdwQ5WMEapTlxLKRmmIeyNmyNy4-yjoNvSiDrDvtux6pGd0g3c3~OlOku40zqkh73RatBqYVHaMx4VoBNWolQyWw-HhWgOxizGTNe~NqnFDj0OaH~Neee0ajVZrm1-uMKhlCP0EMtXFZfbpupSFAPSdZMiL8Xmya5GPavLF3j80p0LsQZ0OIzcZ0Y0EEaPk7e4HTx2SUgOjf7TDwmAmeAXJPCtwKP7-rm9xO7iKKh8CNBSbgoDgdpd859jUqfsZxEfyCeHow-~FTtHkYpJQaCaoasgiT2RJWj8yHsEzauefh6QoSKKrW-4VCO2bQw~plO19CdOAHM2v7NBNNcc4PZg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","TN State Legislature","date","2025-03-25T00:00:00Z","article","Senate Bill 4‑20 prompted one of the longest panels of witnesses in the Commerce and Labor Committee, as pharmacists, patients with chronic conditions, employers and insurers described competing views on so‑called alternative funding programs (AFPs) and co‑pay maximizer arrangements.

Physicians and specialty pharmacists testified the alternative programs delay access to necessary drugs by steering insured patients away from an insurer’s standard pharmacy benefit, and create logistical hurdles—import requirements, telehealth visits with international providers, and weeks‑long delays. A specialty pharmacist presented internal health‑system data showing AFP‑enrolled patients waited nearly two months to receive medications, versus a typical 2–5 day turnaround for patients covered under the insurer benefit. A patient with severe hemophilia described that he could not go weeks without medication and said AFP delays could be life‑threatening.

Employers and some insurers defended tools that use manufacturer assistance (copay maximizers) to reduce employer cost and preserve benefit coverage. Executives from the Tennessee Employer Benefits Alliance and Blue Cross Blue Shield spoke about savings these programs produce and urged the committee to preserve co‑pay maximizer tools designed to lower costs while maintaining no out‑of‑pocket exposure for patients. Blue Cross told the committee it would accept a compromise that banned AFPs while preserving co‑pay maximizers such as its PrudentRx program.

PBM and employer representatives said the bill as drafted would eliminate some employer tools to manage high pharmacy costs and argued employers rely on a wide array of benefit design options to comply with fiduciary duties and control premiums.

After hours of witnesses and push‑and‑pull among stakeholders, Senator Reeves (the sponsor) and supporters urged the committee to move the bill out but to allow time to finalize compromise language. The committee agreed to roll the measure to the first calendar of 2026 to permit the parties to resolve a technical compromise that would ban AFPs while preserving legitimate copay‑maximizer programs. Committee members signaled the bill would return with a narrower, industry‑vetted amendment aimed at banning AFPs (which carve drugs out of insured coverage and funnel patients to assistance programs) while leaving employer‑sponsored copay maximizers intact.

The hearing showcased significant disagreement between patient advocates and employers/insurers on one side and pharmaceutical companies and certain auditors on the other. The committee’s decision to hold the bill for early 2026 reflected the complexity and competing fiduciary and access arguments.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Commerce and Labor Committee\tMar 25, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","After extended testimony from pharmacists, patients, employers and insurers, the Commerce and Labor Committee agreed to carry SB 4‑20—the bill aimed at banning alternative funding programs that steer insured patients out of coverage—into early 2026 for further work and compromise.","taxTitle","Commerce and Labor, Senate, Committees, Legislative, Tennessee","taxId",36488,"location","Tennessee","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6624072,"Committee advances bill protecting 340B contract pharmacies after hours of testimony from hospitals, unions and pharma",2935,2008000,4943000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2768648-18837cdf9507712d3ff93210658bb0e3&start=2008&end=4943","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2768648-18837cdf9507712d3ff93210658bb0e3/thumbnail_2008000.jpg","/articles/6624072/Tennessee/Committee-advances-bill-protecting-340B-contract-pharmacies-after-hours-of-testimony-from-hospitals-unions-and-pharma","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6624072-55973585cd56f347595c07f2d731f46d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771207157&Signature=c48pMEMEfJ7K90Rx6e8xvPJGmD75EC2Gxz1DDeTRk0Hhwz0PKqNzwjbAA8kNjybFl-LP010ekdi~tyhsvsC-vwa~ctdlFCgAn9zce9-3CWP2k1LBCQZqZ7Co9dJX78YcaUGGLkEp1DkCqT9lgfRPFBD2WFJUUIaj3tQg8Y3jkZIBxZZ0vncNmOI-UyqnCZbP-Z68pVGowhxq1TODuDxeOTAxj1H-RW0UYdT0iisRYhhpJoBQOVMn7QKlR7D6~uD45emN9eRKZ~Em1pcBBcFTRy1sCllhdHUmTnJuFLLhfm52oUieZS-RMD2F3b-v4as737M0TsoPGcMY9MkmMeD3Tw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 14‑14, a measure addressing access and arrangements under the federal 340B drug discount program, drew more than an hour of testimony in the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee before the committee adopted an amendment and advanced the bill to the finance committee.

Sponsor Chairman Briggs described SB 14‑14 as a bill to protect safety‑net providers that serve uninsured and underinsured patients by ensuring manufacturers cannot block or restrict contract pharmacy arrangements that allow covered entities to obtain discounted outpatient drugs. \"The bill protects patients and not the pharmaceutical companies,\" Briggs said, explaining the 340B program lets covered entities stretch scarce resources and reinvest savings in care for vulnerable populations.

Witnesses for and against the bill appeared. George Hampton, president and CEO of Curex Pharmaceuticals, opposed the bill, saying it would expand contract pharmacies, add middlemen and reduce transparency, which he argued could harm patient safety and drug innovation. Kermit Moore of the A. Philip Randolph Institute and Sharon Lamberton of the pharmaceutical manufacturers association testified that 340B has grown substantially and that audits show discounts are not reliably reaching patients; they urged congressional reform rather than state mandates.

Safety‑net providers and federally qualified health centers told the committee the 340B savings at their sites are reinvested in wraparound care—mobile units, substance use and mental‑health services, same‑day medications for uninsured patients—and that restricting contract pharmacy arrangements would reduce access in rural and underserved areas. Mercy Community Healthcare’s director of care coordination described how her center uses 340B savings to buy same‑day medications and support programs for low‑income patients.

Committee members questioned witnesses about the program’s growth—witnesses gave competing explanations that included expanded program eligibility, rising drug prices and changes to participation classes. Members also asked whether manufacturer dollars under 340B are federal or private; witnesses clarified that discounts are provided by manufacturers (the program was created in federal law as section 340B of the Public Health Service Act) and are not paid by general tax appropriations to the program.

On committee procedure, the committee adopted amendment drafting code 004543 (a conforming amendment described by the sponsor as aligning the bill with applicable state and federal law). Several other amendments were withdrawn. After debate and testimony, the committee voted to advance SB 14‑14 to the finance committee. The clerk announced the committee tally as five ayes and four noes.

As the bill advances it is likely to face continued debate on whether state action should intervene in a federal program and how to ensure savings reach patients rather than being absorbed elsewhere in the health system.","A divided Senate Commerce and Labor Committee advanced Senate Bill 14‑14, which would protect safety‑net providers’ contract pharmacy arrangements under the federal 340B drug discount program after extended testimony from hospitals, community health centers, pharmaceutical manufacturers and labor groups.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6624076,"Senate committee backs bill to preempt local labor rules, citing uniformity for businesses",299,1483000,1782000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2768648-18837cdf9507712d3ff93210658bb0e3&start=1483&end=1782","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2768648-18837cdf9507712d3ff93210658bb0e3/thumbnail_1483000.jpg","/articles/6624076/Tennessee/Senate-committee-backs-bill-to-preempt-local-labor-rules-citing-uniformity-for-businesses","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6624076-5bb30454eb52730b3287bc93c032f634/orig.mp4?Expires=1771207157&Signature=TVy-yDw0tt6RSKB38HbfQEnMJQaw4S~uyPDx0RrXZGhybCU8YMpELTXcFU8U8r~nyy-epWKHUDT7WNwScOmWwDhHLcnsnxxIq5z5l5TbBusl6QT4rAU-iDRB5D3d0EqMBsC2wRSNm2L2hw2~fCMIuPzlM9jaTzJTMqLl8gp~tkUp97TcUei4C7P7IcrZKfg3-D7TmMPLcwDe1tibmKGBSbD7LpoOtsX4f-z~sjin1UvGKWvr6tvG1BtD71W91~2FVGWCeswUoxXdzidf012JzEfwoDgrQWtaESxZsMUVvw1Ifh5fgnB7H5NuFEY8-1B8kmmFLkDZWHFwVHSfCX6XZA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senators on the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee voted to advance Senate Bill 6-74, legislation sponsored by Sen. Taylor that would prohibit local governments from adopting new labor and employment rules that conflict with or exceed state or federal law.

The bill’s sponsor told the committee the measure was intended to provide regulatory predictability for businesses and to reduce compliance burdens on small employers. “This bill…will serve to proactively preempt local governments and state government from imposing new labor regulations. It will ensure uniformity across the state by granting the general assembly full control over labor and employment laws,” Sen. Taylor said during committee remarks.

Sen. Taylor said the proposal is forward‑looking and would apply to new local regulations going forward. Committee counsel, Matt King, clarified the bill’s scope during a legal briefing: the language would prohibit a local government from adopting or enforcing an ordinance, resolution, rule, code, requirement, or policy that establishes a term or condition of employment that conflicts with state law.

Questions from other senators focused on whether the bill would reach contract provisions or only formal local ordinances. Sen. Ackberry asked whether a city negotiating contract terms—such as minority participation requirements in public construction—would be affected. Counsel explained the bill’s text would likely apply: if the local condition was a labor regulation not authorized by state law, it could be preempted.

After discussion the committee voted to advance SB 6-74 to the committee on calendar. The clerk announced the result: eight ayes and one no; the bill now moves forward in the Senate process.

The measure drew questions about the reach of preemption—especially whether existing local requirements would be grandfathered and how contract provisions would be treated—issues committee counsel addressed but that will likely be raised again as the bill proceeds.

Votes at a glance: The clerk announced the committee tally as 8 ayes and 1 no; the result was recorded as “SB 6‑74 moves committee on calendar.”","The Senate Commerce and Labor Committee advanced Senate Bill 6-74, a measure sponsored by Sen. Taylor that would bar local governments from imposing new labor or employment regulations that exceed or conflict with state or federal law. The committee voted to move the bill to the calendar, 8–1.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6624057,"Committee unanimously advances bill to clarify insurance coverage for PANS/PANDAS treatments after parent testimony",417,4920000,5337000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2768648-18837cdf9507712d3ff93210658bb0e3&start=4920&end=5337","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2768648-18837cdf9507712d3ff93210658bb0e3/thumbnail_4920000.jpg","/articles/6624057/Tennessee/Committee-unanimously-advances-bill-to-clarify-insurance-coverage-for-PANSPANDAS-treatments-after-parent-testimony","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6624057-661a42d1ce886e4d49681bb1d0d49c75/orig.mp4?Expires=1771207157&Signature=NiVzhJcRVwra~sWCiuLT185QMT2Tr6q2hB32OHFH0mH4vH4z5mdIkE93GUNada-Yf8sW25weehQmLuEz7JL4nuA9K-AVtnBwprZA1ANyv0a1m8rm6oM08YUCKb~a-uqN494R73HCKYHtd5nnIb2zzhCg7jokA32hEdNrgDREvDTCUOi~izHypOzzGkIv54dbSJ0MGj8geBcfUZ0IMUjr4pBMEGG6TLPKOHbKth7mDWTikPv3JYPO300GOJuYzitdM5F1Bv-CgVYAo266Zuhj7IwJ0ANqpCvOZ1jvbRfZXwIIQmg4LNUAS027QuTq10BWc6XtoR36vt-6dvHkNmpV7g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Commerce and Labor Committee unanimously advanced Senate Bill 14‑26 following personal testimony from a Tennessee parent describing the effects of PANS/PANDAS on her child and the cost of medically necessary treatments that had been denied by insurance.

Sponsor Senator Watson explained the amendment before the committee and said it adjusts language to make coverage of certain treatments permissive and to add medical necessity language for PANDAS treatment recommendations. The sponsor said the amendment also removed language limiting lifetime or duration constraints so the committee would consider medical necessity in coverage decisions.

Lauren Wilson of the sponsor’s district told the committee about her daughter’s sudden onset of severe obsessive‑compulsive disorder and related symptoms at age 11. Ms. Wilson said her daughter required inpatient care, IVIG and plasma exchange that were denied by their insurer and cost the family more than $150,000 out of pocket; she said timely, specialized treatment helped her daughter recover and urged committee members to support SB 14‑26. \"Early effective treatment will reduce the long term burden and prevent permanent cognitive, behavioral, and physical impairment,\" Wilson told the committee.

Committee members asked procedural questions about amendments and then voted; the clerk recorded nine ayes. The bill was moved to the committee on calendar.

The hearing included no additional witness opposition at the committee level; the sponsor and family representatives emphasized clinical urgency and the high cost of out‑of‑pocket therapeutic interventions.","Senate Bill 14‑26, which would add coverage parameters for pediatric acute neuropsychiatric disorders (PANS/PANDAS) and make certain treatments permissive or subject to medical necessity standards, passed the Commerce and Labor Committee after mother’s testimony describing her daughter's diagnosis and out‑of‑pocket treatment costs.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6624062,"Senate panel approves bill requiring access to detransition care and limits local bans on therapy",692,7600000,8292000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2768648-18837cdf9507712d3ff93210658bb0e3&start=7600&end=8292","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2768648-18837cdf9507712d3ff93210658bb0e3/thumbnail_7600000.jpg","/articles/6624062/Tennessee/Senate-panel-approves-bill-requiring-access-to-detransition-care-and-limits-local-bans-on-therapy","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6624062-2ed255164395202677cf141839f6dc6c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771207157&Signature=mCAbfGXpe2iKwWvztHxfz6PuUvpFxh7Zu0TOyokhDaiqchPdICne5irKCpSGWvWG3KJveOsJhcmSa0aTNFpzPJ9l5AvatWxuqrxXYus1mQCeJhnK~4FRf9w2cZqvweT0Ue8v7db1YndCn3oDeWfyWoGZCB8R~wRqfH-29IrNlRyrnwwClWDYyYnekHKXQfDXKzSk7w-kBfRSNFfsuOVbDhUz3nohsS7hJYXQtc5EyGzdCNMzf5v9WVLDBc~-HA9lkBUfuarJ~egZn7pPMzdDdzmpG6pQo4AXMgIwP3wbw03TJWDA8oiDpbXlQlH76mnZnILcD0PtzZ1pfhH4ff1jQQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Commerce and Labor Committee advanced Senate Bill 6‑76 after the sponsor described provisions aimed at ensuring access to detransition care and restricting local bans on psychotherapy for gender dysphoria.

Sen. Taylor said the bill responds to concerns that some patients who later seek to reverse prior gender‑affirming procedures lack available insurance coverage or clinic pathways to receive detransition care. The measure would require clinics that provide transition services and insurers that cover transition plans to make detransition services available as well; it would also prohibit local governments from enacting policies that ban psychotherapy treatments (sometimes characterized in debate as conversion therapy bans) for treating gender dysphoria.

Senators questioned whether the measure mandates coverage and whether local governments could limit benefits in the plans they control. The sponsor and others described the bill as a mandate on plan design only where insurers already offer transition services; the legislation would require parity so a plan covering transition treatments must also cover detransition care. Committee discussion touched on medical necessity standards, reporting requirements for clinics that provide transition services, and public‑health concerns for immunocompromised populations when discussing related bills.

The committee adopted a sponsor amendment (drafting code 005099) and voted to move SB 6‑76 to the finance committee. The clerk announced the tally as five ayes and four noes. The Chair later noted one change in a member’s recorded vote, but the committee recorded the bill as advanced to finance.","Senate Bill 6‑76, sponsored by Sen. Taylor, would require clinics and insurers that cover gender‑affirming transition services to also provide detransition coverage and would prohibit local governments from banning certain psychotherapy treatments. The committee adopted an amendment and voted to send the bill to finance on a narrow margin.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Pharmacists, patients and insurers clash in committee over alternative funding programs; bill moved to next year for revision

Committee advances bill protecting 340B contract pharmacies after hours of testimony from hospitals, unions and pharma

Senate committee backs bill to preempt local labor rules, citing uniformity for businesses

Committee unanimously advances bill to clarify insurance coverage for PANS/PANDAS treatments after parent testimony

Senate panel approves bill requiring access to detransition care and limits local bans on therapy