Arizona House Health Committee advances bills on nursing home cameras, pharmacy pay, SNAP soda and more

The Arizona House Committee on Health and Human Services took up a slate of health and social‑services bills on Feb. 17, 2025, advancing measures on electronic monitoring in assisted‑living rooms, pharmacy reimbursement rules, a state request for a USDA SNAP waiver to bar soda purchases, clarifying court‑ordered behavioral evaluations, and a study of nonemergency medical transportation rates.

The committee voted to forward most measures to the full House, often after contentious hearings in which industry groups, patient advocates and regulated providers sparred over supplier economics, individual privacy and how state or federal rules should be enforced.

Why it matters: Together the bills touch services used by tens of thousands of Arizonans—residents of long‑term care facilities, people who rely on Medicaid transportation, patients who fill prescriptions at local pharmacies, and SNAP recipients. The committee’s votes set the priorities that could move quickly to the House floor and, if approved there and by the Senate, to the governor’s desk.

The most heavily attended item was House Bill 2785, carried by Representative J. Wynne, which would allow residents of assisted living and nursing care facilities to install electronic monitoring in private rooms and authorizes the Department of Health Services (DHS) to assess civil penalties for violations. Representative John Wynne, who sponsored the bill, framed it as a safety measure: “If I rent a space in a facility and I want to put a camera in there, I ought to be able to do that,” he told the committee. Supporters, including AARP Arizona, said cameras have uncovered serious abuse: Dana Marie Kennedy, AARP Arizona state director, said cameras “offer some level of deterrence as protection for people who are incredibly vulnerable.” Opponents representing assisted‑living providers — including Marie Isaacson of Arizona LeadingAge and Karen Barno of Arizona Alpha — said cameras in private rooms threaten resident dignity and could push caregivers away.

Pharmacy reimbursement and PBMs: House Bill 2208 drew long testimony from rural pharmacists and insurers. Sponsor Representative Brooke explained the bill would require pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) to reimburse pharmacies at no less than the pharmacy’s actual acquisition cost plus a professional dispensing fee tied to the fee‑for‑service rate in the state Medicaid plan. Jason Dykstra, an owner of three rural pharmacies, told the committee, “Every day, my 3 rural pharmacies lose over $2,000 per day,” and described six‑figure losses over months when reimbursements fell below acquisition cost. Opponents — including the Pharmaceutical Care Management Association (PBM trade group) and representatives of health insurers — warned the bill would raise employer and insured costs; one witness estimated the dispensing fee change could add roughly $290 million a year across Arizona payers. Supporters said independent pharmacies are closing under current contracts that they describe as “take it or leave it.”

SNAP and soda: House Bill 2165, amended in committee to focus only on soda, directs the state Department of Economic Security to request a USDA waiver to exclude soda from SNAP (the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) purchases. Sponsor Representative Bisucci said soda has “zero nutritional value” and urged the waiver as a public‑health step. Opponents, including the William E. Morris Institute for Justice and others, urged caution: they said USDA has historically denied state waiver requests because of administrative burdens and that restricting SNAP purchases risks stigmatizing recipients. The committee adopted a technical amendment and advanced the bill on a close vote.

Behavioral‑health evaluations: House Bill 2742, sponsored by Representative Lopez, clarifies timing and filing rules for court‑ordered evaluations and treatment under Arizona’s mental‑health statutes. Hospitals that provide involuntary evaluations said a Pima County interpretation of filing deadlines has left some facilities unpaid for multiple days when courts are closed over weekends and holidays; Taipei Savage, CEO of Palo Verde Behavioral Health Hospital in Tucson, said his facility lost roughly $850,000 over five years because of denied days. The bill instructs statute language to treat filing timelines consistently across counties so facilities are paid for services provided while courts are closed.

Nonemergency medical transportation (NEMT) study: House Bill 2584 directs Access (the state Medicaid contractor) to accept an industry‑funded independent study of NEMT rates and include the study’s results in the administration’s next capitation‑rate request. Providers testified they can’t cover fleet, insurance and wage costs at current Medicaid fee levels: Patient Transport owner Tyson Huggins and AZ Care Transport owner Nicole Phillips said vehicle and labor costs have risen sharply and posted examples of posted Medicaid per‑trip rates (ambulatory, wheelchairs, stretcher) that they said are below private rates and not sustainable. Access told the committee it reviews rates annually and audits network adequacy; the committee pressed Access to share prior audit results and agreed that the study should be transparent about how any recommended changes would be implemented.

Other items: The committee also considered a multi‑state advanced practice registered nurse (APRN) compact (House Bill 2310). That measure produced split testimony: the Arizona State Board of Nursing and hospital groups urged adoption to improve workforce mobility and emergency response, while Arizona nurse organizations and many APRNs asked the Legislature to wait until national compact language and governance concerns are resolved. Technical and licensing cleanup bills for physician assistants and chiropractors also moved forward after limited debate.

Votes at a glance - HB 2785 (electronic monitoring in assisted‑living facilities): committee recommendation — due pass (motion carried). Outcome recorded by the committee: approved 11–1. (Mover: Vice Chair Heap.) - HB 2208 (PBM/pharmacy reimbursement reform): committee recommendation — due pass. Outcome recorded: approved 9 ayes, 0 nays, 2 present, 1 absent (committee roll call recorded by the clerk). (Mover: Vice Chair.) - HB 2165 (SNAP soda waiver request, amended to soda only): committee recommendation — due pass as amended. Final committee vote recorded as 7 ayes, 5 nays. (Mover: Vice Chair.) - HB 2742 (court‑ordered evaluation timelines): committee recommendation — due pass. Final committee vote recorded 10 ayes, 1 nay, 1 present. (Mover: Vice Chair.) - HB 2584 (NEMT rate study funded by providers): committee recommendation — due pass. Final committee vote recorded 11 ayes, 0 nays, 1 present. (Mover: Vice Chair.) - HB 2310 (APRN compact): discussed; committee did not advance the measure to final passage at this hearing (members asked for further stakeholder work and did not vote to forward it at this time).

What’s next: Bills given a due‑pass recommendation will go to the full House for further floor debate; measures that need additional stakeholder work, including the APRN compact, may return to committee. Sponsors and agency staff were urged at the hearing to provide clearer cost or implementation studies where requested — notably for PBM reimbursement mechanics, NEMT rate impacts, and the practical effect of a SNAP waiver should USDA approve it.

Who spoke most often: Sponsors and staff (Representative Wynne on HB 2785; Representative Brooke on HB 2208; Representative Bisucci on HB 2165; Representative Lopez on HB 2742) plus organized stakeholders: Arizona LeadingAge, AARP Arizona, Arizona Alpha (assisted‑living trade), independent pharmacists and the Arizona Pharmacy Business Council, PBM representatives (PCMA), insurers, and providers of behavioral‑health services in Pima County.

Ending note: Committee members repeatedly told witnesses they were weighing trade‑offs between patient safety, provider viability and administrative feasibility. In several instances the panel voted to advance bills while pressing agencies to return more precise implementation plans, cost estimates or letters of agreement from affected counties or payers before the measures proceed further in the legislative process.