Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Drug Pricing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers hear bill to give New Hampshire Prescription Drug Affordability Board better access to state data for price transparency
Summary
Representative Jess Edwards and PDAB officials described HB 645 as a law‑change to let the New Hampshire Prescription Drug Affordability Board request standardized reports from state agencies and private data holders so buyers can see true net drug costs.
Representative Jess Edwards told the committee HB 645 would change statutory procedures so the Prescription Drug Affordability Board (PDAB) can request standard reports from state data owners and use memoranda of understanding to access existing agency datasets instead of building a separate data warehouse. Edwards said the law’s purpose is to make pricing and utilization information available to buyers — state purchasers, insurers and large employers — so they can negotiate better contracts and identify unreasonable drug prices.
Edwards and former Representative and PDAB chair Gary Merchant described the bill’s main elements: (1) define and document a report methodology before issuing a data request; (2) require MOUs and collaboration with agencies that already collect health and claims data; (3) create a narrow, due‑process pathway for contested data calls in which entities can petition the board if they believe a request is unduly burdensome or business‑sensitive; and (4) limited, graduated penalties for noncompliance so the board has an enforcement tool if an entity refuses key data.
Department representatives, including Jason Aziz of the Insurance Department and Morgan Harris (health analytics), described existing state data holdings and a recent redundancy‑reduction analysis they published for PDAB. They signaled technical willingness to collaborate but noted legal complexity around receiving and handling business‑sensitive rebate and PBM data.
AARP New Hampshire and other consumer advocates testified in favor of the bill’s goals, saying PDAB needs better access to data to produce benchmarks, compare net prices that consider rebates, and deliver recommendations buyers can use. Testimony noted the complexity of rebate flows and that clearer data mapping is a prerequisite to measuring true net costs.
Committee members asked about enforcement and the proposed penalty cap (the draft ties penalties to a per‑day rate up to a capped total). Witnesses said the cap is a starting point and that the board and the committee could revisit penalty levels if needed.
No committee vote on HB 645 was taken during the hearing; sponsors requested follow‑up conversations with the Insurance Department, DOIT and other data stewards about specific data elements and legal protections.
