Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Healthcare Pharmacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate advances PBM regulation after rejecting exemption for self‑insured employers
Summary
The Senate debated a pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) reform bill that would impose state controls on PBM practices. An amendment to exempt self‑insured (ERISA) employer plans failed; the chamber adopted the strike‑all language and passed the bill by morning roll call.
The Mississippi Senate passed legislation to regulate pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) after a long floor debate about the scope of state authority over employer plans protected by ERISA.
The bill’s supporters said it will curb abusive PBM practices, protect independent community pharmacists and improve patient access to drugs. Opponents — including several large employers — warned the statute could increase prescription costs for self‑insured employers and lead to litigation under ERISA.
Senator Parks, presenting the bill on the floor, said lawmakers had worked on the language over multiple years and that the measure was crafted to address spread pricing, ensure greater price transparency, and protect patients who require specialty drugs. The sponsor told the Senate the Department of Health would be asked to monitor effects and that the bill excludes certain narrow categories where requested by employers.
Senator England proposed an amendment to exempt self‑funded employer plans, including those covered by ERISA. England and other proponents of the exemption argued the change was necessary to avoid imposing state regulation on ERISA plans and to prevent potential litigation and large increases in employer health costs. Opponents — including Senator Parker and other advocates for independent pharmacists — said exempting self‑insured plans would gut the bill’s consumer protections and leave patients exposed.
The amendment to create an exemption for self‑insured and ERISA plans was put to a vote and failed on the floor. The Senate then adopted the strike‑all language sent by conferees and moved the bill by morning roll call. Sponsors and some members cautioned that federal preemption (ERISA) remains a legal risk; several senators said they expect litigation questions to be resolved over time or in federal courts.
What’s next: The bill heads to the governor if both chambers concur, and sponsors said they expect implementation questions — especially those involving ERISA plans and potential employer impacts — to be prominent in post‑enactment guidance and any legal challenges.
