Panel debates PSAO transparency; amendment clarified pharmacy–PBM communications but HB2551 failed to advance
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Committee considered HB2551 to regulate Pharmacy Services Administrative Organizations (PSAOs), adopted an amendment clarifying pharmacies may communicate directly with PBMs and requiring remittance pass-throughs, but after extended debate the committee voted not to pass the bill out of committee.
House Bill 2551 would create a regulatory framework for Pharmacy Services Administrative Organizations (PSAOs) that provide administrative services to independent and small-chain pharmacies. The committee considered a Williams/Sutton amendment to clarify that nothing in the statute would prevent an independent or small-chain pharmacy from communicating directly with a pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) and to require PSAO contracts to pass remittances to the pharmacy within a reasonable time.
The amendment was moved, seconded and discussed; Representative Collins and others asked for a definition of "small chain," and reviser Eileen said the intent was family-owned two- or three-store chains that contract with PSAOs rather than national chains. The amendment passed on a voice vote.
Debate then turned to broader concerns about the bill's scope and potential unintended consequences. Representatives raised issues including whether PSAOs would be made a required middleman, whether purchasing agreements and certain PSAO activities are accurately described in the bill, and whether the $500-per-day penalty for noncompliance was appropriate given modest PSAO fees reported by pharmacists. Several members said independent pharmacists told them PSAOs perform limited services and that the bill might not address the transparency pharmacists requested from PBMs. After discussion and a voice/hand-count vote, the chair announced that the bill "does not pass out of committee."