Legislature(2015 - 2016)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/31/2016 01:30 PM Senate LABOR & COMMERCE
Note: the audio
and video
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Confirmation Hearings | |
| SB201 | |
| Confirmation Hearings | |
| SB175 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | SB 201 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 175 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 166 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 169 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
SB 175-PHARMACY BENEFITS MANAGERS
2:14:33 PM
CHAIR COSTELLO reconvened the meeting and announced the
consideration of SB 175. She noted that this is the first
hearing and a committee substitute is forth coming.
2:15:43 PM
SENATOR CATHY GIESSEL, Alaska State Legislature, as sponsor,
introduced SB 175. She noted that the Labor and Commerce
Committee is very supportive of small businesses in Alaska, of
which local pharmacies are one. Small businesses are a vital
part of Alaska's economy and that is the focus of SB 175. It has
to do with fair and reasonable treatment and predictable
guidelines that come from an entity called a pharmacy benefit
manager (PBM). Local pharmacies must deal with PBMs in order to
run their businesses. Currently, there are no real guidelines
for reimbursements by PBMs to local pharmacies so PBMs can
change reimbursement rates and request audits at will. They can
also refuse to respond to, or pay pharmacies, for the dispensing
medications. Pharmacies have no legal recourse at this point. SB
175 will provide an avenue of appeal to an unreasonable audit as
their last recourse.
She noted support letters from many small pharmacies and some
include examples of unfair treatment by PBMs. Several pharmacies
have been driven out of business by PBMs. She also noted the
four-page letter from a large pharmaceutical company from
Washington, DC, that outlines reasons not to pass the
legislation. She provided the history behind the profitable PBM
industry.
SENATOR GIESELL said 33 other states have passed similar
legislation demanding transparency in pricing and fair audits.
She concluded that she considers PBMs as "pharmacy billion-
dollar middlemen."
JANE CONWAY, Staff, Senator Cathy Giessel, Alaska State
Legislature, presented information related to SB 175. She
delivered a PowerPoint to explain PBMs. She said PBMs started in
1970 as claims processors and have since become intertwined in
almost every aspect of the pharmaceutical supply chain. They are
almost unregulated at the state and federal levels and they
represent some of the largest companies in the nation.
She listed examples of PBM's market power and influence:
CVS/Caremark, Express Scripts, and OptumRX control over 70
percent of all U.S. scripts.
She said PBMs are designed to reduce administrative costs for
insurers, validate patient eligibility, administer plan
benefits, negotiate costs between pharmacies and health plans,
and audit pharmacies for fraud. PBMs also develop pharmacy
provider networks, and pharmacies must accept PBM contracts.
She noted every opposition letter talks about negotiated
contracts, but they are really "take it or leave it" contracts.
She cited an example.
MS. CONWAY continued to say that PBMs influence what drugs are
dispensed, collect money from drug manufacturers, and restrict
pharmacies on how many pills they can dispense at a given time.
They dictate how much pharmacies will be paid for the drugs they
dispense, have free reign to dictate what pharmacies are
permitted to do in a given network, operate their own mail-order
pharmacies, and audit pharmacies at will.
2:23:19 PM
MS. CONWAY explained how PBMs work. The insurer hires a PBM to
manage drug costs and it negotiates prices for both
insurers/manufacturers and insurers/pharmacies, then with
manufacturers, and finally with manufacturers/wholesalers.
Finally, the PBM negotiates insurer reimbursement for drugs and
dispensing fees with pharmacies.
MS. CONWAY said SB 175 brings fairness to audits and doesn't
allow audits during the first seven days of each month because
of high patient volume. It is designed to prevent targeting of
clerical errors and it establishes a reasonable timeframe to
prepare for an audit.
The bill also establishes an audit appeals process for
pharmacies and guidelines for PBMs to follow regarding patient
confidentiality. Extrapolation cannot be used in assessing fees
and penalties. Alaska pharmacists would not be penalized for
providing mail-order service to their customers. Finally, the
bill does not prevent the recoupment of funds where fraud,
waste, and abuse exist.
She noted that 33 states have already enacted fair audit
legislation and 24 states have already enacted Maximum Allowable
Cost (MAC) transparency legislation.
MS. CONWAY said the bill will also require registration of PBMs
with the Division of Insurance. It sets up guidelines for
generic drug MAC pricing, establishes a mechanism for a pharmacy
to appeal MAC pricing, and prevents auditing local pharmacists
out of a job.
2:26:28 PM
She related that there are many stories from pharmacists about
the abuses of PBMs. She reviewed an audit from her hometown
pharmacy in Soldotna. The PBM extrapolated a .1 percent error
and came up with a $7,300 bill. The pharmacist found no recourse
but to sell his business to an outside company.
2:28:15 PM
MS. CONWAY turned to the maximum allowable cost (MAC) that can
be reimbursed to the pharmacist for dispensing a prescription.
Typically, PBMs use an aggressively low MAC price list to
reimburse their contracted pharmacies and a different, higher
list of prices when they sell to their clients or plan sponsors.
They reimburse low and charge high, pocketing the significant
spread between the two prices. Most plan sponsors are unaware
that multiple MAC lists are being used and have no real concept
of how much revenue the PBM retains.
She said when PBMs fail to update MAC lists in a timely manner,
pharmacies are forced to dispense at a loss, sometimes as high
as $100 or more, or not dispense at all. When prices increase,
PBMs often wait weeks or even months before updating MAC lists.
The acquisition price spike/lagging reimbursement trend has a
very significant impact on pharmacies' ability to remain in
business. Neither plan sponsors nor contracted retail network
pharmacies have any transparency into the MAC process.
2:30:52 PM
MS. CONWAY addressed what SB 175, a MAC transparency bill, does.
It sets reasonable standards on what can be MAC'd, requires
regular reporting of MACs to a pharmacy in a useable format, and
provides for a defined MAC appeals process.
It does not mandate that a PBM reimburse a pharmacy at a higher
amount, or represent an administrative burden on the PBM, nor
does it mandate that a PBM approve a pharmacy's MAC appeal. It
does not result in increased costs to the healthcare system.
2:31:38 PM
She reviewed the statistics on the total pharmacies in Alaska;
of the 84 pharmacies, 20 are independents.
She said that 24 states have passed similar legislation and 33
have passed fair and uniform pharmacy audits.
2:32:33 PM
CHAIR COSTELLO opened public testimony.
2:33:10 PM
JASON TAPLEY, Community Pharmacist, testified in support of SB
175. He said he works for SEARCH. He has had 5-10 audits where
he has had to prove "that the money was yours," and to show
documentation that he could recover the costs. This bill will
provide a clear, consistent process for these audits to occur.
2:35:13 PM
MARGARET SODEN, representing herself, said she is a retired
pharmacist testifying in support of SB 175. She recalled her
fifty years in the field and the current policy of third-party
billing. She said she has undergone a number of audits, but with
proper notification and conduct they can be done and cause the
least disruption. She shared a personal story of undergoing an
audit in mid-winter in Fairbanks and opined that this bill will
establish some parameters for audits to make them easier.
2:38:56 PM
GERALD BROWN, representing himself, said he is a pharmacist and
business owner testifying in support of SB 175. A lot of
contracts are sent by PBMs and this would provide some structure
for those contracts, most of which are "take it or leave it."
The MAC provision is very important because of the terrible
reimbursement reductions. The take it or leave it contracts make
it impossible to negotiate.
2:41:56 PM
SCOTT WATTS, Community Pharmacy, said he is a business owner
testifying in strong support of SB 175. The bill establishes
strong standards for audits and does away with the penalties for
clerical errors. He provided an example of a recent audit that
contained clerical errors and the pharmacy was charged $6,000
recoupment for the entire prescription.
He noted that MAC pricings need to be updated or the pharmacy
ends up dispensing at a lower cost. There is currently no way to
get through to a PBM. While the contract is signed by a
pharmacist, there is no room for negotiation.
2:44:48 PM
MOLLY GRAY, President, Alaska Pharmacists Association, testified
in support of SB 175. It aligns with the pharmacy's mission to
provide quality care. They are asking for a standard set of
rules for audits.
2:46:17 PM
DIRK WHITE, representing himself, testified in support of SB
175. He said he has been a community hospital pharmacist for 31
years. Their primary issue is the low cost reimbursement; it is
all about MAC pricing. Last year they lost $22,176.42 on
prescriptions in the grocery store pharmacy. He provided other
examples of losses.
The said the bill wouldn't limit audits. He mentioned that his
contract does not allow mail order prescriptions to rural areas.
2:49:07 PM
CINDY LAUBACHER, Express Scripts, testified in opposition to SB
175. She voiced concern about cost implications the bill would
have on their clients and the limitations on auditing. It
restricts the number of claims that can be reviewed and the
lookback timeframe.
She said MAC was created as a means of incentivizing the
purchase of generic drugs. That became the industry standard for
reimbursing pharmacies. If the pharmacy disputes the
reimbursement, they have the opportunity to request an audit.
This bill would destroy any incentive to prescribe less
expensive medications.
2:51:48 PM
ERIC DOUGLAS, CVS Health, testified in opposition to SB 175. He
addressed misnomers mentioned in today's testimony. He said SB
175 is an omnibus bill aimed at every anti-PBM legislation that
has been introduced. He said there are multiple audit laws in
the U.S. He said CVS was not contacted to discuss this bill.
The audit provision in SB 175 is not how they operate. They
don't extrapolate and there is an appeal process available. He
disputed the statement about MAC reimbursement levels. Generic
drugs are commoditized and they set a maximum allowable cost. He
maintained that there is an appeals process. Putting PBMs under
the insurance division regulations is wrong because they aren't
insurance companies.
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if he has supported this type of
legislation in any of the 33 states that have passed it.
MR. DOUGLAS answered no, but they have supported some audit
bills.
2:57:07 PM
BARRY CHRISTENSEN, Co-Chair, Alaska Pharmacists Association,
testified in support of SB 175. He noted that this topic has
been discussed since 2008 when a similar bill passed the Senate.
He disputed the statement that there hadn't been meetings or
negotiations with PBMs; he recalled a meeting Senator Egan held.
PBMs also have lobbyists in Juneau.
He noted he submitted written testimony listing reasons why the
bill is needed. Pharmacies in Alaska need help with the audit
process and the amount they're getting paid for generic
prescription drugs.
2:59:47 PM
JENNY CASTILLO, Trust Administrator, Alaska Teamster Employer
Welfare Trust, testified in opposition to SB 175. She stated
that their PBM performs infrequent on-site audits; the audits
are multi-source claim reviews and are concurrent to claim
submissions to mitigate client prolonged risk to inaccurate
payments and decreased repetitive errors through timely
corrections. Their PBM conducts many audits and the parameters
are clearly outlined. The relationship is a negotiated
arrangement and should remain that way. It should not be
legislated.
3:01:59 PM
CHAIR COSTELLO kept public testimony open on SB 175. She asked
if the administration has a position on the bill.
3:02:14 PM
CHRIS MURRAY, Program Coordinator, Division of Insurance,
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development
(DCCED), said he does not have a position on SB 175.
CHAIR COSTELLO asked if he agrees PBMs need regulation.
MR. MURRAY said he just recently learned about this issue and
isn't prepared to answer.
CHAIR COSTELLO asked if it is appropriate for the division to
regulate PBMs.
MR. MURRAY said they would be able to do the job, should the
legislation pass.
CHAIR COSTELLO held SB 175 in committee awaiting a committee
substitute.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 24 - State Medical Board.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
State Medical Board |
| Medical Board Fact Sheet.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
State Medical Board |
| Medical - Carlson #1.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
State Medical Board |
| Medical - Clift #1.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
State Medical Board |
| Medical - Neyhart #1.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
State Medical Board |
| Medical - Humphreys #1.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
State Medical Board |
| Medical - Roderer #1.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
State Medical Board |
| SB 175 vsn W.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 175 |
| SB 175- Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 175 |
| SB 175 - Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 175 |
| SB 175 - Supporting Document - White 3-11-16.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 175 |
| SB 175 - Supporting Document - Cordova Drug 3-15-16.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 175 |
| SB 175 - Supporting Document - AKPhA.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 175 |
| SB 175 - Supporting Document - Island Pharm 3-11-16.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 175 |
| SB 201 - Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 201 |
| SB 201 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 201 |
| SB 201 Hearing Request.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 201 |
| SB 201 - Supporting Document - Board of Pharmacy.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 201 |
| SB 201 - Supporting Document - AKPha.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 201 |
| SB 175 - News Article - Anthem vs Express Scripts.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 175 |
| SB 175 - Opposition Letter - Teamsters.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 175 |
| SB 175 - PBM and MAC Presentation.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 175 |
| SB 175 - Supporting Document - Info NACDS.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 175 |
| SB 175 - Supporting Document - Soden.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 175 |
| SB 175 - Supporting Document PBM Watch - other states legislation.pdf |
SL&C 3/31/2016 1:30:00 PM |
SB 175 |