Louisiana House Bill 358 Sparks Controversy Over Pharmacy Ownership

Categories: Louisiana Business NewsLouisiana HealthcareLouisiana News

Lawmakers expressing diverse opinions on Louisiana House Bill 358 regarding pharmacy ownership.

News Summary

In Louisiana, House Bill 358 aims to prohibit pharmacy benefit managers from owning pharmacies, sparking a heated debate among lawmakers and industry stakeholders. While the bill seeks to level the playing field for independent pharmacies, major chains like CVS argue it could lead to significant closures and job losses. Governor Jeff Landry has endorsed the legislation, emphasizing its consumer protection goals. As discussions continue, the implications for Louisiana’s healthcare landscape remain uncertain.

BATON ROUGE, LA — A heated discussion is taking place in Louisiana over House Bill 358, which would prohibit pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) from owning pharmacies. The legislation aims to shield independent pharmacies from the dominance of large corporations, but it has generated significant controversy among lawmakers and industry stakeholders.

The Louisiana House passed Bill 358 with an overwhelming vote of 88 to 4. This action occurred on the second-to-last day of the legislative session, reflecting the urgency and intensity of the debate surrounding the bill. However, the Senate had already adjourned before it could review the measure.

Supporters claim that the bill will enhance consumer choices and counteract the overwhelming market presence of larger pharmacy chains. The legislation seeks to level the playing field for local independent pharmacies, which advocates argue have been adversely affected by the business practices of PBMs.

Conversely, major pharmacy chain CVS, which operates both a pharmacy benefits manager and a network of drugstores, has voiced strong opposition to the bill. The company argues that its enactment could lead to the closure of 119 CVS pharmacies across Louisiana, which would impact approximately 1 million patients statewide. Furthermore, the pharmacy chain indicates that as many as 22,000 patients who depend on high-cost specialty drugs could be affected by these potential closures.

In light of these concerns, CVS has launched a public lobbying campaign against the bill, urging customers to engage with their lawmakers regarding the potential implications. The company has also indicated that the legislation could result in significant job losses, estimating that around 2,700 CVS employees in Louisiana could be impacted.

In response to CVS’s campaign, some lawmakers have accused the company of employing fear tactics to sway public opinion. They assert that taking a stand against large corporations that have marginalized independent pharmacies is essential to restoring fairness in the market and ultimately lowering drug prices.

Governor Jeff Landry has publicly endorsed Bill 358, criticizing PBMs for their role in driving up drug prices. He contends that the legislation aligns with the state’s goal of supporting local businesses and protecting consumers.

Initially, the language of the bill focused on remote work regulations for pharmacy technicians. However, it was amended to forbid the ownership of pharmacies by PBMs, leading to critiques regarding the last-minute introduction of such a significant provision. Some legislators and CVS have called for a more comprehensive public discussion on the bill’s long-term effects.

Rep. Dustin Miller, the bill’s sponsor, has assured stakeholders that sufficient time will be allocated for the implementation of the bill to allow pharmacies to adjust. The bill is set to take effect in January 2027, offering a grace period for pharmacies to adapt to the potential changes required by the new law.

The debate over Bill 358 is part of a broader national conversation about the functions and regulations of PBMs in the pharmaceutical industry. Earlier discussions in Louisiana have examined related proposals aimed at curtailing the influence of PBMs over pharmacies and addressing the rising costs of medication.

In response to the legislation, CVS is reportedly considering legal action similar to challenges it has made in Arkansas against comparable laws. Concerns have also been raised regarding the capacity of independent pharmacies to manage specialty drugs that CVS claims are its exclusive domain. Nonetheless, Rep. Miller has affirmed that many independent pharmacies possess the capability to fulfill these needs, suggesting that they could effectively serve their communities despite the changes proposed by the legislation.

As the legislative session concludes, the implications of House Bill 358 for Louisiana’s healthcare landscape remain to be fully realized, but it is clear that the ramifications will extend beyond pharmacies and patients, impacting the entire pharmaceutical market in the state.