SB1509 requires the Legislative Reference Bureau to study best practices for regulating pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) and for reducing prescription drug costs for health insurance plan beneficiaries. The study must look at how other states regulate PBMs and identify approaches that improve transparency in the health insurance system while lowering drug costs. The bureau must then submit a report with findings, recommendations, and any proposed legislation to the Legislature before the 2026 regular session.
The bill is a study measure rather than a direct regulatory change, so it does not itself impose new PBM rules or alter prescription drug pricing requirements immediately. Its practical effect is to create a formal review process that could lead to future legislation on PBM oversight, drug pricing transparency, and insurance market practices. The act is set to take effect on December 31, 2050, a delayed effective date that is commonly used in Hawaii legislation to signal a placeholder or administrative timing mechanism rather than immediate implementation.
Impact
SB1509 would not directly amend existing pharmacy, insurance, or consumer protection statutes at enactment; instead, it directs the Legislative Reference Bureau to produce a policy study that could inform later legislation. The measure affects pharmacy benefit managers, health insurers, and insured consumers by focusing on prescription drug affordability and transparency, but any binding legal changes would depend on future bills introduced after the report is delivered.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have generally favorable support in committee, with both the Senate Health and Human Services Committee and the Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee passing it with amendments and no recorded opposition in the vote tallies provided. At the same time, the later committee recommendation to defer the measure suggests some hesitation or a desire for further consideration, likely related to scope, timing, or whether a study is the best vehicle for addressing PBM and drug-cost concerns.
Contention
The main point of contention is not the goal of lowering prescription drug costs, which appears broadly supported, but rather how to approach the issue and whether a study is sufficient or necessary. Potential concerns likely center on the role and regulation of pharmacy benefit managers, the cost and usefulness of another legislative study, and whether the delayed effective date and deferment indicate uncertainty about moving to substantive regulation. The available record does not show explicit opposing arguments, but the deferment suggests unresolved questions among committee members about next steps.
Prescriptions for testosterone not allowed to be transmitted or reported within the prescription drug monitoring database and removes from the records all existing information concerning prior testosterone prescriptions.
Prescriptions for testosterone not allowed to be transmitted or reported within the prescription drug monitoring database and removes from the records all existing information concerning prior testosterone prescriptions.
Increases the maximum fill for non-opioid, non-narcotic controlled substances found in schedule II, so that a sixty-day (60) supply may be dispensed at any one time.
Increases the maximum fill for non-opioid, non-narcotic controlled substances found in schedule II, so that a ninety-day (90) supply may be dispensed at any one time.