HB78 prohibits drug manufacturers, their agents, and affiliated companies from discriminating against entities participating in the federal 340B drug pricing program. The bill is aimed at protecting federally qualified health centers, lookalike clinics, and their contracted pharmacies so they can acquire, receive, and dispense discounted 340B drugs for eligible patients without manufacturer interference.
The bill defines key terms such as 340B drug, 340B program, applicable entity, affiliate, and manufacturer, and it bars manufacturers from blocking delivery of 340B drugs to contract pharmacies, interfering with dispensing to eligible patients, or conditioning access on the submission of claims, utilization, purchasing, or other data unless federal law requires it. The act takes effect January 1, 2026.
Impact
HB78 would add a new state-law prohibition on discriminatory practices affecting 340B-covered entities and their contract pharmacies, creating enforceable protections beyond the federal 340B framework. It would affect prescription drug manufacturers, manufacturer agents, affiliates, federally qualified health centers, lookalike clinics, and pharmacies contracted to dispense 340B drugs, while reinforcing access to discounted medications for low-income and underserved patients.
Sentiment
The recorded votes show the bill passed both chambers, but with notable opposition: 36-27 in the House and 26-14 in the Senate. That pattern suggests the bill had majority support and was viewed favorably by proponents of 340B access, while also drawing substantial concern from some lawmakers about its policy implications. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record indicates support strong enough for passage but not broad consensus.
Contention
The main point of contention is the balance between protecting 340B entities’ access to discounted drugs and limiting manufacturer control over distribution and data collection. Supporters likely view the bill as necessary to prevent manufacturers from restricting contract pharmacy arrangements or imposing data demands that could undermine the 340B program. Opponents appear to have been concerned about the bill’s reach into manufacturer business practices, especially the prohibition on requiring claims or utilization data and the limits on how drugs are delivered and dispensed through contract pharmacies.