To amend sections 1345.99 and 3901.99 and to enact sections 1345.033 and 3901.216 of the Revised Code to prohibit certain increases in the prices of, and cost sharing for, prescription drugs and drug therapy related devices and supplies during a shortage and to name this act the Medical Shortage Protection Act.
HB 940, the Medical Shortage Protection Act, would create new protections for consumers and insured patients during shortages of prescription drugs, including generic drugs, and drug-therapy-related devices and supplies. The bill limits how much a supplier may raise the price of a covered drug, device, or supply during a shortage: sales or offers to sell in Ohio could not exceed 10% above the pre-shortage price. It also limits health plan issuers and administrators from increasing cost sharing by more than 10% above the amount charged before the shortage period.
The bill defines a shortage period by reference to either federal action under the Defense Production Act or a gubernatorial emergency declaration made with advice from specified health authorities. Violations of the pricing limit would be treated as an unconscionable consumer practice under Ohio consumer law, and violations of the insurance cost-sharing limit would be treated as an unfair or deceptive insurance practice. The bill also creates a medical shortage fund in the state treasury, funded by penalties collected under the new provisions, to be used by the director of health to address shortages of prescription drugs and related devices and supplies.
HB 940 would add new sections to Ohio’s consumer protection and insurance codes and amend penalty provisions in those chapters. It would give consumers and covered persons a private right of action, allow recovery of treble-type damages at six times actual economic loss, and authorize attorney’s fees and costs for successful claims. It also establishes misdemeanor and civil penalty exposure for reckless violations, including per-violation fines and daily fines during the shortage period, with collected amounts directed into a newly created medical shortage fund for shortage mitigation efforts.
The available record shows the bill was introduced and referred to the House Health Committee, but there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes in the provided materials. As a result, there is no documented floor or committee sentiment to assess from the record. Based on the bill’s structure, the measure appears consumer- and patient-protective, aiming to curb price spikes and insurance cost-sharing increases during shortages.
The main policy tension in HB 940 is between protecting patients from shortage-related price increases and imposing price and cost-sharing caps on suppliers and insurers. Potential points of contention include whether a 10% cap is appropriate, whether the shortage triggers are sufficiently clear, and whether the bill’s penalties and private enforcement provisions are too severe or could create compliance burdens. Suppliers, drug manufacturers, insurers, and administrators would likely be the affected parties most concerned about the bill, while consumers, patients, and health advocates would likely support its protections.