Jeanette Contreras portrait

PBMs profit while consumers foot the bill. Policymakers must act

By NCL Director of Health Policy Jeanette Contreras

As consumers, when we go to the pharmacy for our medications, we expect a fair price. However, there’s growing evidence that pharmacy benefit managers — or PBMs — have been impeding the savings that should be going to consumers. Consumers deserve  to share in the cost savings, and we need policymakers to step in and help make that happen.

We previously wrote about our disappointment in how PBMs have evolved from once honest brokers to becoming profit driven and greedy, now taking savings away from consumers and patients.

One avenue PBMs use to pocket savings is through pharmaceutical rebates. PBMs negotiate with companies to lock in discounts for drugs in order to secure the drugs’ placement on a list (formulary). PBMs have notoriously leveraged formularies to give greatest access to the drugs that pay the PBMs the largest rebates, leaving less expensive drugs off-limits to consumers.

A recent Senate Finance Committee report found that rebates to PBMs have significantly increased since 2013 (some as high as 70 percent). But these discounts fail to lower the patients’ out-of-pocket costs for necessary treatments, such as insulin. For one product, the manufacturer offered the PBM a 56 percent rebate – which means more than half of the savings for insulin are going to a company that doesn’t even make the lifesaving medication.

Insulin is expensive. Forbes recently reported that newer versions cost patients between $175 and $300 a vial. The story points out diabetes patients need multiple vials, the cost of which add up quickly; the total annual value of rebates and discounts for PBMs is likely to be more than $5,000 per patient. As a result, consumers lose, paying more than many of them can afford for lifesaving drugs.

Another way PBMs profit is by avoiding competition, which would drive value and savings for consumers. Three main PBMs accounted for about 60 percent of all U.S. prescription claims in 2019. And when it comes to insulin, with so few industry players, it’s no surprise that consumers again find themselves on the losing end.

We’re pleased to see that some policymakers in the states are taking steps to address these issues. In New Jersey, the state is shaking things up by creating alternatives to how it contracts with PBMs — which is, in turn, increasing competition and benefitting consumers. New Jersey residents are saving  a bundle (to the tune of $2.5 billion over five years).

In New Hampshire, a recent study shows that the state can expect to save an estimated $17.8-$22.2 million annually thanks to legislation that will utilize a similar competitive PBM contract process.

While this is encouraging news, there is still more work to be done to bring to light the role of PBMs. Policymakers need to step in to ensure PBMs deliver savings to patients as they were originally intended to do. We’re encouraging state and federal action to review the role PBMs play in driving up costs and to address the many loopholes they use to increase profits.

Consumers — not PBMs — should come first at the pharmacy counter. Reach out to your elected officials. Share this story on social media to help raise awareness. And stay tuned as we continue the conversation.

Jeanette Contreras portrait

Expanded Medicaid coverage for postpartum care

By NCL Director of Health Policy Jeanette Contreras

The COVID-19 pandemic has enlightened us to how the social determinants of health adversely impact maternal outcomes in low-income, medically underserved communities. Year after year, the United States continues to have the highest maternal mortality ratio among wealthy countries. In efforts to address this disparity, the American Rescue Plan Act includes a provision that allows states to expand Medicaid coverage to women for up to one year after childbirth.

The dismal maternal and infant mortality rates are directly correlated with the health disparities that disproportionately afflict black, indigenous, and women of color. A 2019 report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that Black women were 3.3 times more likely than white women to die from pregnancy-related complications and Native American and Alaska Native women were 2.5 times more likely than white women to die within a year after childbirth.

Medicaid has traditionally been seen as a safety net for low-income pregnant women and children, providing health coverage that funds more than four in ten births in the U.S. each year. Under federal law, Medicaid must cover pregnant women with incomes up to 138 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) through 60 days postpartum. Each year, over 1.6 million women across the U.S. are effectively placed at risk for becoming uninsured when that 60-day coverage period ends.

Women who live in states that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are eligible to continue their health coverage through Medicaid. Additionally, the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, which passed last year, provides states with a 6.2 percent increase to the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) rate to cover new enrollees eligible under the ACA Medicaid expansion as long as the Public Health Emergency is in place or at least throughout 2021. However, the women living in the 14 states that have yet to expand Medicaid would find themselves uninsured.

Under the American Rescue Plan, for the next five years, states have the option to extend Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) eligibility to pregnant individuals for 12 months postpartum. Though each state’s Medicaid program is different, the inclusion of this provision incentivizes states to extend health care to mothers during the most vulnerable time in their lives. This increased access to health care will pave the way towards improving health disparities for our most at-risk women and infants beyond the pandemic.

Jeanette Contreras portrait

Vaccine recommendations for those who recovered from COVID-19

By NCL Director of Health Policy Jeanette Contreras

As the United States prepares for the release of a third COVID-19 vaccine, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) meets to discuss further implementation considerations that will inform guidance for the vaccine rollout. At its March 1 meeting, ACIP dedicated a portion of the discussion to whether those who’ve recovered from the virus should still be vaccinated.

To date, there are more than 28 million confirmed cases of COVID-19, and experts estimate that the true number of individuals infected, yet not clinically confirmed, to be triple that amount, pushing the total prevalence to approximately 100 million. A recent study by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) indicates that those who’ve recovered will have a certain amount of natural immunity to the virus for up to eight months after infection, which is in line with the findings of a major British study published in early February, in which 88 percent of participants who previously tested positive for COVID-19 still had antibodies after six months.

Considering that the demand is greater than the supply, it is a difficult task to make recommendations for the equitable distribution of vaccines. For example, Spain issued recommendations that patients wait six months after diagnosis to get vaccinated if an individual is under age 55 with no major health complications. People over 55, or those with health risks that make them vulnerable to reinfection, are exempt from this delay and encouraged to be vaccinated.

Additionally, early studies are showing that immunity in individuals who had recovered and received one shot may be equal to or even exceed those not infected who had received two doses. According to the University of Maryland School of Medicine, a single dose of the Moderna or Pfizer mRNA vaccines would elicit an immune system response sufficient to provide comparable immunity to two doses in a non-infected person. On February 12, France became the first country to issue guidance recommending that people who have already recovered from COVID-19 only need to receive one dose of a vaccine, between 3 and 6 months after their infection.

Early research like this is informing public health policies in other countries. But the United States is known all over the world for its scientific rigor and reliance on randomized clinical trial data as a gold standard. In a recent blog, NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins reassures us that, should other studies support these early results, the experts at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and CDC will certainly consider whether one dose is enough.

The implementation of a one-dose vaccine would help to increase supply, however, the emergence of COVID-19 variants presents new challenges for curbing this pandemic. Current CDC guidance states that even if you’ve recovered from COVID-19, you should get vaccinated. Arming yourself with a vaccine will keep you and your family safe, and ultimately help to stave off new COVID-19 variants.

National Consumers League calls on Administration to swiftly address PBMs’ role in diving up drug costs

For immediate release: February 3, 2021

Media contact: National Consumers League – Carol McKay, carolm@nclnet.org(412) 945-3242 or Taun Sterling, tauns@nclnet.org(202) 207-2832

Washington, DC—Washington, DC – The National Consumers League encourages the Biden Administration to continue work on meaningful reforms that help drive down consumer out-of-pocket costs of medicines. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Monday announced the decision to delay a final rule on pharmaceutical rebates that would address critical issues in our healthcare system. The rule aims to lower out-of-pocket costs for consumers by eliminating anti-kickback safe harbors for drug rebates and offering them as direct-to-consumer discounts.

As HHS has demonstrated, the rebates, discounts, and fees negotiated between pharmaceutical companies and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) are rarely used to lower consumer out-of-pocket costs for medications. According to the new Senate Finance Committee report, some PBMs receive as much as 70 percent of insulin’s list price—demonstrating that PBMs can increase their profits when list prices are higher. By passing PBM rebates along to patients, savings at the pharmacy counter could be significant.

The following statement is attributable to NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg:

This delay is a major and preventable setback for consumers. We could be one step closer to significantly lowering out-of-pocket costs, but the government has delayed action. As we continue to face a global pandemic and economic challenges, it’s absolutely essential that we put the interests of consumers above all else—including PBMs.

“We must fix our broken drug pricing process, and HHS has identified one major flaw. The discounts these manufacturers offer to PBMs aren’t passed along to consumers as they should be. And PBMs continue to increase their fees, driving costs up even further. This rule would ensure that consumers—not large, corporate PBMs—save money on the medications they need.

Consumers deserve better, and NCL is committed to encouraging meaningful PBM reforms as soon as possible.

###
About the National Consumers League (NCL)
The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

National Consumers League applauds Congress for surprise billing protections for consumers

For immediate release: December 22, 2020

Media contact: National Consumers League – Carol McKay, carolm@nclnet.org, (412) 945-3242 or Taun Sterling, tauns@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC – The National Consumers League welcomes the inclusion of long-needed surprise billing protections in the COVID Relief Omnibus Spending Bill.

Surprise billing happens when a patient’s insurance doesn’t cover a procedure provided by an out-of-network physician, something patients don’t know or realize when they get a procedure. An estimated one in five emergency visits and one in six inpatient admissions will trigger a surprise bill, which can run into the thousands of dollars.

Medical debt disproportionately drives people into bankruptcy. Bill collectors and hospitals often layer on fees, interest, and penalties, driving the original costs way up. A 2019 study published in the American Journal of Public Health found that 530,000 bankruptcies filed annually are because of debt accrued as a result of treatment for medical illness.

This statement is attributable to NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg:

“We greatly appreciate the bipartisan leadership of Senators Maggie Hassan (D-NH) and Bill Cassidy (R-LA) in getting the surprise billing language over the finish line. We also thank House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), Ranking Member Greg Walden (R-OR), Senate Health Committee Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-TN), and Ranking Member Patty Murray (D-WA) for their early leadership on this issue. This is a shining example of working across the aisle for the betterment of consumers.

Consumers can breathe a huge sigh of relief because under the bill—including the cost of an air ambulance—consumers will be ‘held harmless’ when exposed to out-of-network costs. Once this bill is law, consumers can expect that fees charged will be far more affordable and predictable at in-network rates. We are grateful to Congress for recognizing surprise billing as a predatory practice from which consumers need protection. The committee leadership not only helped to pass a bill but launched an investigation.

After two years of debate and discussion on how health care providers and health plans will negotiate these extra costs, it was agreed that patients should be taken out of the middle of dispute resolution processes. Now, we finally have a workable system for protecting consumers.”

###

About the National Consumers League (NCL)

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

Jeanette Contreras portrait

2021 rings in new health care protections for consumers

By NCL Director of Health Policy Jeanette Contreras

Surprise medical bills occur when patients unknowingly receive care from a provider who is not in their health insurance plan’s network. As the first COVID-19 vaccinations are administered, Congress has passed landmark legislation to ensure consumers needn’t worry about surprise medical bills from emergency medical services.

The passage of this legislation couldn’t come soon enough, as more than 476,000 Americans hospitalized with the coronavirus have already incurred exorbitant medical debt from COVID-19 treatment. Now, thankfully, 2020 will come to a close with renewed optimism in the American health care system.

This new law will also protect consumers from surprise billing from out-of-network ambulance and air ambulance trips, which can amount to tens of thousands of dollars in medical bills. Most patients are conscientious consumers, careful to find a doctor that accepts their insurance before making an appointment. However, in the case of an emergency, a patient faces the possibility of receiving care from an out-of-network doctor in an out-of-network hospital.

As Congress debated legislative fixes to surprise billing, the Administration showed political will toward finding a solution with the issuance of Executive Order 13877, Improving Price and Quality Transparency in American Healthcare to Put Patients First, which includes principles on surprise billing. In a July 2020 report addressing surprise billing, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) further urged Congress to act, recognizing that 41 percent of insured adults nationwide were surprised by a medical bill in the past two years.

Following Executive Order 13877, HHS finalized a set of regulations to address price transparency for consumers. The first rule set to take effect on January 1, 2021, requires hospitals to publicly list standard charges for the items and services that they provide. The second rule, set to take effect in 2022, demands similar transparency from most health plans and issuers of health insurance coverage. These regulations offer consumers more control over their health care spending and better information as they shop and compare health coverage options for themselves and their families.

The new HHS regulations, coupled with the surprise billing legislation, amount to the greatest consumer protections in America’s health care system since the Affordable Care Act. Consumers with health insurance should not have to worry about surprise medical bills—especially during a pandemic. The health care system will be a little more consumer-friendly in 2021, which is good news for all of us.

What you should know about the Healthcare.gov Open Enrollment

Nissa Shaffi

By Nissa Shaffi, NCL Associate Director of Health Policy

From November 1, 2020 to December 15, 2020, consumers will be able to enroll in health coverage through the health insurance marketplace, Healthcare.gov. Choosing the right health plan involves thoughtful decision-making, with careful consideration of your needs and your budget. COVID-19 testing and treatment, telehealth, and mental health services have been vital pandemic necessities, and consumers are advised to pay attention to any changes in their current health plans to account for any adjustments in health needs.

It is estimated that annually consumers typically spend 17 minutes when selecting plan options during open enrollment, most simply sticking with their plans from the previous year. If you need assistance navigating the health insurance marketplace, you can consult a healthcare navigator to help in comparing the coverage options that make sense for you. Healthcare navigators provide free, unbiased advice and offer services in a number of languages. To find a navigator in your area, please click here.

Even with the election and looming challenge to the ACA coming before the Supreme Court, California v. Texas, consumers should know that the federal health insurance marketplace, also known as Obamacare, is still available. The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on November 10, but the ultimate decision can come as late as June 2021. We’ve written more about the implications of California v. Texas here. Despite multiple attempts by opponents to repeal the ACA, over 20 million people have gained coverage through the marketplace in the past decade.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recently announced that marketplace premiums have dropped by 2 percent nationally. Additionally, as a result of the pandemic, the marketplace has seen greater insurer participation – in turn, offering consumers with more robust options for coverage. Plans offered via Healthcare.gov are required to cover a set of essential health benefits mandated by the ACA, ensuring that you have access to comprehensive care – a provision that is of chief importance during this time. The ACA has afforded consumers with a host of health protections and prohibits insurance plans from discriminating against enrollees based on health status, including pre-existing conditions. To learn more about the marketplace, click here.

The National Consumers League encourages consumers to seek coverage via ACA compliant plans offered on the marketplace. If you miss the deadline to apply for coverage within the open enrollment period, you may be able to qualify for a Special Enrollment Period (SEP). Applying during a SEP is contingent upon meeting certain criteria, such as life events like having a child or losing health coverage. If you qualify for Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), you can apply at any time. Most importantly, in order to have coverage that is effective by January 1, 2021, you must sign up by December 15, 2020.

CMS Proposed Rule Ignores Data & Bipartisan Support for the Value of Copay Assistance Programs

By NCL Director of Health Policy Jeanette Contreras

Americans love getting a discount. As consumers, we like to shop to save without compromising the quality of the products we buy. But in healthcare, the stakes are higher at the checkout counter. Patients not only want a discount, they depend on it to afford necessary, sometimes lifesaving, medication to treat their health condition.

Despite what we know about the value and impact of copay assistance programs, a new policy from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) could put a barrier between these critical programs and the patients who need them most.

Manufacturer copay assistance programs include discounts, coupon cards, and vouchers which many of our friends, family members, and neighbors use to afford their prescriptions. Studies have shown that without these financial support systems, many patients couldn’t afford their medicines.

The CMS proposal, which has yet to be finalized, would require manufacturers to guarantee that this assistance goes directly to patients—and if manufacturers do not, they would be required to include the value of the copay assistance in Medicaid Best Price and Average Manufacturer Price (AMP) calculations. That would be fine but there’s a  problem.

CMS has a separate policy that was already finalized earlier this year: the Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters (NBPP) Rule for 2021. In part, the NBPP allows health insurance companies and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) to use policies that stop copay assistance from counting towards a patient’s out-of-pocket burden—sometimes called copay accumulator adjustment programs.

NCL criticized HHS for permitting health plans to use these so-called copay accumulator adjustment programs.

“Removing this cost-sharing assistance will force those patients to pay thousands of dollars more in unexpected costs at the pharmacy. These new costs could push some to forego those medications, leading to worsened health outcomes. This could compromise medication adherence and will lead to increased health care costs over time.” – NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg

Separate studies conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and IQVIA show that out-of-pocket costs can contribute substantially to reduced adherence or to patients not taking their medication altogether. This is counterproductive because if patients do not take their meds as directed, it means higher costs in other parts of the healthcare system stemming from increased hospitalizations, ER visits, and long-term health issues.

If the data doesn’t convince CMS, voters should. Weeks before the presidential election, we can clearly see widespread support for the value of copay assistance regardless of political affiliation. According to a new National Hemophilia Foundation national survey, more than 80 percent of registered voters believe the government should require copay assistance to be applied to patients’ out-of-pocket costs. Even lawmakers agree that CMS should stop this policy before it launches. A bipartisan group of 36 members of the U.S. House of Representatives sent a letter to CMS urging the agency to not finalize the “contentious line extension section or the Medicaid best price change as currently defined in the notice of proposed rulemaking.”

Clearly, copay assistance is critical to Americans. We hope CMS reevaluates the potentially harmful consequences of this new rule on patients and pulls back this counterproductive proposal.

Advocating for emergency air transport coverage

This spring, NCL sent a letter to the CEOs of Cigna, Aetna, and UnitedHealth Group, urging them to enter into productive negotiations with air medical service providers to ensure coverage of emergency air medical transportation. The ask came as the COVID-19 pandemic spread across the country, making air medical services even more essential, particularly in rural America.

“We are increasingly concerned about emergency air medical access during this crisis, and believe this life-saving care should be covered by every insurance plan,” said NCL Associate Director of Health Policy Nissa Shaffi.

“We are asking that insurers review the robustness of their coverage policies and immediately enter into network negotiations with air medical providers so that this critical service is covered, and patients are never left with a bill they cannot pay.”

The National Consumers League supports expanded COBRA coverage

By Sally Greenberg, NCL Executive Director

In a perfect world, every person in the United States would have quality health care coverage, irrespective of whether they were employed or whether their employer-offered health insurance. The National Consumers League (NCL) has long advocated for universal access to health insurance for every American.

For political reasons, however, we still have a hybrid, expensive, and patchwork health care system. Thankfully, the Affordable Care Act addresses some of these disparities for millions, but our health care system in the United States still leaves many gaps in who can get coverage. And now, with the COVID-19 pandemic, the gaps in our social safety net have been made very stark indeed. Estimates are that 27 million Americans who have lost their jobs have lost their health insurance as well, according to an analysis from the Kaiser Family Foundation.

An estimate from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation found between 25 million and 43 million people could lose their employer-sponsored insurance in the coming months if job losses continue.

However, help is on the way.

The Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions (HEROES) Act passed the House of Representatives on May 15, 2020. The bill addresses the COVID-19-induced massive unemployment/loss of health insurance crisis for Americans who receive their health insurance through their employer.

The HEROES Act allows individuals eligible for Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) coverage to maintain their employer-sponsored coverage after a layoff, reduction in hours or furlough without having to pay premiums through January 2021. The bill also would provide two special enrollment opportunities for individuals to obtain health insurance: (a) during the emergency period for Medicare-eligible individuals residing in an emergency area who have not previously enrolled in Medicare and (b) during an eight-week enrollment period for an Affordable Care Act exchange for individuals who are uninsured for whatever reason. The bill would authorize veterans without a disability or health insurance to qualify for special enrollment in the Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system for a 12-month period. Finally, the bill would expand the Medicaid expansion pathway provided for in Families First, which covered 100 percent of testing costs. HEROES would expand this pathway to include full federal coverage for COVID-19 treatment and vaccines without cost-sharing for certain Medicaid enrollees.

There are issues, of course, with handing over billions of dollars to the health care industry through expanded COBRA that they might not have received otherwise. Among them, they pay excessive salaries to their CEOs that should trouble all of us who pay insurance premiums.

There is also the possibility that increasing access to private insurance via COBRA subsidies could stunt nationwide efforts to expand Medicaid for more vulnerable populations, to some degree.

But this is a case where we cannot let the pursuit of perfection be the enemy of the good. For nearly 40 million Americans struggling with loss of employment, passage of the HEROES Act will mean that they will not have to worry that neither they, nor their families, will lose health insurance.

We agree with Actors’ Equity, which issued this statement before the HEROES Act was adopted, “it is time for Congress to consider a 100% COBRA subsidy to ensure that no one loses their health care in the middle of a pandemic.” Similarly, our friends at Families USA have echoed the call for fully subsidizing COBRA coverage for displaced workers, among other robust consumer assistance measures. To read more, click here.  

Fully or heavily subsidizing COBRA coverage will have multiple benefits – particularly for consumers with chronic illnesses who have already satisfied their annual deductible- who would either be faced with potentially starting a new deductible from scratch, or with an entirely new provider altogether. By subsidizing COBRA coverage, families will be able to seek medical care, access vaccines and testing for COVID, and will have the full array of health care protections. It is a measure that will be good for the entire nation and will lessen the already frightening and painful loss of employment.

As a result, NCL strongly supports the HEROES Act provisions to subsidize COBRA benefits to the many millions who have lost employment. The House of Representatives has done its part. Now we need the Senate to approve the HEROES Act and move it to the President’s desk for signature. The nation will be far healthier if everyone can have access to health care in the age of this catastrophic COVID-19 pandemic.