| On Tuesday, health system leaders testified before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations about potential changes to the 340B Drug Pricing Program. The committee was receptive to witnesses’ claims that the program is essential to the financial survival of many systems, but representatives stated that “the status quo is not acceptable” and that they had a responsibility to “step in and provide oversight.” There was little interest expressed in broad overhauls to the program, but both witnesses and representatives focused on how it could benefit from greater transparency, for example requiring hospitals to disclose 340B revenue, how savings are used, and which patient populations are served through the program. Meanwhile, Republicans and Democrats in both houses have introduced multiple bills this session that focus on various aspects of the 340B program, including transparency. |
| The Gist: It’s encouraging to see members of congress recognize how essential the 340B program is to health system finances, and of the potential reforms on the table, increased transparency is a relatively palatable option. Congress is exploring statutory tweaks to the program in response to the myriad legal challenges concerning it, many of which involve the Department of Health and Human Services. Several of these lawsuits stem from more than 20 major drugmakers restricting 340B discounts at contract pharmacies, which has led multiple states to enact legislation protecting these discounts, in turn prompting further lawsuits. The mess of conflicting rulings these cases have produced so far is a clear sign that the 340B statute will be amended, and health system advocates should continue working with Congress to find solutions that preserve the integrity of the program. |
HENRY KOTULA 