Arkansas House advances maternal health bill despite concerns about statute of limitations
Rep. Julie Mayberry (center), R-Hensley, explains her concerns about a portion of the Healthy Moms, Healthy Babies Act, sponsored by Rep. Aaron Pilkington (right), R-Knoxville, on the House floor on Wednesday, February 12, 2025. (Tess Vrbin/Arkansas Advocate)
The Arkansas House of Representatives approved a bill Wednesday that supporters lauded as necessary to improve the state's maternal health care landscape, despite a handful of lawmakers expressing concerns about a section regarding alleged medical injuries during childbirth.
House Bill 1427 is the Healthy Moms, Healthy Babies Act, sponsored by Rep. Aaron Pilkington, R-Knoxville. Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders announced the initiative last week, calling it a 'comprehensive, collaborative approach' to improving low-income Arkansans' access to health care during pregnancy and childbirth.
Much of the legislation would alter the state's Medicaid program by establishing presumptive Medicaid eligibility for pregnant Arkansans, offering reimbursements for doulas and community health workers and establishing pregnancy-related Medicaid coverage for specific treatments.
Sen. Missy Irvin, R-Mountain View, is the bill's lead Senate sponsor and is also sponsoring the identical Senate Bill 213, which the Senate approved Wednesday.
The Healthy Moms, Healthy Babies policy package will cost the state $45 million per year, with $13 million set aside in Sanders' proposed fiscal year 2026 state budget and the rest coming from federal funds, Pilkington told the House on Wednesday.
Only 34 hospitals in 23 of Arkansas' 75 counties have labor and delivery units, and five maternity wards have closed since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, most recently in Newport. Pilkington mentioned the Newport closure while urging his colleagues to vote for the bill.
'We're just trying to make it a little less expensive to operate a labor and delivery unit here in the state of Arkansas,' he said. 'We have to stop the bleeding.'
Arkansas has one of the highest maternal mortality rates in the nation, and the third-highest infant mortality rate, according to the Arkansas Center for Health Improvement.
There are things in this bill that are probably not as palatable as others, but if we're going to move this needle, this is the first step to moving that needle.
– Rep. Jeff Wardlaw, R-Hermitage
Four House Republicans said they supported most of the bill but could not vote for it because of a clause on the final page that would make a child's fifth birthday the statute of limitations for any actions against alleged medical injuries during birth.
Little Rock attorney Paul Byrd spoke against the bill in Wednesday's House Committee on Public Health, Welfare and Labor meeting for the same reason. Byrd said it would be difficult to determine any neurological damage to a child at all, let alone what caused it, before the age of five.
Current law, which HB 1427 would amend, allows a minor or his or her legal guardian to 'commence an action' on an alleged medical injury by the child's 11th birthday or two years after the injury occurred, depending on which is later.
Rep. Jimmy Gazaway, R-Paragould, called the bill's statute of limitations section a 'poison pill' that 'doesn't belong' with the rest of the policy package.
'This could be sent back to committee, that portion could be taken out, and we could pass this bill with 100% [of the] vote,' Gazaway said.
Pilkington said childbirth is 'a very small window' that the five-year statute of limitations would cover, and he added that the Arkansas Trial Lawyers Association is neutral on the legislation.
Gazaway and five other Republicans voted present on the bill, while two more did not vote.
Reps. Jack Ladyman of Jonesboro, Julie Mayberry of Hensley and Jim Wooten of Beebe also spoke against the final clause of the bill, and all three voted against it, along with fellow Republicans Hope Duke of Gravette, James Eaton of Huntsville and David Ray of Maumelle.
State lawmakers aim to tackle Arkansas' maternal health crisis with new legislation
Ladyman also spoke against and voted against the bill during Wednesday's committee meeting.
All 19 House Democrats and the remaining 67 House Republicans voted for HB 1427. Five Republicans spoke in favor of the bill, including Reps. Mary Bentley of Perryville and Jeff Wardlaw of Hermitage, who are cosponsoring the legislation.
'There are things in this bill that are probably not as palatable as others, but if we're going to move this needle [on maternal health], this is the first step to moving that needle,' Wardlaw said.
Rep. Ashley Hudson, D-Little Rock, is the bill's sole Democratic sponsor.
More than half of births in Arkansas are covered by Medicaid, according to Arkansas Department of Human Services officials. HB 1427 would not expand Medicaid coverage for postpartum mothers from 60 days to 12 months after birth, a federal option that all other states have adopted to some extent.
Pilkington is sponsoring a separate bill to create this policy, House Bill 1004. House Minority Leader Andrew Collins, D-Little Rock, has filed the similar House Bill 1008. Both bills have yet to be heard in committee.
The Senate Committee on Public Health, Welfare and Labor will be next to consider HB 1427.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gov. Landry threatens special session over failed prescription drug prices bill
A pharmacy technician fills a container with pills to put into a drug dispensing machine for an automated line at a pharmacy in Midvale, Utah. () A low heat that's simmered for weeks over an attempt to lower prescription drug prices in Louisiana increased to a boil Thursday in the waning hours of the state legislative session, with Gov. Jeff Landry saying he will bring lawmakers back to Baton Rouge to address prescription drug policy. The eight-week regular session ended with lawmakers backing the less stringent of two measures aimed at regulating pharmacy benefit managers, often referred to as PBMs or 'middlemen' that oversee prescription drug programs for insurance companies and large employers. PBMs have faced increasing criticism from patient advocate groups who blame them for high medication prices, while independent drugstore owners say they unfairly favor large corporate pharmacies. Some of the country's largest pharmacy chains, including CVS, also operate a PBM, which critics have said leads fewer pharmacy and medication options for consumers. Landry wanted lawmakers to pass a more aggressive bill that would have prohibited companies from owning drug stores and pharmacy benefit managers, which would have threatened companies such as CVS who own both. The Senate declined to bring House Bill 358, by Rep. Dustin Miller, D-Opelousas, up for a final vote, however, allowing it to die before the legislative session ended. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Instead, the legislature passed what had been seen as a compromise between the corporate chains and independent pharmacists in House Bill 264, by Rep. Mike Echols, R-Monroe. The bill requires PBMs to be more transparent about their practices with state regulators and to pass more prescription savings on to consumers. The Senate also hastily drafted and approved a resolution instructing the Louisiana Department of Health to study the impact of banning PBMs from also owning pharmacies and to produce a report on the subject ahead of the legislature's 2026 regulation session next March. ,Landry was upset the lawmakers didn't go farther, however, and threatened to haul the lawmakers back into session later this summer to pass the same proposal. 'Yes we will have a special session to lower prescription drugs for our citizens. It's that important!' Landry said in an email from his spokeswoman Kate Kelly shortly before the bill failed. It's not clear when the governor would call a special session focused on PBMs. Several lawmakers said he was already on his way to France for the International Paris Air Show which starts Monday. He cannot sign off on the paperwork needed for a special session while outside of the state of Louisiana. Senate President Cameron Henry, R-Metairie, told reporters after adjournment the complexity of Miller's bill, along with feedback from stakeholders, led to the decision to back alternative measures. . 'The more that members had the opportunity to really digest what that bill would do – and the conversations they were having back home with both their local pharmacy, the chain pharmacist, who it was going to affect – we really had a difficult time getting a true grasp of what the bill was going to do,' Henry said. The Senate president said opposition from senators to the Miller bill grew over the day Thursday as more constituents and lobbyists reached out to members. He also said a special session on PBM legislation seems unnecessary because the Landry-backed bill wasn't even supposed to get implemented for another two years. 'I don't know why you would call a special session for a bill that doesn't take effect until 2027,' Henry said. Arkansas approved a law similar to the Miller bill earlier this year and currently faces federal lawsuits from two of the country's largest pharmacy benefit managers. Henry expressed reluctance to follow their lead. The Miller proposal drew strong opposition from a plaintiff in one of the Arkansas cases – CVS, which owns the pharmacy benefit manager CVS Caremark. Its campaign to defeat the bill included sending text messages to thousands of members of the public, including state employees and their families Thursday, which led the governor to direct Attorney General Liz Murrill to investigate the company's actions. CVS Caremark contracts with the state Office of Group Benefits for billions of dollars to manage insurance coverage for state employees and retirees. 'This is not an appropriate use of personal information obtained through a state contract.' Murrill said Thursday morning in a news release. CVS had said the Miller bill would force it to close more than 125 stores in Louisiana, leading 2,700 employees to lose their jobs. 'Closing drug stores doesn't lower drug prices. Forcing out 20% of the state's pharmacies only makes pharmacy deserts worse,' Amy Thibault, CVS executive director of corporate communications, said in an email. When Echols made the final pitch for his compromise legislation Thursday in the House, he singled out CVS for criticism, noting he had talked with Murrill about her pursuing charges against the company for violating terms of its state contract when it sent its mass text message to state workers. 'This House is not for sale. This legislature cannot be bullied,' Echols said. Randal Johnson, with the Louisiana Independent Pharmacies Association, said the Echols bill will be a vast improvement over the current PBM regulations in Louisiana. 'We believe the consumer will have an opportunity to find out what their drugs costs, and the consumer will have the opportunity to have a less expensive cost of medication' under the Echols legislation, Johnson said. A special session can last no longer than 30 days, and its subject matter will be limited to what Landry wants to discuss if he decides to call it. Piper Hutchinson contributed to this report. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
County's spending on Chaos Waterpark and Action City may be filling in a gap
EAU CLAIRE — Savannah Bertrand is the mother of two disabled children whose family takes advantage of the Chaos Waterpark and Action City annual passes provided by the Children's Long-Term Support (CLTS) program administered by Eau Claire County. She said that especially since the closure of Prevea — which had been a part of the broader closure of HSHS Sacred Heart and St. Joseph's Hospitals — and the loss of access to occupational therapy which accepts Medicaid, access to the jumping park and the water park has become even more essential. 'As far as the Action City passes, it's hard to quantify how much they help,' Bertrand said. 'We have the ability to go to the jumping park. That really helps them burn off and regulate a little better.' Bertrand said that she has two children with disabilities. 'They both have Fragile X syndrome and autism,' she said. 'Without an annual pass to these things, we probably wouldn't be going at all simply because it takes so long to build up their ability to actually participate in it. When we first started going, we could only go for like 15 to 20 minutes, and it's expensive. We couldn't afford to just keep taking them in order to build their tolerance up for being there.' She said that her family utilizes the parks several times a week. 'We've been working on social skills and building that confidence,' Bertrand said. 'Being able to participate in the community like this is very helpful. They play with other kids now.' She said that the park passes were chosen over the YMCA because it works better for her family. 'I'm not saying that the YMCA is a bad place, but it wouldn't — and it didn't — work for my family,' she said. 'The one time that I went to the YMCA, I wasn't able to help my disabled son get dressed for his swim lesson. He couldn't be in the locker room with me, and then he ran straight into the pool [in] his clothes. He was a bolter back then.' Bertrand stressed that she wanted people to know that the park passes have 'nothing to do with the budget deficit. We've already paid taxes on this part of the money. This is an approved service by the state, and this is 100 percent state money.' In reference to the $68,000 spent on annual passes between the months of January and April by the county, Bertrand said, 'I mean, $68,000 is a lot of money, and to somebody that doesn't understand exactly what the program is and what it can and can't cover, I understand why [County Board Supervisor Michele] Skinner asked about that.' Nonetheless, Bertrand wants people to know how essential these services are to her family. 'It doesn't matter if they get rid of the passes at all,' she said. 'The only thing that's going to [do] is reduce services even more for a population that already doesn't have much as far as access to care, to services, to support.' She said that there are a lot of great things CLTS can cover in theory, but there aren't always available providers. 'Speaking for myself but also the families that I've talked to about this, it's really hurtful that people are questioning some people with some of the only services they take,' she said. 'It's not like they're just giving handouts. It's a lot of work to even be enrolled in these programs. All the kids on the programs go through functional screens every year. Especially, given the thought of Medicaid cuts, taking away one of the few things that is successful with our kids is really disheartening.'
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Lawmakers decide which bills worth negotiating and kill the rest
On a day when the House and Senate created negotiating committees to try and salvage 50 bills, they voted to summarily kill about 15 others after concluding that compromise was unlikely to be reached on them. A major reform bill (SB 297) that hit the cutting room floor Thursday was the pitched battle between Secretary of State David Scanlan and HealthTrust, the state's largest risk pool, over whether Scanlan should get enhanced power to regulate these groups that manage insurance plans for units of government. Last week, the House of Representatives rejected Scanlan's reforms in favor of an amendment that would have let the groups decide whether to come under the regulation of Scanlan's office or the Insurance Department. Without debate, Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Dan Innis, R-Bradford, asked the Senate to 'non-concur' on the House changes and the Senate did on a voice vote which killed the measure. Scanlan said killing the bill made sense. "I am pleased the Senate voted to non-concur on the House amended version of SB 297. What began as an attempt to improve the transparency and accountability of pooled risk organizations entrusted with $750 million taxpayer dollars became an attempt by one risk pool to move to a regulatory environment favorable to them without addressing the underlying concerns," Scanlan said in a statement. Ivermectin bill rejected The Senate also decided to reject out of hand a controversial House-passed proposal (SB 119) to allow any doctor or pharmacist to provide ivermectin to any patient without a prescription. Ivermectin was created as a drug to treat parasites for animals but in the past decade it proved to be a prize-winning medication to treat humans for similar conditions. During COVID-19, the drug became a viral sensation for many Americans who used it to respond to the virus. House Democratic Floor Leader Lucy Weber of Walpole had argued against giving ivermectin the special status of having a 'standing order' for any patient. She noted the only medications that have that designation are EpiPens that treat allergic reactions, smoking prevention drugs and some forms of contraception. This was the main reason that former Gov. Chris Sununu gave when he vetoed a similar bill to this one. Rep. Yuri Polozov, R-Hooksett, said he pursued the bill because during the pandemic many medical providers were ostracized or even sanctioned for prescribing ivermectin. Many other bills were also killed because sections that legislators still wanted to survive had been tacked onto another bill. In this case, the original bill the House amended to favor ivermectin was expected to save the state up to $9 million a year to allow health care providers to prescribe brand name drugs in the Medicaid program if they have discounts or rebates that make these medications cheaper to purchase. The state Senate tacked that provision onto the trailer bill of its state budget. In a similar vein, the Senate on Thursday killed a bill (SB 60) dealing with legalized gambling that would have taken from state regulators and given to the Legislature the authority to write rules regarding immunization requirements. The House had already tacked that section onto the version of its own budget trailer bill. Another bill (SB 100) that died Thursday was meant to alter a 2021 ban on teaching discrimination in public schools to respond to a federal judge's ruling that struck it down as unconstitutionally too vague. The House-passed language would require a showing that the educator 'knowingly' was advocating bias in his or her teachings. Some socially conservative groups that supported the law had warned lawmakers that the House bill only addressed a small part of the legal flaws with the existing law. The Senate also rejected a House-passed bill that would have created a court docket to resolve disputes over so-called blockchain currencies such as bitcoin (SB 25). klandrigan@
