logo
Who's afraid of Big Pharma? Not the R.I. House's lone independent

Who's afraid of Big Pharma? Not the R.I. House's lone independent

Yahoo01-05-2025

Rep. Jon D. Brien, a Woonsocket independent, is seen on the floor of the Rhode Island House of Representatives on April 29, 2025, waiting for the day's session to begin. (Photo by Alexander Castro/Rhode Island Current)
When Big Pharma lobbyists came to the Rhode Island State House April 10 to oppose legislation that would hurt drugmakers' profits, Woonsocket independent Rep. Jon D. Brien was ready for them.
Brien, the sole independent in the 75 seats of the House of Representatives, was there to introduce his bill that would shield a federal drug pricing mandate from manufacturer intervention.
'They've come from far away to tell you, 'The sky shall fall in the state of Rhode Island if you pass this legislation,'' Brien told the House Committee on Health and Human Services. 'And I assure you … it will not.'
H5634 aims to stop drugmakers and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) from controlling patient access to discounted prescription drugs under the 340B Drug Pricing Program. Congress created the program in 1992 to help safety net clinics and hospitals 'stretch scarce federal resources as far as possible,' according to program overseer, the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA).
Under 340B, providers buy drugs from manufacturers or wholesalers at a federally set minimum discount of 23.1% off the average retail price, although the discount for providers is typically 25% to 50%. Providers are then reimbursed for the drug's standard price by insurers, and the clinic's savings are reinvested in more patient services.
The feds don't pay the difference — the manufacturer eats the discount. Drugmakers continue to participate so they can have their drugs covered by Medicaid and Medicare, but some have recently tried to block providers from contracting with multiple pharmacies to fill 340B prescriptions. Outsourcing dispensing, manufacturers argue, is the latest example of how providers are profiting off a system designed to reduce customer costs for outpatient drugs.
'This legislature needs to fight back,' Brien told the committee. 'Pharmacy benefit managers, insurers and drug manufacturers are bleeding our safety net providers dry with discriminatory, profit-driven tactics. They're slashing reimbursements, clawing back funds, and steering prescriptions to their own pharmacies, crippling health centers and hospitals that serve our most vulnerable residents.'
When Rhode Island Current caught up with Brien a week later, he remained firm on his bill's importance for protecting Rhode Islanders.
'Who are we going to prioritize this legislative session: Big Pharma or the people of Rhode Island?' Brien asked. 'It'll be hard to go back to them and tell them why this didn't pass, because I sure as hell am not going to sugarcoat it if it doesn't.'
He was glad to see testimony supporting the legislation far outweigh opposition at the hearing. The bill was held for further study, which happens to every bill upon its debut. But what makes Brien's bill unique is the list of strange bedfellows backing it. Co-sponsors include two Republicans, Reps. Marie Hopkins of Warwick and David Place of Burrillville, and two Democrats, Reps. Megan Cotter of Exeter and Jacquelyn Baginski of Cranston — a rare show of tripartisan teamwork.
'Without question, the most consensus building piece of legislation that I've ever submitted,' Brien tweeted about the bill on April 29.
Brien, who sports an image of Tulsi Gabbard being sworn in as director of national intelligence as his X header, won his House District 49 seat in 2022. Like Gabbard, Brien was once a Democrat. An attorney who specializes in personal injury, criminal defense, DUIs and expungements, Brien held the Rhode Island House District 50 seat from 2007 to 2013 when he lived in Woonsocket's Globe District, before moving to the city's North End. (The District 50 seat now belongs to Democratic Rep. Stephen Casey.)
'We are all of vast and varying ideologies, but we all believe the same thing,' Brien said over the phone. 'And the same thing is we got to get this bill passed.'
Last year, Brien introduced the same legislation, which died in committee. It's why Cotter, whose western, rural Rhode Island district spans 100 square miles of Richmond and most of Exeter, sought him out this year. Brien's bill, she said, could help local health clinics survive, especially those in the state's rural and underserved areas.
'This bill could be the difference between some of them staying open and some of closing,' Cotter said.
Across the rotunda, however, the Senate version of the bill remains firmly partisan. S0114, sponsored by Democratic Sen. Bridget Valverde of North Kingstown alongside seven Democrats, most of them progressives, was held for further study after its hearing on March 20.
Brien's fight for 340B comes from his own backyard. Thundermist Health Center in downtown Woonsocket in Brien's district is a federally qualified health center which serves over 63,000 patients annually, including low-income and uninsured people, and it participates in the 340B program. It then reinvests the savings into other services, like an onsite food bank.
Last year, Thundermist had to lay off 130 workers and eliminate its tobacco cessation program after losing roughly $5.6 million in 340B revenue, Matthew Roman, the center's chief operating officer, told the House committee. The loss came even after Thundermist worked with a national firm to recover maximum revenue from the program.
Thundermist staff said the patient experience has been affected by moves by manufacturers to refuse or heavily limit shipments of 340B discounted products to multiple pharmacies — a not uncommon request for providers, who will contract with multiple pharmacies so patients can fill their medicines closer to home. Some Thundermist patients now have to visit different pharmacies depending on which manufacturer made their medication, Chris Durigan, the health center's director of clinical pharmacy services, told lawmakers at the hearing.
Peter Bancroft, CEO of WellOne Primary Medical and Dental Care which has four locations in Rhode Island, shared a similar story. About a year and a half ago, WellOne used to subsidize about 40,000 $5 prescriptions monthly in its discount program. Now, the center is writing around 10,000 of those prescriptions a month, because of manufacturer restrictions that steer the discounted drugs toward one pharmacy.
'We had to pick one that was quote, unquote 'centralized,'' Bancroft said. 'Well, if you think there's a central pharmacy between Burrillville and North Kingstown and Scituate and Foster. We ended up going to the pharmacy in Chepachet. Our patients from North Kingstown are not driving to Chepachet to get their $5 prescription.'
Other community health clinics offered testimony in support of Brien's and Valverde's bills. Providence Community Health Centers lost $9 million in 340B revenue in four years. WellOne faces a $2.1 million deficit in fiscal year 2025, with $1.7 million tied directly to lost 340B earnings. Wood River Health, which has three locations across the state, reported a $1 million loss in revenue over two years.
CharterCARE doesn't yet benefit from 340B at its for-profit, safety net hospitals, but it wants the program intact as its properties — Our Lady of Fatima Hospital in North Providence and Roger Williams Medical Center in Providence — transition to nonprofit, 340B-eligible status after a protracted but soon-to-be-concluded change in ownership. Jeffrey Dandurand, the health system's pharmacy director, submitted written testimony that 'a key aspect of our strategic transition plan…is dependent on participation in the 340B program.'
The Hospital Association of Rhode Island supports the legislation and submitted written testimony, and the town of Burrillville passed a resolution in support.
Pharmaceutical manufacturers, however, are unhappy with the use of contract pharmacies, which can be any third-party drugstore including chains like CVS and Walgreens. In 2010, HRSA allowed providers to use unlimited contract pharmacies, fostering abundant growth. Since then, the number of contract pharmacies has grown 12,000%, and there were more than 200,000 contract pharmacy agreements inked between 2013 and 2024 — numbers that come from a report funded by PhRMA, a major pharmaceutical lobbying and trade group.
Brien's Republican co-sponsors on the House health committee were unmoved by the arguments of Brian Jordan, a lobbyist for PhRMA, that the root issue of 340B's problems 'always goes back to low Medicaid reimbursement.'
'It almost sounds like you just don't like the program, and you're trying to restrict the program as much as possible,' said Rep. David Place of Burrillville.
First-term Rep. Marie Hopkins of Warwick dug into Jordan's assertion that facilities are using 340B for profit. These are places already operating on 'shoestring' budgets, she offered, and 340B is a way to recoup costs.
'It's not how the program was originally intended,' Jordan said. 'I mean, it's a revenue source. Why not increase the sales tax, something like that?'
'When I go to the mechanic, and I pay the $299 for tires, I know that he got them for $100,' Hopkins said. 'But there is a cost associated with his providing the service. That's how business works. I see this the same way, and you're trying to scoop out their revenue source.'
Hopkins' arguments echoed those of hospital trade groups, like a 2024 American Hospital Association report that cited a $30 billion growth in the 340B program over five years, while the drug market grew $330 billion in that same time. Other sources like the Drug Channels Institute analyzed HRSA data to show that the 340B program grew $12.6 billion in a single year, accounting for $66 billion overall revenue in 2023.
'Everyone in the drug channel — hospitals, federal grantees, PBMs, pharmacies, plan sponsors, employers, insurers, wholesalers, technology vendors, consultants, and more — profits from the billions of 340B dollars that are sloshing around the system,' the institute's founder Adam J. Fein wrote in 2024.
PhRMA's Jordan and Rep. Hopkins did agree there should be more rigorous oversight of 340B. As drafted, the Rhode Island legislation does not permit audits beyond those already performed by the federal government. Cara Sammartino, an associate professor at Johnson & Wales who chairs the school's public health program, urged lawmakers in written testimony to strike that clause, as vagueness in federal audit laws allows 340B entities to audit themselves or hire contractors to do it.
'When I go to the mechanic, and I pay the $299 for tires, I know that he got them for $100. But there is a cost associated with his providing the service. That's how business works. I see this the same way, and you're trying to scoop out their revenue source.
– Rep. Marie Hopkins, a Warwick Republican, to a pharmaceutical lobbyist a House committee hearing
Brien told Rhode Island Current the idea that 340B providers aren't audited is an industry 'red herring…All the legislation says is that these institutions can't be audited more than the federal government requires them to be.'
In 2023, Minnesota became the first state to require annual reporting from 340B entities. A 2024 report found that 13% of providers — mostly large hospitals — earned 80% of 340B revenue, while safety net clinics earned the least. Meanwhile, $120 million went to contract pharmacies and third-party administrators, echoing drugmakers' assertions that the program is lucrative.
Similarly, a 2021 white paper by the Schaeffer Institute for Public Policy & Government Service found that hospitals represented 60% of 340B sites in 2020. Unlike non-hospital entities covered by the program, 340B hospitals 'are not required to use 340B savings to serve vulnerable populations, nor are they required to report how 340B revenues are used,' according to the report.
Johns Hopkins University Professor of Accounting Ge Bai wrote in a 2023 testimony before a U.S. Congressional subcommittee that 'many tax-exempt hospitals have been deviating from their original charitable pursuits to focus on expanding their market share and enhancing profitability,' a motive that also includes 340B, since 'eligible tax-exempt hospitals…can generate substantial profits by providing these drugs to well insured patients,' Bai wrote.
Asked about the Rhode Island bill, Bai said over email, 'The bill, if passed, would represent a win for 340B hospitals in RI and a loss for pharmaceutical companies.'
But, she added, 'the scale of the 340B program has been ballooning.' She pointed to an April 15 executive order from President Donald Trump likely to affect the program by requiring greater oversight and regulation of Medicare and Medicaid payments for drugs.
Brien and Valverde want Rhode Island to follow in the footsteps of 33 states that have passed laws to defend contract pharmacy use or prohibit PBM discrimination against 340B entities. The legislation has invoked both specific legal challenges and broader ones. Judges in the D.C. and Third Circuits ruled that the 340B statute says nothing about where or how drugs must be dispensed — ultimately a blow against contract pharmacies.
Conversely, it seemed as if the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services would resume the course set for HRSA under the Biden administration when, in March, HRSA continued litigation over drugmakers' Medicaid contracts if they offered alternative rebates in violation of 340B. An HHS spokesperson said via email that the agency does not comment on ongoing litigation, and would not provide an on-record comment about the future of the 340B program.
States have already been sued for trying to enshrine 340B protections, Brien said at the hearing, and some emerged victorious. The possibility of defeat in court was not enough to deter Brien. He cited lawsuits against proposals for truck tolls and high-capacity magazine bans filed before the relevant bills even hit the House or Senate floor.
Brien asked his colleagues: 'Since when does this institution not pass legislation for fear of a lawsuit?'
Over the phone, Brien remained hopeful.
'I intend to do a full court press on this thing. It's my number one priority. It's the number one priority of a number of legislators,' he said. 'It comes down to, 'Will leadership stand with Big Pharma or the people of Rhode Island?''
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

To The Point: 2 Democratic candidates for open US Senate seat
To The Point: 2 Democratic candidates for open US Senate seat

Yahoo

time3 hours ago

  • Yahoo

To The Point: 2 Democratic candidates for open US Senate seat

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (WOOD) — On this 'To The Point,' we continue to introduce you to candidates running for the open U.S. Senate seat in Michigan. You'll hear from two Democrats — first, . 'I don't care what side of the aisle you're on. What we saw happen in 2016 really divided our community, divided our state,' she said. 'And there was something about how ugly the politics had gotten that pushed me to want to get involved.' Next, 'That's really what's defined my career is putting up my hand for Michigan in tough and uncertain moments and rolling up my sleeve and getting things done,' she said. 'I've been able to do that in the United States House of Representatives, getting bills passed and that's one of the reasons I'm running for U.S. Senate.' In the early going, the races for some of the top offices in the state are already heating up, and we'll introduce you to the players on 'To The Point.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Illinois congresswoman says Sikh man praying on House floor was ‘deeply troubling'
Illinois congresswoman says Sikh man praying on House floor was ‘deeply troubling'

Yahoo

time6 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Illinois congresswoman says Sikh man praying on House floor was ‘deeply troubling'

The Brief U.S. Rep. Mary Miller (R-Illinois) said in a since-deleted post on X that a Sikh chaplain leading a prayer in Congress was "deeply troubling." She initially misidentified the man as Muslim, according to multiple reports. Miller's comments have received backlash from several fellow members of Congress. WASHINGTON, D.C. - A Republican congresswoman representing parts of downstate Illinois is getting heat for saying in a since-deleted social media post on Friday that it was "deeply troubling" to her that a Sikh man led a prayer in the House of Representatives, after misidentifying the man as Muslim. What we know According to multiple reports, U.S. Rep. Mary Miller wrote on X: "It's deeply troubling that a Muslim was allowed to lead prayer in the House of Representatives this morning. This should have never been allowed to happen. "America was founded as a Christian nation, and I believe our government should reflect that truth, not drift further from it. May God have mercy!" Miller then edited the post to reflect that the man was actually Sikh, but later deleted it entirely. Still, Miller's post garnered criticism from multiple members of Congress, including Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, a Democrat who represents parts of Chicago's northwest suburbs and is running for a U.S. Senate seat. He called Miller's comments anti-Sikh and anti-Muslim. "I am appalled by Rep. Mary Miller's comments—first misidentifying a Sikh chaplain as Muslim, then saying he should have 'never been allowed' to lead the House in prayer. Her remarks were both anti-Sikh and anti-Muslim, and they reflect a disturbing pattern of religious intolerance," Krishnamoorthi said. "The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion for all. The Sikh and Muslim communities have long contributed to the strength, service, and spirit of our nation. All Americans—regardless of party—must come together to reject these attacks and stand united against all forms of prejudice." Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York), the minority leader in the House, also reacted to Miller's comments saying, "It's deeply troubling that such an ignorant and hateful extremist is serving in the United States Congress. That would be you, Mary." The Congressional Asian Pacific Americans Caucus, which includes Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Illinois) and Krishnamoorthi, said on X that it condemned Miller's anti-Sikh and anti-Muslim bigotry." "Sikhs and Muslims practice two separate and distinct religions, and conflating the two based on how someone looks is not only ignorant but also racist," the CAPAC added in its post. A request for comment to Miller's campaign was not immediately responded to on Saturday. The backstory It's not the first time Miller has drawn ire for controversial comments during her tenure in Congress. Just a few days into her first term in 2021, Miller apologized for knowingly quoting Adolf Hitler during a rally outside of the U.S. Capitol. While discussing the need for the Republican Party to appeal to young people, she said, "Hitler was right on one thing. He said, 'Whoever has the youth has the future.'" She made that comment on Jan. 5, 2021, the day before supporters of President Donald Trump stormed the Capitol to stop the certification of President Joe Biden's 2020 election victory. Miller apologized for the comment and said some were trying to "twist" her words to "mean something antithetical to my beliefs." She added she was "passionately" pro-Israel and "will always be a strong advocate and ally of the Jewish community." In 2022, in response to the U.S. Supreme Court overturning the constitutional right to an abortion, Miller said at a rally the decision was a "victory for white life." A spokesman said Miller meant to say the decision was a victory for a "right to life," and that her comment was a "mix-up of words."

Democrats see political trap in Trump's Biden probe
Democrats see political trap in Trump's Biden probe

The Hill

time8 hours ago

  • The Hill

Democrats see political trap in Trump's Biden probe

Democrats are warning members of their party not to fall into a political trap after President Trump ordered an investigation into former President Biden's mental state and executive actions at the end of his term. Trump directed his counsel, in consultation with the attorney general, to probe 'whether certain individuals conspired to deceive the public about Biden's mental state' amid renewed scrutiny of his predecessor's age and health in the lead-up to last year's election. The probe threatens to keep an issue in the news that Democrats would like to move on from and could force them into the uncomfortable position of having to defend Biden despite his unpopularity. 'We need to avoid taking the bait for a totally unfounded political stunt, which is what this investigation is,' said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). 'It's a distraction from the problems that everyday Americans face in our economy: tariffs, rising prices and the 'Great Big, Beautiful Bill.'' Biden also cast the play as a distraction from controversy swirling around the current White House, pushing back sharply against Trump's suggestion that he was not the one making the decisions from the Oval Office. Trump's call for an investigation fixates on Biden's use of an autopen to sign executive actions, claiming that, if advisers 'secretly used' the mechanism 'to conceal his incapacity,' it would constitute an unconstitutional wielding of presidential power. 'Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency,' Biden said in a statement. 'This is nothing more than a distraction by Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans who are working to push disastrous legislation that would cut essential programs like Medicaid and raise costs on American families, all to pay for tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy and big corporations.' On Capitol Hill, where Trump's House-passed spending bill is hitting snags in the Senate as Elon Musk feuds with Trump and calls to kill the legislation, other Democrats are echoing that framing. 'He's clearly trying to deflect attention from the disastrous effect he's had on the US economy,' said Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.). 'He only brings up Joe Biden when he's really worried about something, like 'Vladimir Putin is playing me and the world sees it. My tariffs thing is not working out.'' 'So I would say, give it as little attention as possible,' Kaine said, suggesting Democrats should turn the inquiry around on Trump and say, ''You're the president now. What about your evidence of mental decline?'' Sens. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) and Ruben Gallego (D-N.M.) concurred that the move is a distraction from the bill and that Democrats should respond by drawing Americans' focus to the budget concerns instead. Engaging could also risk legitimizing some of Trump's claims about the end of Biden's term, suggested Democratic strategist Antjuan Seawright. He called the push for an investigation 'a distraction pitch that Donald Trump is trying to throw down at the batter's box, hoping somebody will swing at it.' 'Anytime we fall into the trap, then we trap our own selves,' Seawright said of Democrats. 'We should focus on this moment and not try to get caught up into conversations that don't gain us anything electorally or politically.' Questions about Biden's age and health dogged him along the 2024 campaign trail, contributing to his eventual exit from the race. Trump, who railed against his two-time rival as 'Sleepy Joe' as they jostled for the White House, has continued to raise the issue, while Democrats seek to turn the page and look toward the midterms and 2028. Trump has repeatedly blasted Biden over his autopen use, questioning whether orders signed by his predecessor — including 11th-hour preemptive pardons for his family members and others to protect against 'politically motivated prosecutions' — are void as a result. The White House confirmed this week that the Department of Justice is reviewing Biden's pardons. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has also started its own inquiry into what Republicans have cast as a 'mental decline cover up.' This week, Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) demanded interviews from some of Biden's former top aides as well as his doctor, Kevin O'Connor. At the same time, new books, including 'Original Sin: President Biden's Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again' from CNN's Jake Tapper and Axios' Alex Thompson, have renewed debate about his mental acuity. The scrutiny also comes after Biden was diagnosed with an aggressive cancer last month. The diagnosis itself prompted questions about whether the timing was intended as a distraction and did little to quell talk about whether the 82-year-old should have dropped out of the race earlier. Republicans, for their part, are largely heralding the inquiries as a pursuit in transparency. 'The American people deserve to know who was making decisions from the White House between 2021-2025. I hope this investigation uncovers the truth,' Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.) said on X of Trump's probe. A number of Democrats seen as 2028 hopefuls, asked in recent weeks about the end of Biden's presidency, have acknowledged his weaknesses. Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg told an Iowa town hall last month that his then-boss's decision to run for reelection 'maybe' hurt Democrats, and Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) told Politico there's 'no doubt' Biden suffered cognitive decline. Across the board, though, Democrats have been pointing toward the future and hoping to move on from questions about their former party leader as they stare down the high-stakes midterms next year and aim for the White House in 2028. Biden's favorability was at 39 percent in the latest YouGov/The Economist polling, compared to Trump's 44 percent and former Vice President Harris's 42 percent. 'If Democrats shift their focus to this, then they risk further alienating and frustrating their base that is ready to put Biden behind them,' said Democratic strategist Fred Hicks. He pointed out Trump's public fallout this week with Musk, who's suggested that Trump's bill could be 'bankrupting America,' and suggested it could be opening for Democrats in their pushback against the administration. But although Democrats are pushing for the party to ignore not just the probe but the Biden discourse more broadly, many have acknowledged that the issue is likely to dog them through 2028 and could even be a political liability for some potential presidential contenders. Strategist Hank Sheinkopfinterpreted Trump's new probe not as a trap or bait, but as a direct attack, and countered some of his fellow Democrats by arguing that the party ought to respond. ''Take [Trump] on or lose in 2026' is really the reality which they don't want to deal with. They somehow believe that if they don't take them on, they'll win anyway,' Sheinkopf said of party leaders. 'What they want is [to say], 'Biden, we're not talking about that, that's the past.' But that's the present. So it's a delusional argument,' he said. 'Trump is making this the present. He's defining the Demcoratic Party by Biden, and the things he's going to say about Biden, whether they are true or not. So you can't let that stand.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store