Arkansas pharmacy bill heads to governor's desk, pharmacy freedom of choice bill enters legislature
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. – The 95th General Assembly saw activity on pharmacy bills on Monday.
A bill to permit non-profit hospitals to maintain a licensed pharmacy is on the governor's desk after a Thursday vote, and a pharmaceutical patient freedom of choice bill was submitted to the legislature the same day.
Arkansas Legislative Council makes pharmacy-protecting PBM rule permanent
Senate Bill 58 will remove the prohibition on non-profit, tax-exempt or government-funded hospitals from having a retail pharmacy permit. The legislation included a provision that a patient was not required to use a hospital's pharmacy and to inform them this was the case.
Meanwhile, House Bill 1442 proposes to support patients and prevent anti-competitive practices for pharmacy patients.
Arkansas bill limiting insurance settlements on governor's desk for signature
The legislation allows patients freedom of choice in their pharmacy and requires pharmacies to have equal access to drug pricing programs. It also reflects SB58's prohibition removal, by requiring a non-profit hospital patient's pharmacy choice to be recorded.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sending money to family in foreign countries may be taxed more
Jun. 9—Families hoping to send money to loved ones in other countries may be hit with additional fees from a tax and spending bill proposed by the Trump administration that would slap a 3.5% tax on remittances sent by anyone who is not a U.S. citizen. The "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" passed through the House in May and is now being debated by the Senate. The budget bill has several proposed tax changes, which include taxing money sent from an estimated 40 million non-US citizens — including green card holders, temporary workers and undocumented immigrants — to family and friends in other countries. The bill had a 5% tax but was reduced to 3.5%. The bill is another way the Trump administration is hoping to dissuade immigrants, both documented and undocumented, from coming into the country and moving money out of the U.S. economy. Republicans believe the bill would increase the average take-home pay of U.S. citizens, while Democrats believe the bill and increased taxes are "a transfer of wealth from the working class to the rich," said Daniel Garcia, spokesperson for the Democratic Party of New Mexico. What is a remittance? Remittances refer to sending money from one person to another and is typically done between family members from one country to another. A person living and working in the U.S. would send money to family members typically living in a developing country, where this money is a source of income that contributes to the country's gross domestic product (GDP). Payments are typically sent using an electronic payment service or a money transfer app. Banks, credit unions and money transfer services charge a fee for processing remittances, and fees average 10%, according to the International Monetary Fund. Cryptocurrency exchanges are not as heavily regulated and can be a way to avoid additional taxes and surcharges. "Taxing remittances would amount to a form of double taxation, since migrants already pay taxes in the country where they work," Esteban Moctezuma Barragán, Mexican Ambassador, wrote in a statement. "Imposing a tax on these transfers would disproportionately affect those with the least, without accounting for their ability to pay," Barragán added. However, some believe the 3.5% tax fee would give financial support to public services and is the most "pro-worker, pro-family and pro-American legislation we've seen in decades," said Amy Barela, chairwoman of the Republican Party of New Mexico. "Let's be clear, this measure is not about targeting individuals," she wrote in a statement to the Journal. "It's about ensuring the 3.5% fee, although modest, would also have a very meaningful impact in helping offset costs associated with public services, border security, and community infrastructure — relieving some of the financial pressure on hardworking New Mexicans who continue to bear the burden of an imbalanced system." Crucial source of revenue Mexico is the second-largest receiver of personally wired money behind India, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In 2024, Latin America received $160.9 billion, with the U.S. accounting for 96.6% of all remittances to Mexico. They also make up 20-30% of GDP in countries like El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti and Honduras. "Remittance is a very important source of revenue in our government," said Patricia Pinzón, consul of Mexico. "This would affect Mexican families and the economy in general, but I would say the basic needs of Mexican families is the most worrying thing." However, "whatever happens in one economy will affect the other," said Pinzón. "Our economies are so interrelated that everything that happens here has a consequence in Mexico," she said. "Mexicans will not stop sending money; they'll just look for alternative ways to send it." Mexican migrant workers sent 16.7% of their labor income back to their families, and more than 80% of the income remains in the U.S. economy. The average amount of remittance sent to Mexico is roughly $350 every one to two months, which "could seem like nothing for the U.S., but it's money that a whole family lives on and covers their basics in Mexico," Pinzón said.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
GOP scores win as Legislature repeals health care for undocumented adults
GOP scores win as Legislature repeals health care for undocumented adults originally appeared on Bring Me The News. Minnesota lawmakers voted Monday to strip MinnesotaCare health insurance from undocumented adults. The measure, which was the most controversial of the legislative session, passed both the House and Senate after leaders reached a budget agreement to avoid a government shutdown. In the evenly-divided House, DFL caucus leader Melissa Hortman was the only Democratic lawmaker to vote for the bill's passage. In the DFL-controlled Senate, Majority Leader Erin Murphy, Sen. Ann Rest, DFL-New Hope and others joined Republicans in voting for the bill. "I cannot vote to shut down our state, I just can't," Rest said in brief remarks on the Senate floor. "I made an agreement, I gave my word," Murphy said shortly before the vote. "I will vote for this. And it's among the most painful votes I've ever taken." The move rolls back a 2023 legislative accomplishment for Democrats, handing a major win to GOP lawmakers who refused a series of offers from DFL leaders and continued to leverage the threat of a government shutdown to get the bill across the finish line. Around 17,000 undocumented adults are currently enrolled in MinnesotaCare, which offers state-subsidized health care plans for low income people who pay premiums in exchange for coverage. The move is expected to save the state $56.9 million in the 2026-27 biennium. Opponents of the bill decried the measure as shameful and several Democratic lawmakers have said the change will cause some undocumented immigrants to die as serious health issues go undetected or untreated. Democrats have also claimed fiscal responsibility is not the motive of the GOP, as the change could drive costs associated with emergency hospital care. This story was originally reported by Bring Me The News on Jun 9, 2025, where it first appeared.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
As Washington Democratic lawmakers slam 'Big Beautiful Bill,' NW Republicans back it while acknowledging imperfections
Jun. 9—WASHINGTON — Lawmakers return to the Capitol on Monday with less than a month before Republicans' self-imposed July 4 deadline to pass President Donald Trump's signature bill, extending tax cuts and increasing spending on immigration enforcement and the military while cutting spending on health care and food assistance. In interviews on Capitol Hill last week, Northwest lawmakers illustrated why passing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is proving such a vexing needle to thread, even as nearly all Republicans agree they must pass some version of the legislation this year. "We have very strong support and we have very strong unity in moving forward to make sure that we don't give America the biggest tax increase in the history of the country, a $4.3 trillion tax increase," said Sen. Mike Crapo, the Idaho Republican crafting the bill's tax provisions as chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, after meeting with Trump on Wednesday. "There's a lot of talk about 'this is a tax cut for the wealthy,'" Crapo told reporters outside the White House. "This is a $2.6 trillion tax increase on people making less than $400,000, and the vast majority of that is for the middle and lower-middle income categories." The crux of the challenge for the GOP is balancing benefits for the businesses and high-income people who have traditionally been the party's constituents with the interests of the working-class Americans who form the party's base in the Trump era, all while appeasing fiscal conservatives who worry about the nation's debt. Reading between the lines of Crapo's statement reveals this tension. The bill would extend the sweeping tax cuts Republicans enacted in 2017 during Trump's first term, so taxes would largely stay the same if it passes, with the exception of temporary tax cuts for tips, overtime wages and Social Security income that were central to the president's campaign. If failing to pass the bill by Dec. 31 would mean a $4.3 trillion tax hike, as Crapo said, including a $2.6 trillion increase on Americans who earn less than $400,000 a year, then the other $1.7 trillion in extended tax cuts would not benefit those people. Meanwhile, the bill passed by House Republicans would reduce future spending on Medicaid by $793 billion and on food assistance for low-income Americans by $294 billion over a decade, according to estimates by the Congressional Budget Office, or CBO. "It is a big, ugly bill that is really bad for our district and really bad for the country," said Rep. Kim Schrier, a Democrat whose district spans the Cascades from Wenatchee to the eastern suburbs of Seattle and Tacoma. "It explodes the debt, and they are taking away from my constituents Medicaid, taking away food stamps, taking away new energy projects in the district, all in order to pay for a tax break for the wealthiest. So this is a lose-lose situation for my constituents." Growing budget deficits In his address to a joint session of Congress in March, Trump said Republicans would balance the federal budget, something Congress hasn't done since Bill Clinton was president in 2000. But estimates published last week by the CBO, a nonpartisan agency that analyzes the effects of legislation, project that the GOP bill would do the opposite, increasing budget deficits by $2.4 trillion through 2034 and adding to the nation's debt of more than $36.2 trillion. For deficit hawks like Rep. Russ Fulcher, a Republican whose district includes North Idaho and most of the Gem State's western half, that's less than ideal. "I'd like to see some more aggressive reductions on the spending curve," Fulcher said. "But the reality is this is Congress and we got this passed by one vote, and so that tells me that those of us on the fiscal conservative side probably pushed it about as far as we could in the House." Fulcher opposed a provision in the House bill that gives an extra tax write-off to people in states with high state and local taxes, which he described as forcing Idahoans "to subsidize bad policy in New York and California." He also lamented that federal spending is projected to keep growing, and the GOP bill wouldn't bring spending down, only slow the increase. "At the end of the day, we did not cut spending overall," Fulcher said, but he ultimately voted for the bill — like all but five House Republicans, while every Democrat voted against it — because he believes it puts the federal budget on a better trajectory. He also supports repealing Biden-era subsidies for low-carbon energy and electric vehicles, another key part of the bill. "By simply bending the spending curve, I believe that gives the investment community some confidence that leadership is taking the debt seriously, and that's really important when it comes to the bond markets financing our debt," he said. "And when the investment community has confidence, that also promotes economic growth." Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, a Democrat who represents a conservative, largely working-class district in southwest Washington, said many of her constituents hate the idea of future generations having to pay for debt-financed spending in the GOP bill, including a down payment on Trump's "Golden Dome" missile system that CBO estimates could cost as much as $831 billion over two decades. "Working people deeply, bitterly understand debt," she said. "People care about this much more than the political establishment realizes. Like, we understand that we are mortgaging our future here, and what are we getting for it?" Gluesenkamp Perez, who has voted with Republicans more often than nearly any other Democrat, said she supports Trump's stated goal of rooting out waste, fraud and abuse in government spending but the GOP bill doesn't accomplish that goal. She said she agrees with the president's proposals to raise taxes on the highest earners and close a tax break for Wall Street called the "carried interest loophole," which Republicans in Congress have shot down. "It's not providing relief from administrative burden and bureaucracy," she said. "It's not empowering people to make better decisions for their long-term health. It's not building national health; it's taking food away from kids. You know, my dad always said that people can talk about their values all day, but you see their tax returns and you know what they really think and care about." Rep. Michael Baumgartner, a Spokane Republican, said he disagrees with the idea Trump reportedly floated in a call with House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. — letting the tax rate on people who make at least $2.5 million a year revert from 37% to 39.6% — and said the president hasn't made that a priority in his conversations with congressional Republicans. Baumgartner said that while the GOP bill isn't perfect, he supports it because it would enact the policies Trump ran on. "The Big Beautiful Bill is not a silver bullet for everything that ails the American republic, but it is very much a fulfillment of President Trump's campaign promises and what the American people voted for," he said. "It is not a plan to balance the federal deficit in one bill. It took decades to create the framework that had a significant imbalance in federal spending, and it's going to take more than one bill to right that ship." Despite the CBO's projected increase of $2.4 trillion to deficits through 2034, Crapo and other Republicans say their bill won't increase deficits by a penny, relying on projections of increased tax collections from economic growth that critics call wildly unrealistic. Both parties have disregarded the CBO when its findings haven't suited their policy goals, but the office has historically produced accurate predictions and routinely scrutinizes itself when they miss the mark. Republicans accuse the CBO of underestimating the effects of economic growth spurred by their 2017 tax cuts, but independent analysts point out that higher-than-expected revenue was mostly due to inflation and other effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Asked if he was concerned about the GOP bill increasing deficits, Baumgartner said the gap between government revenue and spending is already on track to grow because of the rising cost of entitlement programs like Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security. Solving that problem would take bipartisan action, he said, but the Republicans' bill would be a step in the right direction. "Those are politically very challenging votes to take," Baumgartner said of reforming safety-net programs. "But eventually the bond market will force the American people, and very likely a presidential campaign. You have to have a presidential campaign where candidates are campaigning on entitlement reform and fiscal responsibility at the presidential level to get the message through to the American people." Cuts to Medicaid Wary of the political pitfalls of cutting benefits Americans rely on, Republicans have pitched their reforms to Medicaid and food aid as merely targeting "waste, fraud and abuse" by imposing restrictions designed to prevent noncitizens and able-bodied adults who choose not to work from receiving the funds. The CBO estimates that 10.9 million people would lose Medicaid coverage as a result of those changes, including 1.4 million noncitizens who currently receive Medicaid funded only by states. Combined with the expiration of expanded subsidies passed by Democrats to help pay for private insurance, which Republicans don't plan to extend, the office estimates that 16 million Americans would lose their health insurance by the end of 2034. The bill would require recipients to regularly file reports to prove that they qualify for health insurance and help buying groceries. Democrats say that extra paperwork would strip vital benefits from people who deserve them but get tripped up by added bureaucracy. "The vast majority of people on Medicaid are already working. This bill is just a scam by Republicans to make it so hard to qualify for Medicaid that people just give up," Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said in a virtual news conference on Thursday. "The Republican tax bill will strangle everyone who relies on Medicaid in red tape, creating more barriers to coverage through intentionally confusing and burdensome new work-reporting requirements that could leave more than 620,000 Washingtonians without health care coverage or delayed coverage," Murray said, citing an estimate by the Washington State Health Care Authority, which administers the state's Medicaid program, called Apple Health. The CBO has estimated that stricter work-reporting requirements to qualify for Medicaid wouldn't increase employment. When Arkansas imposed such a policy in 2018, it didn't reduce joblessness in the state. Rep. Dan Newhouse, a Republican from Sunnyside, represents a central Washington district where 70% of children rely on Medicaid, the highest rate in the state. Asked why he voted for the bill despite the cuts to Medicaid, he said federal spending on the program is on an unsustainable trajectory. "We want the program to be viable, to go on into the future being able to provide the service necessary, the medical service for people that absolutely have to have it," Newhouse said. "There are rules in place and we have to follow the law." The GOP bill would change that law. While federal funds already can't be used to give Medicaid to noncitizens, it would penalize states like Washington that use their own money to provide health insurance to immigrants, including both people living in the country illegally and those with legal status. Newhouse, whose heavily agricultural district relies largely on unauthorized immigrant farmworkers, said the loss of health insurance among immigrants in central Washington is "going to be an issue that we'll have to address in some way." But he said his party's bill will help keep Medicaid viable in the long term, as spending on the program continues to grow. Democrats warn that cutting spending on the program won't only affect the people who lose their government-provided health insurance. Leaders of rural hospitals have warned that they could be forced to curtail services or even close due to lost Medicaid revenue, and uninsured patients often delay treatment until they need expensive emergency care. "Whenever we take away health care from anyone, it puts stress on the entire health care system," said Rep. Marilyn Strickland, D-Tacoma. "They're still going to get health care through the emergency room, so all that's going to do is drive up the expense. They will be far more sick and in dire condition when they show up in the emergency room, and that means longer wait times for everybody." The Affordable Care Act of 2010, often called "Obamacare," reduced the number of Americans without health insurance by subsidizing private insurance plans and letting states choose to expand Medicaid coverage to a larger share of their population, which Washington did in 2014 and Idaho did in 2020. Republicans have repeatedly tried and failed to repeal that law, coming close during Trump's first term in 2017 before the late Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., famously killed that effort. Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., told reporters on Tuesday that by reducing Medicaid coverage and allowing the expanded subsidies to expire, the GOP bill is "literally just another attempt to repeal the advancements of the Affordable Care Act." "By covering more people, the Affordable Care Act improved access to care, covered millions more Americans and helped us lower costs, but the provisions in the House reconciliation bill will reverse those gains," she said. "And for what? To give a tax break to the ultra-wealthy or to corporations that don't need it." Sen. Jim Risch, an Idaho Republican, said his party faces a difficult balancing act in crafting the bill — especially when they can afford to lose no more than three GOP votes in either the House or Senate — but they ultimately have to get it done to enact Trump's agenda. The bill would also raise the government's borrowing limit by about $4 trillion, which Congress must do before its August recess, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says, or risk a global financial crisis. "I'm concerned about the deficit every moment of every day," Risch said. "The biggest competing thing you have is the fact that we're going into debt, $1 trillion every 150 days. And on the other side, people are unhappy with the rate of taxation they've got, and those things have got to get reconciled. I think they can, but it's a heavy lift." Orion Donovan Smith's work is funded in part by members of the Spokane community via the Community Journalism and Civic Engagement Fund. This story can be republished by other organizations for free under a Creative Commons license. For more information on this, please contact our newspaper's managing editor.
