NEW JERSEY — A new advocacy campaign is urging New Jersey residents to contact state lawmakers and oppose Senate Bill S-2345, legislation known as the “Patient and Provider Protection Act,” which would place new regulations on pharmacy benefit managers, commonly known as PBMs.
The campaign, promoted through a Speak4 action page, warns that the bill could increase prescription drug costs for patients, employers, unions, and small businesses. Opponents of the measure, including the Pharmaceutical Care Management Association, argue that S-2345 would add what they describe as a $10.92 “pill tax” to most prescriptions filled in New Jersey.
PBMs are companies that work with health insurers, employers, and prescription drug plans to manage pharmacy benefits, negotiate rebates with drug manufacturers, and create formularies that determine which medications are covered and at what cost. The National Conference of State Legislatures notes that PBMs often negotiate rebates from manufacturers in exchange for favorable placement on health plan formularies.
Supporters of S-2345 say the legislation is intended to rein in PBM practices, increase transparency, protect independent pharmacies, and help lower prescription drug costs for consumers. According to the bill text, the measure would establish requirements for PBMs involving contracts with manufacturers and pharmacies, prohibit certain marketing practices, address rebate arrangements, and require PBMs to reimburse pharmacies at rates tied to the pharmacy’s cost of acquiring prescription drugs.
The New Jersey General Assembly advanced related PBM reform legislation in May. Assembly Democrats said the proposal would regulate PBMs and help make prescription drugs more affordable for New Jersey families. New Jersey Monitor reported that supporters view the bill as a way to limit the power of prescription drug intermediaries, while critics contend the measure could instead drive costs higher.
State Senators Vin Gopal and John McKeon have also expressed support for PBM reform, saying the legislation would require PBMs to prioritize patient care, end price manipulation, and ensure fair pharmacy reimbursement.
Opponents counter that the bill would place additional financial burdens on health plans and consumers. PCMA’s campaign argues that S-2345 “does not lower prescription costs” and would make medications more expensive statewide.
The debate reflects a broader national fight over the role of PBMs in prescription drug pricing. Across the country, lawmakers have considered bills aimed at increasing PBM oversight, requiring greater transparency, and protecting pharmacies from reimbursement practices they say are unfair.
New Jersey residents who receive the advocacy message are being directed to contact their legislators and urge them to reject S-2345. The bill remains part of an ongoing debate in Trenton over how to control prescription drug costs while protecting access to pharmacies and medications.
