Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for c…
This bill amends Medicare Part D’s manufacturer discount rules to create a multi-year phase-in of specific manufacturer discount percentages for plasma-derived biological products marketed as of August 16, 2022. It defines “plasma-derived product,” sets year-by-year discount percentages for two beneficiary cost categories (those below and those at/above the out-of-pocket threshold), and excludes drugs dispensed to certain low-income subsidy beneficiaries and specified small manufacturers from the phase-in rules.
Progressives emphasize patient access and affordability benefits.
Narrow, technical change with plausible bipartisan appeal, though pharmaceutical industry reactions and committee negotiations could slow action.
This bill amends Medicare Part D’s manufacturer discount rules to create a multi-year phase-in of specific manufacturer discount percentages for plasma-derived biological products marketed as of August 16, 2022.
It defines “plasma-derived product,” sets year-by-year discount percentages for two beneficiary cost categories (those below and those at/above the out-of-pocket threshold), and excludes drugs dispensed to certain low-income subsidy beneficiaries and specified small manufacturers from the phase-in rules.
Technically narrow and administrable, but interacts with contentious drug-pricing interests and has fiscal implications lacking clear offsets.
How solid the drafting looks.
Progressives emphasize patient access and affordability benefits.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize patient access and affordability benefits.
Likely supportive because the bill aims to protect patient access to life‑saving plasma-derived medicines by mandating manufacturer discounts and phasing them in to limit disruptions.
May want stronger patient protections and monitoring of supply impacts.
Cautious support for a measured, phased approach balancing patient access and industry stability.
Wants evidence that the schedule avoids supply shocks and does not shift costs to plans or taxpayers.
Likely opposed as additional mandates on manufacturers that act like price controls and could hinder innovation or supply.
The phase-in softens but does not eliminate concerns about federal intervention in drug markets.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically narrow and administrable, but interacts with contentious drug-pricing interests and has fiscal implications lacking clear offsets.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize patient access and affordability benefits.
Technically narrow and administrable, but interacts with contentious drug-pricing interests and has fiscal implications lacking clear offse…
Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for PLASMA Act.
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.