Featured Article
What is Supply Market Intelligence?
A Word from our Partner
Higher Expectations,
Fewer Resources;
Is There a Silver Lining?
Market Forces
Consumer-Directed Health Plan Growth Levels Off Among Employers
Patient Protection Act
or Patent Protection Act?
Energy Update:
Natural Gas Prices, and Electric
Customer Switching Statistics
Sourcing Operations
Update
Sourcing Project Updates
Member Spotlight
Steven Hughes,
Vertis Communications
Contract Spotlight
Three Fastest-Growing Contracts
Networking & Events
Mid-Year Review
and Supplier Showcase Recap
Corporate United 2008
Supplier of the Year
In The News
Arslanian and Goldford
Join Corporate United
Corporate United Named
to Inc. 5000 List
Office Products Industry News:
Staples Buys Corporate Express
Eaton Named to List of Most Ethical Companies
Member Feedback
Member Advisory Board
Meeting Notes
The Ohio General Assembly recently introduced legislation in the Senate that, if passed, would prohibit generic substitution of anticonvulsant drugs for the treatment of epilepsy without the prior consent of the physician and patient. Sub. Senate Bill 114 seeks to make an “end run” around ERISA, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.
While ERISA is a comprehensive federal law intended to primarily regulate retirement and pension plans and displace all state regulations relating to pension plans, ERISA also has the effect of regulating all other employee benefits, including health benefits. Thus, for self-insured employers, ERISA preempts state laws such as benefit mandates, unless the state law falls into one of three exceptions. Although Sub. SB 114 does not fall into one of these exceptions, the state law, if passed, would have the effect of applying to self-insured employers in Ohio because it is a bill that affects the practice of pharmacy, which is regulated by the state vis-à-vis the Board of Pharmacy.
Today, many of the drugs used to treat epilepsy and therefore prevent seizures are brand medications with patents set to expire as early as the third quarter of 2008. As a result, many state legislatures, under pressure from advocacy groups like the Epilepsy Foundation, have crafted state laws to act as barriers to generic substitution. Employers who provide medical and pharmacy benefits could be materially impacted if this bill and other “me too” bills are enacted to protect brand manufacturers.
The cost of generic prescription drugs after a six month exclusivity period, post patent, can be a much as 60 to 80 percent cheaper than brand medications. Many employers have adopted benefit plan designed to mandate the use of generic medications once the brand patent expires. However, Sub. SB 114 would clearly erect barriers to employers’ wishes. These types of legislative initiatives, if successful, may lead to other special interest groups seeking protection. If you are an Ohio employer, write or call your Senator and ask that he or she not support this bill as it will lead to higher pharmacy costs.
![]()
