By a 12-9 party-line vote, the House Commerce and Labor Committee on Jan. 14, 2025, passed legislation that would create a Prescription Drug Affordability Board. (Photo by Markus Schmidt/Virginia Mercury)
A Virginia House committee on Tuesday advanced a bipartisan proposal to create a Prescription Drug Affordability Board, renewing efforts to tackle skyrocketing medication costs after Gov. Glenn Youngkin vetoed an identical measure last year.
House Bill 1724, sponsored by Del. Karrie Delaney, D-Fairfax, and Del. Ellen Campbell, R-Rockbridge, passed the House Commerce and Labor Committee on a 12-9 party-line vote. The legislation now heads to the House Appropriations Committee for further consideration.
Supporters argue the board would bring much-needed oversight to drug pricing, identifying excessively priced medications and recommending strategies to lower costs, including potential price caps.
“When I knock on doors in my district, I hear heartbreaking stories of neighbors rationing medication or choosing between paying for life-saving prescriptions and keeping the heat on,” Delaney told the committee. “Meanwhile, drug companies are seeing record profits as products skyrocket in price, well above inflation. The problem is clear — the cost of simply staying alive in Virginia is much too high.”
Under the legislation, the board would review drug prices and set payment limits for up to 12 drugs annually between 2026 and 2029, focusing on state-sponsored and regulated health plans. A stakeholder council would assist in decisions, and manufacturers would be required to share pricing data, with the attorney general enforcing compliance.
The proposal has gained traction as public concern over rising drug costs grows. Advocates point to similar boards in states like Maryland, where the state legislature has tasked a similar panel to move forward with a plan to cap how much the state and local governments pay for certain high-cost prescription drugs.
However, opponents of the bill, including representatives from the pharmaceutical industry, argue that such a board could stifle innovation and reduce access to certain medications. They also caution that price controls could disrupt supply chains and deter drug manufacturers from doing business in Virginia.
And House Minority Leader Todd Gilbert, R-Shenandoah, voiced concerns about the proposal’s potential unintended consequences, citing recent events in Southern California’s insurance market, where wildfires in the Los Angeles area highlighted gaps in coverage for many residents.
“I was struck by the situation in California,” Gilbert said during Tuesday’s committee debate. “A whole slew of insurance companies had either pulled out or dramatically reduced coverage in California, leaving a number of people who were impacted by these fires uninsured. For every dollar they collected in premiums, they were paying out $1.09 in lawsuits. So they just said, ‘We’re in the business of making money, whether anybody likes that or not. We can’t make money doing this.’”
Gilbert cautioned that the proposed oversight of drug pricing could lead to a similar scenario.
“We can wave the magic wand and dictate costs, but if we’re not careful, we could see fewer drugs, fewer lives saved, and fewer opportunities for research and development.”
But Delaney pushed back against comparisons to California’s insurance market, emphasizing the differences between the two industries.
“The Virginia market is huge — 8.7 million residents,” Delaney said. She argued that pharmaceutical companies are unlikely to abandon such a lucrative market simply because profits might be reduced, not eliminated.
Delaney dismissed such concerns as “fear-mongering,” saying the notion that drug companies would “hold hostage the health and life of Virginians” over reduced profits is far-fetched.
“There is still an opportunity to make profit in Virginia,” she added, noting that the proposed board is about ensuring fairness and access, not eliminating profits.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.