- Today
- Holidays
- Birthdays
- Reminders
- Cities
- Atlanta
- Austin
- Baltimore
- Berwyn
- Beverly Hills
- Birmingham
- Boston
- Brooklyn
- Buffalo
- Charlotte
- Chicago
- Cincinnati
- Cleveland
- Columbus
- Dallas
- Denver
- Detroit
- Fort Worth
- Houston
- Indianapolis
- Knoxville
- Las Vegas
- Los Angeles
- Louisville
- Madison
- Memphis
- Miami
- Milwaukee
- Minneapolis
- Nashville
- New Orleans
- New York
- Omaha
- Orlando
- Philadelphia
- Phoenix
- Pittsburgh
- Portland
- Raleigh
- Richmond
- Rutherford
- Sacramento
- Salt Lake City
- San Antonio
- San Diego
- San Francisco
- San Jose
- Seattle
- Tampa
- Tucson
- Washington
Washington House Advances 340B Drug Pricing Bill Amid Concerns
The bill aims to protect safety net providers, but some lawmakers worry it will lead to costly litigation.
Published on Mar. 4, 2026
Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›
The Washington state House Appropriations Committee has advanced a bill concerning the federal 340B drug pricing program. The bill would prohibit manufacturers from restricting entities from acquiring 340B drugs and require reporting and fees. However, some lawmakers argue the bill exceeds the state's authority, will lead to costly litigation, and benefits affluent areas rather than those truly in need.
Why it matters
The 340B program allows drug manufacturers to provide discounted drugs to certain hospitals and clinics, which then charge full price to patients. This has led to concerns about overcharging and excessive profits, especially for public employee health plans. The proposed legislation aims to address these issues, but faces pushback from those who believe it oversteps the state's authority.
The details
Senate Bill 5981 would prohibit manufacturers from restricting 340B drug acquisition and require reporting and fees from both covered entities and manufacturers. Supporters say it protects safety net providers, while critics argue it benefits affluent areas and will result in costly litigation the state is likely to lose.
- The Washington state House Appropriations Committee advanced the bill on Monday, March 3, 2026.
The players
Rep. Matt Marshall
A Republican state representative from Eatonville who opposes the bill, arguing it exceeds the state's constitutional authority and will lead to costly litigation.
Rep. My-Linh Thai
A Democratic state representative from Bellevue who supports the bill, arguing it is about protecting safety net providers in the state.
340B Program
A federal drug pricing program that allows drug manufacturers to provide heavily discounted drugs to participating hospitals and clinics, which then charge full price to patients.
What they’re saying
“I do not feel or do I not believe that the state has the constitutional authority to actually implement these very burdensome regulations or on one side, but then just unfettered expansion in the wake of 12,000% expansion, in the last 16 years.”
— Rep. Matt Marshall (dailyfly.com)
“This is not doing anything to directly address the needs of safety net providers in rural communities.”
— Rep. Matt Marshall (dailyfly.com)
“SB 5981 'is about protecting safety net providers in our state. And who are these safety net provider? They are the people or the organization that provide support and care for those who otherwise wouldn't get these services asking for your support.'”
— Rep. My-Linh Thai (dailyfly.com)
What’s next
The bill will now move to the full Washington state House for consideration.
The takeaway
The debate over the 340B drug pricing program highlights the ongoing tensions between efforts to control healthcare costs and protect access to care for underserved populations. The proposed legislation in Washington aims to address concerns about overcharging, but faces pushback from those who believe it exceeds the state's authority and could lead to costly legal battles.
