California 2011-2012 Regular Session Status: In Committee

AB 310 — Prescription drugs.

Last action — From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2011-2012 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

(1) Existing law provides for licensing and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care. Existing law provides that the willful violation of provisions regulating health care service plans is a crime. Existing law provides for the licensing and regulation of health insurers by the Insurance Commissioner. Existing law requires health care service plans and health insurers to provide certain benefits, but generally does not require plans and insurers to cover prescription drugs. Existing law imposes various requirements on plans and insurers if they offer coverage for prescription drugs. This bill would prohibit health care service plans and health insurers that offer outpatient prescription drug coverage from requiring coinsurance, as defined, from the enrollee as a basis for cost sharing. The bill would also impose certain limitations on copayments, as defined, and out-of-pocket expenses for outpatient prescription drugs. The bill would make these provisions inoperative upon a determination by the department and commissioner that these provisions would result in additional costs to the state as a result of laws governing federal health care reform. Because this bill would impose new requirements on health care service plans, the willful violation of which would be a crime, it would thereby impose a state-mandated local program. (2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  2. Died pursuant to Art. IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution.

  3. In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.

  4. In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  5. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 12. Noes 6.) (May 3). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  6. Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.

  7. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on HEALTH. Read second time and amended.

  8. Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.

  9. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on HEALTH. Read second time and amended.

  10. Referred to Com. on HEALTH.

  11. From printer. May be heard in committee March 12.

  12. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Ma · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Ma

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

Passed 12 Yea · 6 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 12601
Total 12601
% of votes cast 63%32%0%5%
How each member voted (19)
Member Party Vote
Gordon — Yea
Eng — Yea
Garrick — Nay
Bonilla — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Logue — Nay
Monning — Yea
Pan — Yea
Smyth — Nay
Williams — Not Voting
Ammiano — Yea
Hayashi — Yea
Mansoor — Nay
Nestande — Nay
Silva — Nay
Bonnie Lowenthal — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
V. Manuel Pérez — Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

healthcare health-insurance
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 310 do?
(1) Existing law provides for licensing and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care. Existing law provides that the willful violation of provisions regulating health care service plans is a crime. Existing law provides for the licensing and regulation of health insurers by the Insurance Commissioner. Existing law requires health care service plans and health insurers to provide certain benefits, but generally does not require plans and insurers to cover prescription drugs. Existing law imposes various requirements on plans and insurers if they offer coverage for prescription drugs. This bill would prohibit health care service plans and health insurers that offer outpatient prescription drug coverage from requiring coinsurance, as defined, from the enrollee as a basis for cost sharing. The bill would also impose certain limitations on copayments, as defined, and out-of-pocket expenses for outpatient prescription drugs. The bill would make these provisions inoperative upon a determination by the department and commissioner that these provisions would result in additional costs to the state as a result of laws governing federal health care reform. Because this bill would impose new requirements on health care service plans, the willful violation of which would be a crime, it would thereby impose a state-mandated local program. (2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors AB 310?
AB 310 is sponsored by Ma.
What is the current status of AB 310?
This bill died with 2011-2012 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 310?
Track AB 310 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 310

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 310

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →