California 2013-2014 Regular Session Status: In Committee

AB 670 — Pharmacy Law: incentive payments.

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 2013-2014 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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

The Pharmacy Law governs the practice of pharmacy in this state, including the permissible duties of licensed pharmacists. Among other permitted acts, a pharmacist filling a prescription order for a drug product prescribed by its trade or brand name may select another drug product with the same active chemical ingredients of the same strength, quantity, and dosage form, and of the same generic drug name as determined, as specified, of those drug products having the same active chemical ingredients. A person who violates the Pharmacy Law is guilty of a crime, as specified. This bill would prohibit a pharmacist or pharmacy employer from receiving any payment or other compensation, in the form of money or otherwise to specifically recommend or replace a patient's originally prescribed drug product with a drug product that does not have the same active ingredient as the originally prescribed drug product, unless the recommendation or replacement is the result of, and the payment is included in the reimbursement for, the pharmacist performing a comprehensive medication review, as specified. By creating a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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: Set, second hearing. Held under submission.

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

  5. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  6. Read second time and amended.

  7. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 2.) (April 23).

  8. Re-referred to Com. on B.,P. & C.P.

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

  10. Re-referred to Com. on B.,P. & C.P.

  11. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on B.,P. & C.P. Read second time and amended.

  12. Referred to Com. on B.,P. & C.P.

  13. From printer. May be heard in committee March 24.

  14. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Atkins · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

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

Sponsors (1)

  • Atkins

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 as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

Passed 8 Yea · 2 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 8202
Republican 0001
Total 8203
% of votes cast 62%15%0%23%
How each member voted (13)
Member Party Vote
Maienschein — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Holden — Yea
Ting — Yea
Bocanegra — Yea
Hagman — Nay
Campos — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Skinner — Not Voting
Wilk — Nay
Dickinson — Not Voting
Gordon — Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Not Voting

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety 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 670 do?
The Pharmacy Law governs the practice of pharmacy in this state, including the permissible duties of licensed pharmacists. Among other permitted acts, a pharmacist filling a prescription order for a drug product prescribed by its trade or brand name may select another drug product with the same active chemical ingredients of the same strength, quantity, and dosage form, and of the same generic drug name as determined, as specified, of those drug products having the same active chemical ingredients. A person who violates the Pharmacy Law is guilty of a crime, as specified. This bill would prohibit a pharmacist or pharmacy employer from receiving any payment or other compensation, in the form of money or otherwise to specifically recommend or replace a patient's originally prescribed drug product with a drug product that does not have the same active ingredient as the originally prescribed drug product, unless the recommendation or replacement is the result of, and the payment is included in the reimbursement for, the pharmacist performing a comprehensive medication review, as specified. By creating a new crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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 670?
AB 670 is sponsored by Atkins.
What is the current status of AB 670?
This bill died with 2013-2014 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 670?
Track AB 670 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 670

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 670

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →