Prescription drug coverage.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when SB 853 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on SB 853.
You're tracking SB 853
We'll email you the moment it moves.
SB 853 — Prescription drug coverage.
Last action — August 11 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
3Passed Senate
-
4Passed Assembly
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2021-2022 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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
Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care, and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law provides for the regulation of disability insurers, including health insurers, by the Department of Insurance. Existing law generally authorizes a health care service plan or health insurer to use utilization review, under which a licensed physician or a licensed health care professional who is competent to evaluate specific clinical issues may approve, modify, delay, or deny requests for health care services based on medical necessity. Existing law prohibits a health care service plan contract that covers prescription drug benefits or a specified health insurance policy from limiting or excluding coverage for a drug on the basis that the drug is prescribed for a use that is different from the use for which it was approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration if specified conditions are met. Existing law also prohibits a health care service plan that covers prescription drug benefits from limiting or excluding coverage for a drug that was previously approved for coverage if an enrollee continues to be prescribed that drug, as specified. This bill would expand the above-described prohibitions to prohibit limiting or excluding coverage of a drug, dose, or dosage form, and would apply the prohibition to blanket disability insurance policies and certificates. The bill would prohibit a health care service plan or disability insurer that provides coverage for prescription drugs from limiting or declining to cover a drug or dose of a drug as prescribed, or imposing additional cost sharing for covering a drug as prescribed, if specified criteria apply. The bill would provide that a reduction or termination of an ongoing and approved course of treatment before the end of the treatment or the end or amendment of the policy is an adverse benefit determination, and would require a health care service plan or disability insurer to notify an enrollee or insured, or their representative, and the enrollee's or insured's provider in writing of the adverse benefit determination no fewer than 7 calendar days before the effective date. The bill would require a plan or insurer that has approved an ongoing course of treatment to provide continuing coverage pending appeal or review. Because a willful violation of the bill's requirements relative to health care service plans would be a 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
- Amended 06/02/22 - Amended Assembly Current pdf June 02, 2022
- Amended 04/25/22 - Amended Senate pdf April 25, 2022
- Amended 02/28/22 - Amended Senate pdf February 28, 2022
- Introduced 01/19/22 - Introduced pdf January 19, 2022
- SB853 View text html
Action History
-
August 11 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
-
August 3 set for first hearing. Placed on suspense file.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (June 28). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.
-
Referred to Com. on HEALTH.
-
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
-
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 3928.) Ordered to the Assembly.
-
Ordered to special consent calendar.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 3771.) (May 19).
-
Set for hearing May 19.
-
May 9 hearing: Placed on APPR suspense file.
-
Set for hearing May 9.
-
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 10. Noes 0. Page 3461.) (April 20).
-
Set for hearing April 20.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.
-
Joint Rule 55 suspended. (Ayes 31. Noes 6. Page 2880.)
-
(Ayes 31. Noes 6.)
-
Art. IV. Sec. 8(a) of the Constitution dispensed with.
-
Referred to Com. on HEALTH.
-
From printer. May be acted upon on or after February 19.
-
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- Scott D. Wiener · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Wiener, Scott D. Democratic
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.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 8 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 11 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| % of votes cast | 73% | 0% | 0% | 27% |
How each member voted (15)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| McCarty | — | Yea |
| Nazarian | — | Yea |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Mayes | — | Yea |
| Santiago | — | Yea |
| Rodriguez | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Not Voting |
| Waldron | — | Not Voting |
| Bigelow | — | Not Voting |
| Luz Rivas | — | Yea |
| Wendy Carrillo | — | Yea |
| Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Arambula, Joaquin | Democratic | Yea |
| Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah | Democratic | Yea |
| Flora, Heath | Republican | Not Voting |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 22 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Republican | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 39 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 98% | 0% | 0% | 3% |
How each member voted (40)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Glazer | — | Yea |
| Min | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Dodd | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Newman | — | Yea |
| Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Melendez | — | Yea |
| Borgeas | — | Yea |
| Kamlager | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Yea |
| Rubio | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Hertzberg | — | Not Voting |
| Allen, Benjamin | Democratic | Yea |
| Archuleta, Bob | Democratic | Yea |
| Becker, Josh | Democratic | Yea |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Cortese, Dave | Democratic | Yea |
| Durazo, Maria Elena | Democratic | Yea |
| Hurtado, Melissa | Democratic | Yea |
| Laird, John | Democratic | Yea |
| Limón, Monique | Democratic | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Stern, Henry I. | Democratic | Yea |
| Umberg, Thomas J. | Democratic | Yea |
| Wiener, Scott D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Kamlager | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Laird, John | Democratic | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Kamlager | — | Yea |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Laird, John | Democratic | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Unaffiliated | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 10 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 91% | 0% | 0% | 9% |
How each member voted (11)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Rubio | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Melendez | — | Yea |
| Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Hurtado, Melissa | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Limón, Monique | Democratic | Yea |
| Wiener, Scott D. | Democratic | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 853 do?
- Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care, and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law provides for the regulation of disability insurers, including health insurers, by the Department of Insurance. Existing law generally authorizes a health care service plan or health insurer to use utilization review, under which a licensed physician or a licensed health care professional who is competent to evaluate specific clinical issues may approve, modify, delay, or deny requests for health care services based on medical necessity. Existing law prohibits a health care service plan contract that covers prescription drug benefits or a specified health insurance policy from limiting or excluding coverage for a drug on the basis that the drug is prescribed for a use that is different from the use for which it was approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration if specified conditions are met. Existing law also prohibits a health care service plan that covers prescription drug benefits from limiting or excluding coverage for a drug that was previously approved for coverage if an enrollee continues to be prescribed that drug, as specified. This bill would expand the above-described prohibitions to prohibit limiting or excluding coverage of a drug, dose, or dosage form, and would apply the prohibition to blanket disability insurance policies and certificates. The bill would prohibit a health care service plan or disability insurer that provides coverage for prescription drugs from limiting or declining to cover a drug or dose of a drug as prescribed, or imposing additional cost sharing for covering a drug as prescribed, if specified criteria apply. The bill would provide that a reduction or termination of an ongoing and approved course of treatment before the end of the treatment or the end or amendment of the policy is an adverse benefit determination, and would require a health care service plan or disability insurer to notify an enrollee or insured, or their representative, and the enrollee's or insured's provider in writing of the adverse benefit determination no fewer than 7 calendar days before the effective date. The bill would require a plan or insurer that has approved an ongoing course of treatment to provide continuing coverage pending appeal or review. Because a willful violation of the bill's requirements relative to health care service plans would be a 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 SB 853?
- SB 853 is sponsored by Wiener, Scott D. (Democratic).
- What is the current status of SB 853?
- This bill died with 2021-2022 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” 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 SB 853?
- Track SB 853 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 853
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.
Stay ahead of SB 853
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →