The House Health Care Committee held a public hearing on House Bill 1090, which would require health carriers to reimburse for up to a 12-month supply of contraceptives at one time for new prescriptions as well as refills.

Rep. Emily Alvarado, the bill’s prime sponsor, told the committee that the statute enacted in 2017 required coverage of a 12-month supply only for refills, not initial prescriptions, and that the current distinction forces some patients to return monthly for medication or lose continuity of contraception. “Patients and their providers determine what's best, not insurance companies,” Alvarado said, and she asked the committee to remove that coverage loophole.

Four supporters testified in person and remotely. Elena Vega DeSoto, a graduating University of Washington senior and social-media lead for Planned Parenthood Generation Action at UW, described transportation and scheduling barriers: “As a student, I rely on public transportation or my friends to get to the pharmacy…for some, a monthly trip to the pharmacy might be completely unfeasible,” she said.

Calypso Bettis, vice president of the University of Washington chapter of Planned Parenthood Generation Action, said missing pills because of access barriers had caused pain and disruption to education, and urged passage to reduce the risk of unintended pregnancy.

Nicole Kern of Planned Parenthood Alliance Advocates said Washington’s 2017 law left a loophole because it applied only to refills. Kern cited evidence from other states that extended-supply coverage reduces unintended pregnancy and abortions, and said 26 states plus D.C. have enacted similar policies. Carrie Morris of the Washington State Coalition Against Domestic Violence said extended supplies can be an important safety measure for survivors of reproductive coercion.

Representative Caldier asked whether side effects or new prescriptions create a reason to limit an immediate 12-month supply. Kristen Peterson of the Department of Health, answering procedural and safety concerns about provider discretion, said that prescribing decisions remain with providers and the bill does not force a patient to accept a year’s supply—“providers have the flexibility to prescribe the amount that they believe is right in partnership with the patient,” she said.

No formal action or vote was taken. Committee staff indicated four people signed up to testify (all in support). Rep. Alvarado offered to follow up with a list of best practices for the perinatal program question that arose during the broader departmental briefing.

Ending: The committee concluded the public testimony portion of the hearing on HB 1090; the bill remains pending in committee.