Medicare expands to cover pharmacist services, but state rules create access gaps.

What it does

This bill expands Medicare Part B coverage to include pharmacist services—such as evaluating and treating patients for COVID-19, flu, RSV, strep throat, and other public health emergencies—when performed by a pharmacist working under physician supervision or collaboration as required by state law. Medicare would pay 80% of the lesser of actual charges or 85% of the physician fee schedule (100% for public health emergency services), and pharmacists would be prohibited from balance-billing patients, similar to other Medicare providers.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core mechanism is straightforward: it adds a new category of covered services (pharmacist services) to Medicare Part B and sets payment rates. The operative text directly states what services are covered, under what conditions, and how much Medicare pays.

What the text implies

• Pharmacist scope of practice varies significantly by state; this bill ties Medicare coverage to state law, creating a patchwork where the same service may be covered in one state but not another, potentially creating access inequities across state lines.
• The 85% of physician fee schedule payment rate may be below pharmacists' actual costs in some markets, creating financial pressure on independent pharmacies and potentially favoring large chains with economies of scale.
• Public health emergency services are paid at 100% of the fee schedule with no coinsurance, creating a permanent incentive for pharmacists to classify routine services as emergency-related to maximize reimbursement.
• Supervision and collaboration requirements are defined by state law, not federal regulation; states with weak pharmacist oversight may allow services that other states restrict, creating quality variation.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

Ordinary Medicare beneficiaries gain access to pharmacist services at lower out-of-pocket cost (20% coinsurance, no balance billing), expanding convenient primary care options in underserved areas where pharmacies are often more accessible than physician offices. The supervision requirement protects quality and safety without blocking the benefit.

Who stands to gain

• pharmacy chains and independent pharmacies
• pharmacists and pharmacy service providers
• pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) if they operate in-house pharmacies

Named in the bill

Medicare Part B, Social Security Act, pharmacists, physicians, state boards of pharmacy, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Public Health Service Act, Walgreens (WST)

Where it stands

33 cosponsors: 17 Democrats, 16 Republicans.

• Jul 24, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in Senate”
• Jul 24, 2025 — Referred to Senate Committee on Finance · Congress.gov: “Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

31 lobbying clients named this bill on 38 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $21,939,990 in lobbying spend. A filing names 10 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 98% of bills with at least one filing.

John Thune, the sponsor, reported $817,500 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle. $25,000 of that came from 4 PACs tied to these lobbying clients.

• American Medical Association — $5,643,000 on 2 filings
• CVS Health (and Subsidiaries) — $3,570,000 on 1 filing
• Pharmaceutical Care Management Association — $3,282,990 on 1 filing
• Walmart Inc — $2,060,000 on 1 filing
• Food Marketplace Inc — $1,384,000 on 2 filings

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.