Medco to Pay $29M to Settle Accusations Monday, April 26, 2004 By MARC LEVY Associated Press Writer HARRISBURG, Pa. -- The nation's largest pharmacy benefits manager said Monday it has agreed to pay $29 million to settle allegations by 20 states that it was switching patients to medications to save itself money, not to benefit the patients. Medco Health Solutions Inc. will also be required to make a number of disclosures to prescribers and patients. Those include the minimum or actual cost savings for health plans and the difference in a patient's co-payment, the difference in side effects between prescribed and proposed medications, and Medco's financial incentives for certain drug switches. The agreement does not include an admission or finding of inappropriate business conduct by the Franklin Lakes, N.J.-based company. Medco, like other pharmacy benefits managers, contracts with health plans to process prescription drug payments to pharmacies for medications provided to patients enrolled in the health plans. The settlement was spearheaded by authorities in Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and Maine, and includes Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, Vermont, Virginia and Washington. "Consumers and their doctors should make the decision of switching from one medication to another based on the best interests of the patient, not because a (pharmacy benefits manager) has found a way to make money," Pennsylvania Attorney General Jerry Pappert said in a statement. A separate pending federal suit claims Medco ignored safety rules at its mail-order drug centers and pressured doctors to switch patients to medications made by its former owner, pharmaceutical giant Merck & Co. Medco officials have called those charges either false or overstated. Copyright 2004, Associated Press. Reprinted with permission. Welcome | Latest News | Your Legislator | Mail Order | Questions Contact Us | Petition | Links Coalition for Quality Healthcare "Upholding high standards of personal service, assuring full access to consumer options and preserving the traditional contributions of local pharmacies to the state's economy" © Copyright 2004 Coalition for Quality Healthcare. All rights reserved.

Medco's Clash With Clarity 1 / 5 / 2006 Why You Should Support HB 5254! 11 / 1 / 2005 Generic Drugs By Mail Can Be A Raw Deal 2 / 15 / 2005 UAW plan pinches local pharmacies 2 / 8 / 2005 U.S. Maintains Medco Offered Insurer a Kickback 12 / 3 / 2004 Fill This! 12 / 3 / 2004 Medco May Face Turbulence 11 / 26 / 2004 Illinois ends Caremark contract 11 / 19 / 2004 Study: Shipping through mail can degrade medicine 10 / 27 / 2004 States Want Say on Drugs 8 / 22 / 2004 Express Scripts accused of defrauding state and consumers out of millions of dollars 8 / 4 / 2004 Competitive Concerns and Price Transparency in the PBM Market 7 / 27 / 2004 Protect the Upper Peninsula’s economy by ending restrictions on local pharmacists 5 / 5 / 2004 Drop restrictions on local pharmacists to protect local and state economies 5 / 4 / 2004 Competition will trim Michigan drug costs 4 / 28 / 2004 Pharmacies seek fair competition 4 / 27 / 2004 There Oughta Be a Law 4 / 26 / 2004 Medco to Pay $29M to Settle Accusations 4 / 26 / 2004 House panel eyes Rx break for pharmacies 4 / 21 / 2004 Prescription bills benefit consumers 4 / 2 / 2004 Pharmacists want to match mail-order prices 3 / 30 / 2004 No Cost Increases With CPPA 3 / 29 / 2004 Medicine by mail costly to jobs 3 / 16 / 2004 Mailing drugs may cost jobs 3 / 16 / 2004 Lost Jobs & Tax Revenue, Higher Unemployment Predicted by Study 3 / 16 / 2004 Mail-Order Prescription Mandates To Cost State 3,000 Jobs, $117 Million in Wages 3 / 16 / 2004 Forcing Employees to Buy Drugs Through the Mail. 2 / 19 / 2004 Medco Loses Deal To Supply Drugs To U.S. Employees 2 / 19 / 2004 New Legislation Helps Pharmacies Compete with Mail-Order 1 / 23 / 2004 New Laws Would Level Playing Field for Michigan Pharmacies 1 / 23 / 2004 Beloved Pharmacist Says Goodbye 1 / 20 / 2004 The drugs are in the mail and local druggists pay for it 1 / 20 / 2004 Prescription Coverage Editorial 1 / 4 / 2004