Economy
Md. Ponders New Board to Regulate Prescription Drug Prices
WASHINGTON INFORMER —
By William J. Ford
ANNAPOLIS — Residents, health care advocates and faith leaders converged Thursday on the State House in support of legislation that would create a prescription drug affordability board in Maryland.
According to the legislation from Delegate Joseline Peña-Melnyk (D-District 21) of College Park and state Sen. Kathy Klausmeier (D-Baltimore County), one of the board’s responsibilities would be to “review the cost of a prescription drug product … [and] determine whether use of the prescription drug product … has led or will lead to affordability challenges for the state health care system or high out-of-pocket costs for patients.”
The board would consist of members with expertise in health care economics, or clinical medicine.
The body, which would operate as an independent unit, can make a drug company that introduces a new brand new at $30,000 or more per year, or wholesale acquisition increase of at least $3,000 must validate the cost.
After review, the board could set “an upper limit” on the drug.
“Wherever you go, people talk about the high cost of prescription drugs,” Klausmeier said. “There are so many new drugs out there. The bottom line is we have to get prescription drug cost down.”
One resident, Jo Saint-George, relayed how she and her husband needed to use their entire savings after she was diagnosed with a brain tumor.
In addition to costly surgeries and doctor appointments, her prescription drug medication runs $700 per bottle. Sometimes she split her medication so it could last longer, but eventually ended up back in the hospital, she said, “creating another bill that I still have on my credit today.”
“I’m willing to get transparent and personal around this issue because I never thought I would be on medication,” said Saint-George, an attorney and member of the Maryland State Conference of the NAACP. “But when tragedy strikes, you don’t know when that’s going to happen. So we need these types of supports and affordability to make sure when people goes through these things, they can transition and be alive.”
Politically, there are nearly 100 co-sponsors of the legislation in the House with seven Republicans. One of the most outspoken supporters, Harford County Executive Barry Glassman, said it costs his jurisdiction nearly $7 million a year on prescription drugs for about 900 employees.
“For local governments, health care prescription costs are one of the leading drivers of the problems we are having,” said Glassman, a Republican. “This is a Maryland problem. It’s a national problem. This bill is a good first step at bringing those folks in to justify these enormous price increases.”
Both bills are scheduled for hearings in both the Senate and House on March 6, which could receive some opposition.
Nick McGee, spokesman for the D.C.-based Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), said in a statement Thursday the legislation would enact price controls on prescription medicines that would limit patient access.
“It recycles failed ideas that give government broad authority to arbitrarily set prices and undermine the competitive market that is critical to bringing down costs and delivering new treatments to patients,” he said. “This misguided approach could also have a chilling effect on new innovation and the thriving biotech industry that supports thousands of jobs in Maryland.”
This article originally appeared in the Washington Informer.
Activism
OPINION: Your Voice and Vote Impact the Quality of Your Health Care
One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.

By Rhonda M. Smith, Special to California Black Media Partners
Shortly after last year’s election, I hopped into a Lyft and struck up a conversation with the driver. As we talked, the topic inevitably turned to politics. He confidently told me that he didn’t vote — not because he supported Donald Trump, but because he didn’t like Kamala Harris’ résumé. When I asked what exactly he didn’t like, he couldn’t specifically articulate his dislike or point to anything specific. In his words, he “just didn’t like her résumé.”
That moment really hit hard for me. As a Black woman, I’ve lived through enough election cycles to recognize how often uncertainty, misinformation, or political apathy keep people from voting, especially Black voters whose voices are historically left out of the conversation and whose health, economic security, and opportunities are directly impacted by the individual elected to office, and the legislative branches and political parties that push forth their agenda.
That conversation with the Lyft driver reflects a troubling surge in fear-driven politics across our country. We’ve seen White House executive orders gut federal programs meant to help our most vulnerable populations and policies that systematically exclude or harm Black and underserved communities.
One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.
Medicaid, called Medi-Cal in California, doesn’t just cover care. It protects individuals and families from medical debt, keeps rural hospitals open, creates jobs, and helps our communities thrive. Simply put; Medicaid is a lifeline for 1 in 5 Black Americans. For many, it’s the only thing standing between them and a medical emergency they can’t afford, especially with the skyrocketing costs of health care. The proposed cuts mean up to 7.2 million Black Americans could lose their healthcare coverage, making it harder for them to receive timely, life-saving care. Cuts to Medicaid would also result in fewer prenatal visits, delayed cancer screenings, unfilled prescriptions, and closures of community clinics. When healthcare is inaccessible or unaffordable, it doesn’t just harm individuals, it weakens entire communities and widens inequities.
The reality is Black Americans already face disproportionately higher rates of poorer health outcomes. Our life expectancy is nearly five years shorter in comparison to White Americans. Black pregnant people are 3.6 times more likely to die during pregnancy or postpartum than their white counterparts.
These policies don’t happen in a vacuum. They are determined by who holds power and who shows up to vote. Showing up amplifies our voices. Taking action and exercising our right to vote is how we express our power.
I urge you to start today. Call your representatives, on both sides of the aisle, and demand they protect Medicaid (Medi-Cal), the Affordable Care Act (Covered CA), and access to food assistance programs, maternal health resources, mental health services, and protect our basic freedoms and human rights. Stay informed, talk to your neighbors and register to vote.
About the Author
Rhonda M. Smith is the Executive Director of the California Black Health Network, a statewide nonprofit dedicated to advancing health equity for all Black Californians.
Activism
Oakland Hosts Town Hall Addressing Lead Hazards in City Housing
According to the city, there are 22,000 households in need of services for lead issues, most in predominantly low-income or Black and Latino neighborhoods, but only 550 to 600 homes are addressed every year. The city is hoping to use part of the multimillion-dollar settlement to increase the number of households served each year.

By Magaly Muñoz
The City of Oakland’s Housing and Community Development Department hosted a town hall in the Fruitvale to discuss the efforts being undertaken to remove lead primarily found in housing in East and West Oakland.
In 2021, the city was awarded $14 million out of a $24 million legal settlement from a lawsuit against paint distributors for selling lead-based paint that has affected hundreds of families in Oakland and Alameda County. The funding is intended to be used for lead poisoning reduction and prevention services in paint only, not water or other sources as has been found recently in schools across the city.
The settlement can be used for developing or enhancing programs that abate lead-based paint, providing services to individuals, particularly exposed children, educating the public about hazards caused by lead paint, and covering attorney’s fees incurred in pursuing litigation.
According to the city, there are 22,000 households in need of services for lead issues, most in predominantly low-income or Black and Latino neighborhoods, but only 550 to 600 homes are addressed every year. The city is hoping to use part of the multimillion-dollar settlement to increase the number of households served each year.
Most of the homes affected were built prior to 1978, and 12,000 of these homes are considered to be at high risk for lead poisoning.
City councilmember Noel Gallo, who represents a few of the lead-affected Census tracts, said the majority of the poisoned kids and families are coming directly from neighborhoods like the Fruitvale.
“When you look at the [kids being admitted] at the children’s hospital, they’re coming from this community,” Gallo said at the town hall.
In order to eventually rid the highest impacted homes of lead poisoning, the city intends to create programs and activities such as lead-based paint inspections and assessments, full abatement designed to permanently eliminate lead-based paint, or partial abatement for repairs, painting, and specialized cleaning meant for temporary reduction of hazards.
In feedback for what the city could implement in their programming, residents in attendance of the event said they want more accessibility to resources, like blood testing, and information from officials about lead poisoning symptoms, hotlines for assistance, and updates on the reduction of lead in their communities.
Attendees also asked how they’d know where they are on the prioritization list and what would be done to address lead in the water found at several school sites in Oakland last year.
City staff said there will be a follow-up event to gather more community input for programming in August, with finalizations happening in the fall and a pilot launch in early 2026.
Bay Area
State Orders Cleanup of Former Richmond Landfill
There is no immediate public hazard at the fence line of the site, which is located on the city’s southeastern shoreline, at the foot of S. 51st Street. However, the “site’s wastes pose an unacceptable long-term risk,” according to a CDTSC statement. Also, since the uncapped site sits along a creek and the Bay, wastes can wash off during each rain and high tide, the agency stated.

The Richmond Standard
The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (CDTSC) is ordering Union Pacific Railroad Company (UPRR) and Bayer CropScience, Inc. to clean up the former Blair Southern Pacific Landfill in Richmond due to findings of elevated levels of lead, banned pesticides like DDT, and radioactive material at the site.
There is no immediate public hazard at the fence line of the site, which is located on the city’s southeastern shoreline, at the foot of S. 51st Street. However, the “site’s wastes pose an unacceptable long-term risk,” according to a CDTSC statement. Also, since the uncapped site sits along a creek and the Bay, wastes can wash off during each rain and high tide, the agency stated.
Bayer and UPRR were ordered to clean up the site as it is their predecessor companies that are deemed responsible for the hazardous waste. The site was used from the 1950s to the 1980s, before modern environmental laws were in place, according to the CDTSC.
“During this time, the site was leased to landfill operators, who developed and operated the site as a series of landfills for disposal of industrial and non-industrial wastes,” the CDTSC stated.
The state’s order requires Bayer and UPRR to safely remove and dispose of the radioactive materials and includes penalties of up to $25,000 per day for noncompliance.
“There will be opportunities for public involvement during the development of the cleanup plan and at the Richmond Southeast Shoreline Community Advisory Group (CAG) meetings, which meet on Zoom the second Thursday of every month,” said Richmond City Councilmember Soheila Bana.
-
Activism4 weeks ago
AI Is Reshaping Black Healthcare: Promise, Peril, and the Push for Improved Results in California
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Barbara Lee Accepts Victory With “Responsibility, Humility and Love”
-
Activism4 weeks ago
ESSAY: Technology and Medicine, a Primary Care Point of View
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Faces Around the Bay: Author Karen Lewis Took the ‘Detour to Straight Street’
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Newsom Fights Back as AmeriCorps Shutdown Threatens Vital Services in Black Communities
-
Arts and Culture4 weeks ago
BOOK REVIEW: Love, Rita: An American Story of Sisterhood, Joy, Loss, and Legacy
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
The RESISTANCE – FREEDOM NOW
-
Alameda County4 weeks ago
OUSD Supt. Chief Kyla Johnson-Trammell to Step Down on July 1