Here are the major health bills advocates wish lawmakers passed

I hear a lot of frustration every year from health care advocates whose bills don’t pass on Beacon Hill. But last week, when the Legislature’s 2023-24 formal session ended, I heard something stronger: exasperation, anger and even disgust.

It was not just health care. My colleagues have heard and reported similar reactions from supporters of a climate change bill and a major economic development bill, which passed both chambers of the legislature but never made it out of negotiations to reconcile the two versions. There’s broad distress about the Legislature's inability to get things done. State Auditor Diana DiZoglio, a frequent State House critic, called the system “broken.”

Some former state lawmakers say it’s time for a major shake-up. That could mean the Legislature changes rules, deadlines or goes back to one-year sessions. But John McDonough, a former Democratic state representative for Boston, doesn't see legislators launching those changes from within.

“There’s been too much of a structure developed that insulates them from any change,” said McDonough, now a professor at Harvard’s Chan School of Public Health. “There are many, many people inside there who would love to see a revolution, but if they speak up they are marginalizing themselves and their ability to be effective at all. So it’s gotta come from outside.”

Lawmakers can point to a few health care accomplishments this session, mostly items in budgets. They’re at the bottom of this tally. It’s a collection of the health care priorities gathered from spokeswomen for the House and Senate, leading health care groups, some advocacy organizations and WBUR reporting.

One caveat, given the many health care bills that didn’t make it to the governor’s desk, House and Senate leaders say they’ll try to pass some during informal sessions in the coming weeks and months. This would be unusual. Just one objection during an informal session can kill a bill. There are ways to work around the rules, (what my colleague and veteran State House reporter Steve Brown calls “political jiu-jitsu”) so we’ll see.

For now, here’s a review of the major health legislation that came before lawmakers over these past 19 months:

A bill that would cap or eliminate co-pays for some chronic disease meds, give state regulators new oversight of drug pricing and middlemen who help set drug prices. Lawmakers in the House and Senate both passed bills, but didn’t resolve differences before the session ended.

This legislation was, among other things, an effort to prevent another debacle like Steward Health Care’s bankruptcy, which has already closed two hospitals. Again, House and Senate had different versions. The bills remain in a conference committee, which means they aren’t dead. However, the passage of complicated legislation during an informal session is rare.

A bill that would license and increase use of midwives, birthing centers and doulas had unanimous support in both chambers but didn’t make it out of a conference committee.

The House and Senate both passed legislation that would establish licenses for recovery coaches, expand distribution of naloxone and consider more scrutiny of sober homes. With less than 48 hours left in the session, the Senate added language to allow cities and towns to open overdose prevention centers. The House and Senate did not resolve their differences.

Abortion rights advocates wanted to ban the sale of cell phone location data to prevent tracking people who visit abortion clinics. The voting deadline for this bill was extended to the end of the year but passage during an informal session is not likely.

Abortion opponents lobbied for measures that would impose more limits on late-term abortions and prohibit abortions based on a positive Down syndrome test. These bills were sent for further study as was a bill opposed by abortion opponents that would have limited advertising about and attempted to curtail services at certain pregnancy services centers where abortion is not offered.

This bill aimed to strengthen licensing and boost workforce training in long-term care facilities. House and Senate differences were not resolved in a conference committee.

A package on health care equity didn’t pass. The prescription drug and hospital oversight bills mentioned above included elements of the omnibus bill. Neither made it to the governor’s desk.

Here are four more bills advocates for people with these conditions say are urgently needed:

This bill would extend and expand wheelchair warranty protections to tackle repair delays.

A poll this summer showed two-thirds of adults in Massachusetts support letting some terminally ill patients end their lives with drugs prescribed by a physician, but these bills didn’t make it to the floor of the House or Senate for a vote.

This year’s budget (FY 2025), which was late, has a revised hospital tax that will help the state leverage more federal funds and $2 million to protect abortion access.

A supplemental budget item approved earlier this year helped with a statewide nursing shortage by extending a COVID-19 allowance for seniors in nursing school and recent grads to practice with supervision.

Last year’s budget (FY 2024), also late, included money to expand access to health insurance subsidies. Individuals earning up to $73,000 this year and families with incomes up to $150,000 now qualify.

The ‘24 budget ensured preventive care would be covered with no co-pays in Mass. There was a federal court case that threatened this part of Obamacare.

And the budget authorized pharmacists in Massachusetts to dispense birth control pills.

The new law includes permanent supportive housing for people with disabilities.

Among its provisions are new rules that aim to reduce gun injuries and deaths.

This law clarifies the rights of LGBTQ parents, parents who work with a surrogate mother and parents whose children are conceived using reproductive technologies.