A Democratic bill with 3 Republican cosponsors · See all 19 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, titled the INSULIN Act of 2026, aims to reduce the cost of insulin and provide patient protections. For plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2028, group health plans and health insurance issuers must cover selected insulin products without applying a deductible. These plans cannot impose cost-sharing requirements for a 30-day supply that exceed thirty-five dollars or twenty-five percent of the negotiated price. The bill also establishes a study on uninsured individuals who use insulin, creates a resource center and hotline, and works to expedite biosimilar competition. Furthermore, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Secretary of Labor, and the Secretary of the Treasury are given implementation authorities.
Yes· 3 of 34
- Scored +9
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Significantly reduces the cost of life-saving medicine and provides assistance for the uninsured.
- Scored +9
Does this lower the price of prescription medicines?
Directly caps insulin costs at $35 or 25% of the negotiated price.
- Scored +8
Would people with disabilities be better off under this?
Directly benefits people with the chronic disability of diabetes.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Would business owners be better off under this?
May increase costs for employers providing group health plans.
- Scored -2
Does this lower what people pay for private health insurance?
Capping cost-sharing may lead insurers to raise premiums to recover costs.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Cost-Sharing Caps for Insured Individuals: Section 2 ensures that group health plans and health insurance coverage cannot impose deductibles on selected insulin products and caps cost-sharing at no more than thirty-five dollars for a 30-day supply, which directly lowers out-of-pocket expenses for patients.
-
Support for Uninsured Individuals: Section 5 establishes a grant program for a resource center and a 24/7 hotline to help uninsured individuals find affordable insulin, access assistance programs, and navigate enrollment, providing crucial support for vulnerable populations.
-
Expanded Access in Catastrophic Plans: Section 2 amends the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to require catastrophic health plans to provide coverage for selected insulin products before the enrolled individual has met their annual deductible limitation.
-
Increased Market Competition: Section 6 allows the Secretary to expedite the development and review of applications for competitive biosimilar biological products when there is inadequate biosimilar competition, which can help bring more affordable alternatives to the market.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Exclusion of Out-of-Network Providers: Section 2 specifies that plans are not required to provide benefits for selected insulin products delivered by out-of-network providers, and allows plans to impose higher cost-sharing for these out-of-network products, which may burden patients who cannot access in-network care.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Significantly reduces the cost of life-saving medicine and provides assistance for the uninsured. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Directly benefits people with the chronic disability of diabetes. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Uninsured assistance programs can be accessed by those without standard insurance. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Caps out-of-pocket expenses for insulin. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Provides targeted assistance and resource centers for underserved communities. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Reduces medication costs for those with diabetes. Would children be better off under this? — Lowers costs for children with diabetes who use insulin. Would farmers be better off under this? — Reduces medical costs for farmers with diabetes. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Provides targeted assistance and resource centers for underserved communities. Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — Reduces costs for LGBTQ individuals using insulin. Would men be better off under this? — Reduces costs for men using insulin. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Reduces financial burden of insulin for middle-aged adults. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Provides targeted assistance and resource centers for underserved communities. Would retired people be better off under this? — Reduces costs for retirees on group or individual plans. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Improves access to insulin resources. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Reduces financial burden of insulin for seniors. Would students be better off under this? — Reduces the cost of essential medication. Would union members be better off under this? — Reduces out-of-pocket costs through union-provided health plans. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Improves access to insulin resources. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Reduces costs for veterans using private or group insurance for insulin. Would white Americans be better off under this? — Reduces medication costs for those with diabetes. Would women be better off under this? — Reduces costs for women using insulin. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Reduces financial burden of insulin for young adults. Would billionaires be better off under this? — Reduces medication costs. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Reduces costs, though impact is less significant than for low-income groups. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — Reduces medication costs. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — Reduces medication costs. Would business owners be better off under this? — May increase costs for employers providing group health plans.
- Healthcare
- Does this lower the price of prescription medicines? — Directly caps insulin costs at $35 or 25% of the negotiated price. Does this make health care easier to get in general? — Increases access to life-saving insulin through cost caps and a resource center for the uninsured. Does this strengthen the Affordable Care Act? — Amends the ACA to ensure insulin cost-sharing exemptions do not negatively impact actuarial value. Does this lower what people pay for private health insurance? — Capping cost-sharing may lead insurers to raise premiums to recover costs.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Caps out-of-pocket insulin costs and removes deductibles for patients.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Reduces a significant medical expense for low-income individuals using insulin. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — Provides resources and data collection for underserved and uninsured communities.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Increases federal oversight over health insurance cost-sharing for specific drugs.
- 10/5/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/24/2026
- 5 Cosponsors added.
- 9/21/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 9/14/2026
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- 9/8/2026
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- 9/2/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
Nikki BudzinskiDemocrat · Illinois
Robert BresnahanRepublican · Pennsylvania
Emanuel CleaverDemocrat · Missouri
Joaquin CastroDemocrat · Texas
Angie CraigDemocrat · Minnesota
Suzan DelBeneDemocrat · Washington
Sharice DavidsDemocrat · Kansas
Veronica EscobarDemocrat · Texas
Jahana HayesDemocrat · Connecticut
Glenn IveyDemocrat · Maryland
Pramila JayapalDemocrat · Washington
Mariannette Miller-MeeksRepublican · Iowa
Ryan MackenzieRepublican · Pennsylvania
John MannionDemocrat · New York
Chris PappasDemocrat · New Hampshire
Josh RileyDemocrat · New York
Kim SchrierDemocrat · Washington
Rashida TlaibDemocrat · Michigan
Gabe VasquezDemocrat · New Mexico