A Democratic bill with 2 Democratic cosponsors · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
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
The Affordable Inhalers and Nebulizers Act of 2025 aims to lower the cost of prescription inhaler products for people with breathing disorders like asthma and COPD. It requires private insurance, group health plans, and Medicare to eliminate deductibles for these products and cap cost-sharing at $15 per 30-day supply. The bill also creates a payment program to help uninsured individuals access these products for no more than $15 per month. These changes are set to take effect starting January 1, 2026.
Yes· 3 of 36
- Scored +10
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Eliminates deductibles and provides a subsidized $15 cap for both insured and uninsured low-income individuals.
- Scored +9
Does this lower the price of prescription medicines?
Caps the cost of specified inhaler products at $15 per 30-day supply.
- Scored +8
Would people over 65 be better off under this?
Directly benefits Medicare enrollees by capping inhaler costs at $15.
The opposite· 3 of 6
- Scored -2
Would business owners be better off under this?
Employers providing group health plans may face higher insurance costs.
- Scored -2
Does this lower what people pay for private health insurance?
Insurance issuers may raise premiums to offset the cost of eliminated deductibles and capped cost-sharing.
- Scored -2
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?
The bill establishes a new government expenditure program to pay providers for inhaler products.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Lower Out-of-Pocket Costs: People with private insurance, group health plans, and Medicare will not have to pay a deductible and will have their cost-sharing capped at $15 per 30-day supply for specified inhaler products (Section 2(a)(1)(A), Section 2(a)(1)(B), Section 2(a)(1)(C), and Section 2(a)(2)).
-
Support for Uninsured Individuals: A new payment program will allow uninsured people to receive specified inhaler products for a cost not exceeding $15 for a month's supply (Section 2(b)).
-
Broad Coverage of Equipment: The definition of "specified inhaler product" includes not just the drugs, but also necessary equipment like spacers, nebulizers, masks, and tubing (Section 2(a)(1)(A)(c)).
-
Protection of High Deductible Health Plan Status: Plans will not lose their status as a high deductible health plan just because they remove the deductible for these specific inhaler products (Section 2(a)(1)(D)(i)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Limited Funding for Uninsured: The payments to providers for uninsured individuals are "subject to the availability of appropriations," meaning the program's success depends on whether the government provides the money (Section 2(b)(a)(2)).
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? — Eliminates deductibles and provides a subsidized $15 cap for both insured and uninsured low-income individuals. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Directly targets cost reductions for those with chronic respiratory disabilities. Would retired people be better off under this? — Medicare enrollees see a direct reduction in out-of-pocket costs for inhalers. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Directly benefits Medicare enrollees by capping inhaler costs at $15. Would children be better off under this? — Children with asthma will benefit from significantly lower cost-sharing for inhalers. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Reduces out-of-pocket medical expenses for those with asthma or COPD. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Positively impacts groups with statistically higher rates of asthma and higher burdens of medical cost. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Positively impacts groups with statistically higher rates of asthma and higher burdens of medical cost. Would immigrants be better off under this? — The payment program for uninsured individuals extends benefits to those regardless of citizenship status. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Reduces cost burden for adults with chronic breathing disorders. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Improves access to essential respiratory care for underserved populations. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Provides essential cost relief and access for those in remote areas. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Urban areas often have higher asthma rates due to air quality; this lowers treatment costs. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Improves affordability of essential respiratory medications for young adults. Would students be better off under this? — Reduces healthcare costs for students, particularly those with childhood asthma. Would union members be better off under this? — Improves the value of union-provided group health plans for workers with asthma/COPD. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Benefits veterans who utilize Medicare for their respiratory treatments. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Improves affordability of essential medications. Would farmers be better off under this? — Provides relief for those in agricultural areas who may suffer from respiratory issues. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Reduces costs for anyone requiring these medications, though impact is less critical. Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — Improves affordability of essential respiratory medications. Would men be better off under this? — Improves affordability of essential respiratory medications. Would white Americans be better off under this? — Improves affordability of essential medications. Would women be better off under this? — Improves affordability of essential respiratory medications. Would billionaires be better off under this? — Provides cost savings for respiratory health products. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — Provides cost savings for respiratory health products. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — Provides cost savings for respiratory health products. Would business owners be better off under this? — Employers providing group health plans may face higher insurance costs.
- Healthcare
- Does this lower the price of prescription medicines? — Caps the cost of specified inhaler products at $15 per 30-day supply. Does this make health care easier to get in general? — Significantly improves access to essential asthma and COPD treatments for insured and uninsured individuals. Does this put more money into Medicare, the health coverage for people over 65? — Increases Medicare coverage by eliminating deductibles and capping cost-sharing for inhalers. Does this strengthen the Affordable Care Act? — Integrates cost-sharing protections into ACA-compliant catastrophic plans. Does this lower what people pay for private health insurance? — Insurance issuers may raise premiums to offset the cost of eliminated deductibles and capped cost-sharing.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities? — Increases affordability of essential devices for people with chronic respiratory disabilities. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Reduces medical expenses for low-income individuals needing respiratory medication. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — Lowers financial barriers to healthcare for marginalized groups disproportionately affected by asthma.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Caps out-of-pocket costs for essential medical devices and drugs for consumers. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — The bill establishes a new government expenditure program to pay providers for inhaler products. Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — Adds new spending obligations to the federal budget. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — The bill creates a new payment program for uninsured individuals that requires federal appropriations.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Mandates specific cost-sharing and coverage requirements for private insurers nationwide. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Imposes federal standards on private insurance that may override state-level regulations.
- 2/3/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/10/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Jeanne ShaheenDemocrat · New Hampshire
Chris Van HollenDemocrat · Maryland