(P-PH-9) State-Wide Advocacy Efforts During the Most Recent State Legislative Session

Background/Case Studies: In the wake of the 2023 legislative session, in which potentially harmful legislation to the blood industry was proposed and successfully opposed, the need for a state-wide coalition of independent blood centers was evident.

Study

Design/Methods: Beginning in 2024, efforts commenced to bring together the state's independent blood centers to form an entity to both advocate and lobby at the state level with discussions centering around organizational structure, goals, and financial commitments. Later in 2024, a state level group was formalized as a non-profit industry trade organization. A request for proposal was released to select lobbyists firms and applications were evaluated based on rapport, price, strategic vision, and scope of services. By the end of 2024, the members selected a lobbyist to prepare for the upcoming 2025 legislative session.

Results/Findings: Shortly after the start of the 2025 legislative session, multiple bills were filed that would have negative consequences for the blood supply, including a senate bill with a focus on medically unnecessary directed donations and a house bill that would prohibit and limit the ability of 16 and17 year olds to donate blood products. The blood center group, and its lobbyist, tracked the relevant legislation and quickly compiled data to illustrate the negative impacts these bills would have to the blood supply across the state. To combat the house bill, meetings were held with the representative who filed the bill as well as with relevant committee members to educate them on the status of the blood supply and the effects adoption of the bill would have for patients. Ultimately, the representative who filed the bill acquiesced and was content with the bill not leaving the committee, thus ending the possibility of it passing. To combat the senate bill, the blood center group drafted talking points and finalized an opposition one-pager with the lobbyist. The lobbyist met with the senator and his staff, but unfortunately the senator was unwilling to withdraw the bill. The lobbyist and blood center group representatives continued outreach to the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services to educate and oppose in advance of the bill being heard. The bill was heard and passed to the House and referred to the Public Health Committee. The lobbyist, with additional talking points from the medical directors, lobbied against the bill with the members of the Public Health Committee and these efforts were successful in stopping the bill in the House.

Conclusions: Blood Center advocacy is critical to ensuring a safe and adequate blood supply. Combining the power of multiple independent blood centers into a non-profit trade organization with access to dedicated lobbyist efforts has been successful in blocking proposed legislation that could potentially negatively impact the blood supply. This could be used as a model by independent blood centers in other states.