When CVS decided to blast Louisiana residents with a wave of fearmongering text messages, it was weaponizing personal health data for corporate profit. That’s not advocacy. That’s exploitation.
To be clear about what happened, CVS Health used contact information it collected from prescription services — under a state contract — to warn residents that House Bill 358, a bill designed to curb anti-competitive practices by pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), would shut down their local pharmacy, raise their medication costs, and put pharmacists out of work. It even included a link so recipients could instantly pressure their lawmakers. CVS claimed the legislation would force the closure of more than 125 of its Louisiana stores, resulting in the loss of 2,700 jobs. “Closing drug stores doesn’t lower drug prices,” said Amy Thibault, CVS’s executive director of corporate communications. “Forcing out 20% of the state’s pharmacies only makes pharmacy deserts worse.”
But what CVS didn’t say is they are the ones consolidating control over the pharmaceutical supply chain. As both a PBM (via CVS Caremark) and a retail pharmacy, CVS can negotiate prices on one side and profit on the other — while squeezing out local pharmacies in the process.
Attorney General Liz Murrill and Governor Jeff Landry were right to file three lawsuits against CVS this week — for deceptive trade practices, privacy violations, and PBM abuses. House Speaker Pro Tem Mike Echols didn’t mince words on the House floor during final debate. He singled out CVS’s mass texting campaign and confirmed he had discussed the issue with AG Murrill, suggesting the company may have violated its state contract. “This House is not for sale,” Echols said. “This legislature cannot be bullied.”
But let’s not forget that this kind of overreach didn’t come out of nowhere. It’s the inevitable result of letting corporations regulate themselves for far too long.
For years, independent pharmacists across Louisiana have warned us about the predatory reimbursement rates imposed by PBMs — often owned by the very chains they compete against. These practices are unfair; and they’re slowly killing off neighborhood pharmacies, especially in rural and underserved areas where people already struggle to access care.
Randal Johnson, executive director of the Louisiana Independent Pharmacies Association, welcomed the compromise bill, saying, “We believe the consumer will have an opportunity to find out what their drugs cost, and the consumer will have the opportunity to have a less expensive cost of medication.”
CVS’s mass text campaign wasn’t some desperate act of transparency. It was a calculated power move and an attempt to scare customers into defending a monopoly under the guise of patient advocacy. It crossed every ethical line imaginable.
Even more disturbing is the fact that CVS targeted members of Louisiana’s state employee insurance program. If you’re a teacher, a police officer, or a state nurse who signed up for text alerts about your prescriptions, you didn’t consent to lobbying. You consented to stay informed about your health — not to be used as a political pawn.
This should concern everyone — regardless of party affiliation. Because what’s at stake here isn’t just the integrity of drug pricing or the survival of local pharmacies. It’s the right of citizens to not have their health information manipulated by billion-dollar corporations with legislative agendas.
To be clear, Big Easy Magazine rarely agrees with Governor Landry. But in this case, his outrage is warranted. So is his call for a special legislative session to revive HB 358. The bill passed the House 88–4 before being quietly smothered in the Senate — likely thanks to lobbying pressure.
Let’s not pretend this is new. CVS and other health conglomerates have fought these reforms across the country. Louisiana just happens to be the latest battleground — and maybe, if these lawsuits succeed, it can be the tipping point.
This lawsuit is about more than just texts. It’s about power, and about whether we let massive corporations rewrite the rules of public engagement — or whether we finally say enough.
We urge lawmakers to pass legislation that reins in PBMs and protects local pharmacies. We support the lawsuits against CVS, and we demand stronger safeguards to ensure that patient data cannot be used as political ammunition ever again.
We believe in transparency, competition, and community. CVS believes in control. The line has been drawn.
