As state lawmakers begin to return to office this week, a number of issues will be clamoring for their attention. One of the most important — but perhaps overlooked due to its technical and less attention-grabbing nature — is pharmacy benefit manager reform.

Reform-minded leaders should work with PBMs, leveraging their market power to achieve lower costs for consumers.

Last year, Arkansas became the first state in the nation to ban PBMs, and other states heavily regulated the industry. These efforts are expected to continue in 2026, even as courts raise constitutional questions about the Arkansas law and regulations in Iowa.

I’m a health care broker, so I know PBMs pretty well. They’re easy targets because of the complex process by which they work, as well as the pharmaceutical industry’s years-long campaign to put blame for drug pricing on the industry.

At its core, PBMs’ basic function is straightforward. Because they represent hundreds of thousands or even millions of patients who cannot negotiate with drugmakers on their own, PBMs are able to use their size as leverage to push for lower prices. When the big players reject a high price, a manufacturer has to decide whether it wants to lose access to those patients.

That negotiating leverage also keeps drugmakers from unilaterally dictating the cost of medications, from commonly used drugs like insulin to newer medications like Zepbound and Wegovy. For example, companies gave consumers a New Year’s present of increasing prices for 350 products — but the final costs to patients won’t be known until PBMs have their say.

U.S. health care pricing can be confusing, with even seasoned observers getting lost amid the jargon of rebates, formularies, and spread pricing. Critics often accuse PBMs of adding unnecessary layers of administrative cost or of exaggerating savings. Some of these concerns are legitimate, and the industry’s lack of transparency makes it easy for critics to portray PBMs as the villains keeping patients from being able to afford the medications they need.

But this criticism is better leveled at the drugmakers. They often insist they cannot lower prices because of research costs or regulatory burdens. Yet when Eli Lilly, the first trillion-dollar drug company, found itself boxed out of the CVS network, it suddenly found a way to make its products available more cheaply.

On December 1, drugmaker Eli Lilly cut the consumer cost of its popular weight-loss injection Zepbound, bringing its prices in line with competitor Novo Nordisk’s popular and recently reduced drug Wegovy.

Lilly’s move should be instructive for state and federal lawmakers because it came after Novo Nordisk agreed to lower prices of Wegovy under pressure from pharmacy giant CVS. CVS — through its PBM division, CVS Caremark — had initially tried to negotiate with Lilly, but the drugmaker refused to budge on its pricing, leading CVS Caremark to stop offering Zepbound to clients. But once Novo Nordisk agreed to reduce the price of Wegovy, Eli Lilly suddenly changed its tune.

RELATED: Taxpayers are funding California’s Medicaid shell game

Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Lawmakers looking to reduce prescription drug prices should take note.

Like all industries, PBMs have their flaws, but this case showed CVS forcing a needed price correction. And it should be front of mind for lawmakers who, yes, should insist on greater PBM transparency, but also must be aware of both the constitutional limitations on so-called “reforms” and how overregulating PBMs will impact constituents’ drug prices.

As lawmakers look for solutions to Americans’ record-high health care costs, they should realize that any cost-reduction effort must include prescriptions — and that means working with PBMs. Reform-minded leaders should work with PBMs, leveraging their market power to achieve lower costs for consumers while insisting on price transparency and other reforms that reinforce how PBMs are using fundamental market principles to keep drug companies from causing even more harm to Americans’ finances.

​Pbm reform, Pharmacy benefit managers, Gop, Legislative season, Healthcare costs, Drug prices, Pharmacy, Cvs, Opinion & analysis 

Two repeat offenders, a male and a female, have been charged with murdering an elderly woman in Houston earlier this week — and the male suspect reportedly was out on bond when he skipped a court appearance just days before the fatal shooting.

Tajuana Thomas, 38, and Richard Mouton, 34, are charged with capital murder in the shooting death of a 72-year-old woman, police said, adding that the shooting took place in the 4000 block of Lockwood Drive just before 2 a.m. Monday.

‘It’s always disturbing that you could be on parole, get a felony conviction, and still be on parole and not have your parole revoked.’

Officers responded to a report of a shooting at the residence and located three people suffering from gunshot wounds, police said, adding that responding Houston Fire Department paramedics pronounced the victim dead at the scene.

Thomas and Mouton were hospitalized, police said, adding that video shows they were involved in the shooting.

KPRC-TV, citing law enforcement sources, said witnesses told police that Thomas had been upset with the victim — identified in court records as Linda Martinez — because she previously refused to bail Thomas out of jail, and the two “argued about it all the time.”

Law enforcement sources also told the station that Thomas previously lived at the residence where the shooting took place, and the suspects entered the home through an unlocked back door.

Once inside, the suspects — who were wearing masks — allegedly found Martinez asleep on a couch, and sources told KPRC the pair demanded her jewelry while pointing an AR-style rifle at her.

The elderly victim apparently had plenty of fight in her.

RELATED: Violent repeat offender brutally beats up elderly whites, Mexicans in racially motivated attack, officials say

A law enforcement source told the station that Martinez used a revolver to shoot Mouton in the face and Thomas in the hip.

Court records also revealed criminal histories for both suspects, KPRC reported.

Thomas was on bond for misdemeanor terroristic threat, the station said, after a victim in 2022 reported that she had been fired from her job, showed up again, and allegedly told the victim she was going to “beat his ass.”

More from KPRC:

Mouton, a convicted felon, was on parole until 2024, according to court records.

Then in July of 2025, Mouton got arrested for three charges in Harris County: drug possession, felon in possession of a weapon, and evading arrest.

In those cases, he allegedly ran nearly 1,500 feet from a traffic stop while possessing more than 100 grams of marijuana, 5 grams of ecstasy, 11.7 grams of Xanax, 24+ grams of methamphetamine, 3.4 grams of cocaine, and a firearm, according to records.

RELATED: 9-time convicted felon opens fire on man, woman outside Florida home; he allegedly was after money owed to him: Cops

The station said Mouton was released on bond shortly after his July arrest — but added that records indicate he didn’t show up for a court date last week, after which warrants for Mouton’s arrest were filed, KPRC said.

Mouton reportedly skipped court on Jan. 22; Martinez was killed on Jan. 26.

“It’s always disturbing that you could be on parole, get a felony conviction, and still be on parole and not have your parole revoked,” Andy Kahan with Crime Stoppers told KRIV-TV.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Homeowner shoots intruders, Homeowner fatally shot, Capital murder charges, Houston, Elderly woman victim, Home invasion, Repeat offenders, Skipping court, On bond, Crime 

A Louisiana middle school counselor on leave for allegedly sending inappropriate messages to a young girl was found dead at a vacant school Wednesday.

Quinton Dixon, 44, was placed on leave Jan. 15 from Westdale Middle School in Baton Rouge over the messages allegedly sent to a 14-year-old who had previously been a student at the school.

‘The situation is just so unfortunate. We just got to pray for everybody.’

Police sought to speak with Dixon after someone published screenshots of his alleged Instagram messages to the girl. The messages show him asking if the 14-year-old has a boyfriend, telling her she’s attractive, and hinting at their having a romantic relationship.

The girl told police the messages began after Dixon saw her walking home from school and pulled over his vehicle to talk to her. He obtained her information and sent the messages between November and January.

On Tuesday, the Baton Rouge Police issued an arrest warrant for Dixon on four felony counts of indecent behavior with juveniles.

The next day, his body was found at the Glen Oaks Middle School, which is a mostly demolished vacant school in the same school district.

The East Baton Rouge Parish Coroner’s Office found that Dixon died of a “self-inflicted gunshot wound,” confirming he died by suicide.

The parish school system released a statement on the incident.

“We extend our condolences to the school community, family, and loved ones as they process this information during this difficult time,” the statement reads. “Out of respect for the privacy of students and the integrity of ongoing matters, we are unable to share additional details about the employee.”

RELATED: Parents of 11-year-old targeted in murder plot by 5th-graders break their silence: ‘There was a mastermind’

The district said Dixon had been an employee since 2022.

A man named Redell Norman told WBRZ-TV that he coached with Dixon and had gone to Glen Oaks Middle School.

“It’s unfortunate the circumstances of his untimely demise, but yes, I did know him, and the situation is just so unfortunate. We just got to pray for everybody,” he said.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​School counselor quinton dixon, Louisiana counselor texts, Texts to 14-year-old, Counselor inappropriate texts, Crime 

While surrogacy is marketed to the masses as a beautiful, life-giving procedure that allows those unable to have children the chance to be parents — BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey has been warning for years that that couldn’t be further from the truth.

And after singer Meghan Trainor posted a photo of herself with tears in her eyes, holding her baby topless in a hospital bed after the baby was carried by a surrogate, Stuckey is sounding the alarm again.

“You see this image, and it looks like a mother and her baby. She’s obviously very happy. That happiness is sincere. This really is her biological child. So she loves this baby. There is absolutely no doubt about that,” Stuckey begins.

“But Christians are not just called to feel. We are not just called to see an image, to feel something, and then to make our decisions, especially big moral decisions that affect vulnerable children based on pictures that make us feel a certain way,” she continues.

Stuckey points out that it’s very important for a newborn to have skin-to-skin contact with the woman who carried the baby in her womb for nine months, because the physiological bond created between the baby and the woman who carried him or her is necessary for the child’s healthy development.

Skin-to-skin contact with the true mother regulates the baby’s heart rate, which makes the baby’s transition earth-side more peaceful. This is how puppies and kittens are treated at birth, but thanks to surrogacy, human babies are not held to the same standard.

Not only does surrogacy rip the child away from its mother and give him or her to a stranger, but surrogate pregnancies are a higher risk for the baby and the surrogate. They are more likely to result in preterm deliveries, late-term miscarriages, and NICU stays.

The last point Stuckey makes is that the surrogacy industry is “inherently exploitative.”

Women who need money are forced to sign a contract that often allows those paying her to abort the baby if they feel like it.

There are also no background checks for those who use surrogates, which is why surrogacy has become a go-to method for child-buying schemes around the world — better known as human trafficking.

“In this case, I assume that Meghan Trainor used her own eggs. So she has to pump herself with a lot of hormones in order to be able to ovulate artificially. And then they harvest the eggs from her body. And then they take this egg and I suppose her husband’s sperm. They put this together in a dish in a lab, and they make not just one embryo but multiple embryos,” Stuckey explains.

“And typically, just like in the IVF process, these embryos are graded. And very often, especially in celebrity cases, you determine the gender of these embryos. You determine if this embryo has some kind of special need like Down syndrome or other kinds of chromosomal abnormalities,” she continues.

“Very often these embryos who are not graded well, they’re graded as weak or something else. They are thrown out,” she adds.

Stuckey calls it “human experimentation” that’s only allowed to happen in the United States because of how lucrative the industry is.

“Creating that brokenness of bond on purpose at the moment of birth, I think, is extremely unethical, immoral, and cruel. Especially when we’re talking about two men that are buying the eggs from one woman and renting the womb of another woman, two separate women, and then taking that child away both from the biological mother and from the only body that he or she has ever known,” Stuckey says.

“And to put that baby on their hairy chest, it’s disgusting. It is immoral in every single way,” she continues, adding, “Again this is more cruelty that we show to human beings than we would ever show to puppies and kittens.”

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Camera phone, Free, Video, Video phone, Upload, Sharing, Youtube.com, Relatable with allie beth stuckey, Relatable, Allie beth stuckey, The blaze, Blazetv, Blaze news, Blaze podcasts, Blaze podcast network, Blaze media, Blaze online, Blaze originals, Megan trainor, Meghan trainor, Surrogacy, Ivf, Child exploitation, Human trafficking 

We are told, repeatedly, that woke is dead. Piers Morgan even wrote a book about it, so it must be true. Right?

Wrong.

Strength, by Hollywood’s current definition, must weigh a little over 100 pounds and look perpetually annoyed.

If in doubt, please watch the trailer for “Apex,” due for release in April. With it comes Hollywood’s most exhausted fantasy yet: the indestructible badass woman who outruns youth, outpunches men twice her size, and shrugs off biology like it’s a clerical error.

Mission: Implausible

This time, it’s a 50-year-old Charlize Theron sprinting through the Australian wilderness and scaling cliffs as if she’s Tom Cruise circa “Mission: Impossible 2.” Gravity is optional. Muscle mass is negotiable. Aging, it seems, is strictly forbidden.

We’ve seen this act so many times that it barely registers any more. Swap the title card, rotate the backdrop, keep the same choreography. A lone woman wronged by men. A past trauma. An axe to grind, sometimes literally. Six-foot brutes wait their turn to be neutralized. The music swells. The credits roll. And with them go the eyeballs of nearly every viewer still capable of respecting basic reality.

The point is not that women can’t be strong. Of course they can. Strength is not the issue. Hollywood’s definition of it is. Somewhere along the way, empowerment became synonymous with women cosplaying male action heroes, only with fight scenes that insult Newton and scripts that insult the audience. A petite actress body-checking men built like refrigerators — then calling disbelief misogyny — is not progress.

What makes “Apex” more revealing than irritating is how nakedly it exposes the broader frame. This isn’t about one film or one actress. It’s the result of a steady drip: years of female-driven nonsense poured into every genre until it became the genre. The same beats. The same postures. The same lectures delivered at gunpoint.

Form fatale

Hollywood has always run on formula. Nothing new there. It followed money, copied hits, and abandoned failures without sentimentality. But the formula answered to the audience. If people didn’t buy tickets, the trend was over.

Now the industry treats audience resistance not as feedback, but as something to be corrected — like a behavioral problem that needs retraining. Failure is no longer evidence that the formula is broken. It is treated as proof that the audience is.

Studios like to pretend this is audience demand. It isn’t. It’s institutional inertia. Executives terrified of being accused of regression keep recycling the same safe lie: If the movie fails, the audience is at fault. If it succeeds modestly, it’s a cultural victory.

It’s a system that makes the arrival of the new “Supergirl” later this year entirely predictable. Not because audiences asked for it. Not because there was pent-up demand. Not because anyone ever thought, yes, this is what’s missing. It is arriving because this is what the industry now produces by reflex.

The irony is hard to miss. The original “Supergirl” debuted in 1984, the same year Orwell warned us about systems that repeat lies until they feel inevitable. That film was a commercial and critical dud, quickly forgotten for good reason.

Four decades later, Hollywood appears determined to rerun the experiment, convinced that time, tone, and audience memory can all be overwritten. Don’t expect to be entertained. Expect scowls and sermons in spandex. Strength, by Hollywood’s current definition, must weigh a little over 100 pounds and look perpetually annoyed.

RELATED: FEMPIRE STRIKES BACK: Kathleen Kennedy leaves ‘Star Wars’; is it too soon for fans to celebrate?

Down for the count

We saw the results late last year. The box-office face-plant of “Christy,” the biopic of boxer Christy Martin, made the point brutally clear. Despite opening in more than 2,000 theaters, it scraped together just $1.3 million — one of the worst wide releases on record.

The film stars Sydney Sweeney, an American beauty inexplicably styled like a discount Rocky Balboa. Producers assumed her star power would draw crowds, then forgot why anyone — especially male viewers — watches her in the first place. It isn’t to see her absorb jabs, hooks, and uppercuts like a human heavy bag. It’s when she leans into what she actually is: feminine, magnetic, sexy. No one is buying a ticket to watch a gorgeous woman get beaten senseless.

This is the quiet truth studios refuse to say out loud: Men and women are not the same, and they do not want the same things on screen. Audiences happily watched Liam Neeson bulldoze Europe in “Taken.” They turned up in droves to see Keanu Reeves turn the death of a dog into a four-film genocide in “John Wick.” Nothing motivates a man like canine-related trauma and unlimited ammunition. Those films worked because they leaned into male fantasy without apology.

Equalizer rights?

What audiences don’t want is that same template awkwardly stapled onto a completely different body and sold as innovation. Denzel Washington was excellent in “The Equalizer” — cold, credible, and infinitely cool.

The TV reboot took that precision and desecrated it by turning the role into unintentional slapstick. A morbidly obese Queen Latifah as a silent, unstoppable angel of death is pure absurdity. This is a woman who struggles to climb a single flight of stairs, yet viewers are expected to believe she’s capable of stalking, subduing, and dispatching trained men without breaking a sweat.

Which brings us back to “Apex.” What makes the film accidentally hilarious isn’t Charlize Theron running through the bush. It’s the industry sprinting right behind her, desperately chasing a fantasy that stopped selling years ago. The humor comes from the sincerity. From the absolute faith that this time — finally — it will land.

And it will land. Just not gracefully. More like a Boeing falling out of the sky. Twisted metal, scorched wreckage, and stunned executives wandering around asking what went wrong.

And from that wreckage, there will be no reckoning. No pause. No course correction. Just a quick trip back to the studio lot to greenlight the next movie nobody requested and that everyone will forget.

​Movies, Entertainment, Lifestyle, Culture, Supergirl, Charlize theron, Girlboss, Mary sue, Hollyweird