Skip to content

Bills · 2011-2012 Regular Session

SB 232

Died at session end Official bill text Atom feed

eliminating the ability for the Department of Health Services to alter Medical Assistance eligibility, provider payment methods, and other Medical Assistance program procedures by policy and eliminating the requirement to request a waiver regarding Medical Assistance program eligibility.

  1. Introduced, stopped here
  2. Passes Senate, not reached
  3. Passes Assembly, not reached
  4. Governor signs, not reached
  5. Law, not reached

Unfamiliar terms? Glossary

What this bill does

Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau

Currently, the Department of Health Services (DHS) administers the Medical

Assistance (MA) program, which is a joint federal and state program that provides

health services to individuals who have limited resources. Some services are

provided through programs that operated under a waiver of federal Medicaid laws

(MA waiver programs). Current law requires DHS to study potential changes to the

MA state plan and to waivers of federal Medicaid law for certain purposes, including

increasing the cost effectiveness and efficiency of care for the MA program and MA

waiver programs and improving the health status of individuals who receive benefits

under the MA program or an MA waiver program. If DHS determines that revision

of existing statutes or rules would be necessary to advance any of the purposes for

which the study was conducted, DHS may propose a policy to do any of the following:

require cost sharing from program benefit recipients up to the maximum allowed by

the federal government; authorize providers to deny care or services if a program

benefit recipient is unable to share costs; modify existing benefits or establish

various benefits packages and offer different packages to different groups of

recipients; revise provider reimbursement models for particular services; mandate

that program benefit recipients enroll in managed care; restrict or eliminate

presumptive eligibility; impose restrictions on providing benefits to individuals who

are not citizens of the United States; set standards for establishing and verifying

eligibility requirements; develop standards and methodologies to assure accurate

eligibility determinations and redetermine continuing eligibility; and reduce income

levels for purposes of determining eligibility. Before implementing a policy that

conflicts with a state statute, DHS must submit to the Joint Committee on Finance

under the committee's passive review process the proposed amendment to the state

MA plan or proposed waiver of federal Medicaid law and estimates of the projected

cost savings associated with the amendment or waiver request. If the proposed state

MA plan amendment or waiver request is not rejected by the committee, DHS must

submit to the federal government the amendment or waiver request, if necessary, to

the extent necessary to implement its policy. If the federal government does not allow

the amendment or does not grant the waiver, DHS may not implement the policy.

Current law also requires DHS to request a waiver from the federal government

to allow the department to implement eligibility standards, methodologies, and

procedures under the state MA plan or federal Medicaid law waivers that are more

restrictive than those in place on March 23, 2010. If the federal government does not

approve the waiver request before December 31, 2011, DHS must reduce, on July 1,

2012, following the procedures under federal law, income levels to 133 percent of the

federal poverty line for adults who are not pregnant or disabled for the purposes of

determining eligibility, to the extent permitted under federal law.

This bill eliminates the requirement for DHS to conduct the study. DHS is not

authorized, under the bill, to create a policy that would override elements of the MA

What it would cost

Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs

Sponsors

Introduced by: C. Larson (D) , Erpenbach (D) , Hansen (D) , King (D) , Lassa (D) , Miller (D) , Risser (D) , S. Coggs (D) , Shilling (D) , Taylor (D) , Vinehout (D)

20 cosponsors

Berceau (D) , Bernard Schaber (D) , C. Taylor (D) , Doyle (D) , Fields (D) , Grigsby (D) , Hebl (D) , Jorgensen (D) , Milroy (D) , Pasch (D) , Pocan (D) , Pope-Roberts (D) , Richards (D) , Ringhand (D) , Roys (D) , Seidel (D) , Sinicki (D) , Staskunas (D) , Turner (D) , Zamarripa (D)

Votes

Suspending the rules (to take a vote immediately) needs a two-thirds majority — a higher bar than passing the bill, which needs a simple majority. That's why a suspension motion can show more Ayes than the passage vote that follows it. Glossary

Senate: Refused to suspend rules to withdraw from committee on Public Health, Human Services, and Revenue and take up, Ayes 15, Noes 17

Failed 15–17 Nov 2, 2011 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Full history

  1. Oct 12, 2011 · Senate

    Introduced by Senators Erpenbach, Shilling, Vinehout, Miller, C. Larson, King, Lassa, Hansen, Risser, S. Coggs and Taylor;Cosponsored by Representatives Pasch, Richards, Milroy, Bernard Schaber, Zamarripa, Roys, Pope-Roberts, Fields, Ringhand, Doyle, C. Taylor, Jorgensen, Sinicki, Staskunas, Hebl, Berceau, Turner, Grigsby, Seidel and Pocan

  2. Oct 12, 2011 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Public Health, Human Services, and Revenue

  3. Nov 2, 2011 · Senate

    Refused to suspend rules to withdraw from committee on Public Health, Human Services, and Revenue and take up, Ayes 15, Noes 17

  4. Mar 23, 2012 · Senate

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1