Parliamentarian memo says SCHIP resolution filed too late to be given fast-track status

Jul 24 2008

The Senate Finance Committee canceled a vote scheduled for Wednesday on a resolution to block Bush administration rules limiting the expansion of SCHIP, after being informed by the Senate parliamentarian that the deadline for "privileged" status of the resolution had passed, CQ Today reports (Wayne, CQ Today, 7/22).

The bipartisan resolution, signed by 41 senators, would prevent guidelines issued by CMS on Aug. 17, 2007, from taking effect next month.

According to the guidelines, before expanding SCHIP eligibility to children in families with incomes greater than 250% of the federal poverty level, states first must demonstrate they have enrolled at least 95% of eligible children with family incomes below 200% of the poverty level. The Bush administration in May sent letters to state health officials to clarify that states can use data on Medicaid, SCHIP or private insurance to demonstrate they had reached the 95% requirement (Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, 7/18).

The parliamentarian in a memo to the senators wrote that the resolution should have been filed by July 8 to qualify for privileged consideration and thus be protected against delay tactics under the Congressional Review Act. The CRA requires a 60-day period for congressional review of new rules (Edney, CongressDaily, 7/23).

Comments

A Republican Senate aide said, "By missing the filing deadline, [Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus (D-Mont.)] lost fast-track protection," adding, "This may cause it to fall off the agenda" (CQ Today, 7/22). Baucus in a statement said, "There's more than one way to skin a cat, and I fully intend to work ... to get rid of this wrongheaded rule." A Baucus aide said supporters of the resolution are considering ways to proceed with efforts to block the SCHIP rules, such as adding it to any appropriations bills with a good chance of passing.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) in a statement said, "Every member of Congress should be outraged by the ease at which the administration circumvented the law and Congress as an institution," adding, "Instead we have had some members fight us every step of the way on nullifying this illegal policy in an ill-advised attempt to protect this administration from the lawsuits filed by several states stemming from the Aug. 17 rule" (CongressDaily, 7/23).