Res. No. 1151
Resolution endorsing the Speaker’s decision to file, on behalf of the Council, an amicus brief in support of the Plaintiffs in the litigation between several states and the federal government captioned New York v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, for the purpose of supporting the wide latitude granted to states by the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (“SCHIP”) to set their own income rules for SCHIP eligibility.
By Council Members Rivera, Recchia Jr., Dickens, Fidler, James, Koppell, Liu, Nelson, Palma, Sears, Weprin and White Jr.
Whereas, The State Children’s Health Insurance Program (“SCHIP”) was enacted by Congress in 1997 to create a partnership between state and federal governments to provide health insurance coverage to low-income children who are not eligible for Medicaid; and
Whereas, SCHIP grants states broad discretion in determining the family income level of the children they will cover under their state SCHIP programs; and
Whereas, The current SCHIP programs effective in New York, Washington, and Illinois, approved by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), cover children whose family incomes do not exceed 250 percent of the federal poverty limit; and
Whereas, The legislatures of New York, Washington, and Illinois have passed, and their governors have signed, legislation authorizing expansion of their SCHIP programs to cover children whose family incomes do not exceed a higher percent of the federal poverty limit (400, 400, and 300 respectively); and
Whereas, Maryland’s SCHIP program currently covers children whose family incomes do not exceed 300 percent of the federal poverty level; and
Whereas, Experience in other states demonstrates that similar expansions have had the desirable effect of increasing enrollment in SCHIP among uninsured children, including those already eligible for but not now enrolled in SCHIP; and
Whereas, On August 17, 2007, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the branch of HHS that administers the SCHIP program for the federal government, issued a letter that purported to impose stringent new requirements on any state that covers or desires to cover children whose family incomes are above an “effective level” of 250 percent of the federal poverty limit; and
Whereas, This requirement will obstruct the legislative directives in New York, Washington, and Illinois to expand their state SCHIP programs, and will deprive Maryland of its ability to continue to administer its current SCHIP program; and
Whereas, The federal government, faced with an opportunity to expand health coverage to nearly four million additional uninsured children, inexplicably chose to do nothing, jeopardizing the future of millions of children that currently rely on SCHIP for health care, including over 160,000 in New York City alone; and
Whereas, The State of New York, along with the State of Illinois, the State of Maryland, and the State of Washington, have filed a lawsuit against HHS, challenging HHS’s new requirements precluding states from including (or seeking to include) in their SCHIP program children from families whose income are above 250 percent of the federal poverty limit; and
Whereas, The plaintiffs allege that HHS violated administrative rulemaking policies, in that (i) HHS failed to comply with public notice and comment rules; and (ii) HHS's income limit requirements are contrary to the Social Security Act (the federal law that created SCHIP); now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Council of the City of New York endorses the Speaker’s decision to file, on behalf of the Council, an amicus brief in support of the Plaintiffs in the litigation between several states and the federal government captioned New York v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, for the purpose of supporting the wide latitude granted to states by the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (“SCHIP”) to set their own income rules for SCHIP eligibility.
LGA
11.08.07