Kansas House Bill HB2004

Kansas 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/13/25
• Refer: 1/13/25
• Refer: 1/15/25
• Report Pass: 1/28/25
• Engrossed: 2/3/25
• Refer: 2/4/25
• Report Pass: 3/19/25
• Refer: 1/12/26
• Refer: 2/3/26
• Report Pass: 2/10/26
• Enrolled: 4/9/26
• Vetoed: 4/9/26
• Override: 4/9/26

Caption

Senate Substitute for HB 2004 by Committee on Government Efficiency - .Requiring the secretary for children and families and the office of inspector general to exchange information and documents related to cash assistance, childcare assistance and food assistance fraud investigations and requiring the secretary for children and families and the secretary of health and environment to execute a memorandum of understanding or other written data-sharing instrument upon written request of the United States department of agriculture or the United States department of health and human services and comply with data requests from such federal agencies.

Summary

HB 2004, as enacted through the Senate substitute, strengthens information-sharing for fraud detection in Kansas public assistance programs. It requires the secretary for children and families and the Office of Inspector General to exchange documents and data related to cash assistance, child care assistance, and food assistance applicants, recipients, eligibility determinations, electronic benefit card transactions, and other materials tied to audits or fraud investigations. The bill sets a 30-day deadline for responding to requests between the agencies and limits use of the shared information to detecting, investigating, and prosecuting fraud. The bill also updates Kansas law governing fraud reporting and federal data coordination. It amends K.S.A. 39-760 to continue the statewide toll-free reporting system for suspected welfare abuse and health care provider fraud, and it adds requirements that the secretary for children and families and the secretary of health and environment enter into memoranda of understanding or other written data-sharing instruments when requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Once those agreements are in place, the agencies must comply with written federal data requests and provide the requested information within 60 days. In practical terms, the bill expands the state’s authority and obligation to share public assistance records both internally and with federal agencies. It affects the Department for Children and Families, the Office of Inspector General, and the Department of Health and Environment, and it is aimed at improving oversight of SNAP/food assistance, child care assistance, cash assistance, and related medical assistance fraud reporting systems. The bill also repeals the prior version of K.S.A. 39-760 and replaces it with the amended framework. The overall sentiment appears strongly supportive of the bill’s anti-fraud and administrative-efficiency goals, as reflected in the large margins of passage in both chambers and the successful veto overrides. The votes suggest broad bipartisan acceptance, though not unanimous. The main point of contention is likely the balance between fraud prevention and privacy or administrative burden, since the bill compels agencies to exchange sensitive applicant and recipient data and to respond to federal requests within defined timeframes.

Impact

HB 2004 amends Kansas public assistance law by mandating data sharing between the Department for Children and Families and the Office of Inspector General for fraud-related investigations, and by requiring formal data-sharing agreements with USDA and HHS upon request. It changes K.S.A. 39-760, repeals the existing section, and imposes deadlines and use restrictions on exchanged information, affecting administration of cash assistance, child care assistance, food assistance, and related welfare/medical assistance fraud reporting systems.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have been viewed favorably as a fraud-prevention and government-efficiency measure, with strong passage in the House and Senate and later successful veto overrides in both chambers. The vote margins indicate substantial support, though the presence of notable minority opposition suggests some legislators had concerns about the scope of mandatory data sharing and the handling of sensitive assistance records.

Contention

The primary tension in HB 2004 is between anti-fraud enforcement and privacy/administrative concerns. Supporters likely favored quicker access to records, stronger coordination between agencies, and compliance with federal data requests to improve fraud detection in public assistance programs. Opponents appear to have been concerned about compelled sharing of applicant and recipient information, the breadth of records covered, and the requirement to respond to federal requests within fixed deadlines, which could raise confidentiality and workload issues for the affected agencies.