An Act amending the act of June 13, 1967 (P.L.31, No.21), known as the Human Services Code, in public assistance, providing for waivers to be requested for medical assistance.
Summary
HB298 would require the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services to seek federal approval for a Medicaid demonstration waiver under Section 1115 of the Social Security Act. The waiver would let the department impose stricter eligibility rules for certain Medicaid recipients: nondisabled, nonpregnant adults ages 19 to 64 who fail to report changes affecting eligibility could be barred from re-enrolling and denied benefits for up to six months, and their eligibility would be redetermined every six months instead of annually. The bill would also allow the department to suspend existing Medicaid renewal practices that rely on automatic renewals using available information and prepopulated renewal forms.
The bill also sets administrative requirements if a waiver is approved or denied. The department would have to notify specified state officials and the General Assembly of any federal approval and adopt rules to implement the section. If federal approval is denied, the department must resubmit the waiver request within 24 months of each denial. The act would take effect 60 days after enactment.
Impact
HB298 would amend the Pennsylvania Human Services Code by adding a new section governing Medicaid waiver requests, specifically directing the Department of Human Services to pursue federal approval for changes to medical assistance eligibility and renewal procedures. If implemented, it could affect adult Medicaid recipients by increasing reporting obligations, shortening eligibility review cycles, and limiting automatic renewal pathways. The bill would not itself change federal Medicaid rules, but it would require state action to seek a waiver and to adopt implementing regulations if approval is granted.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the bill appears to reflect a policy preference for tighter Medicaid eligibility administration and more frequent verification of continued eligibility. The overall tone of the measure is procedural and directive, with no documented public sentiment in the supplied record. Because no votes or transcripts are available, there is no evidence here of bipartisan support or opposition, only the bill’s clear intent to pursue stricter program oversight.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the bill’s proposed tightening of Medicaid access for nondisabled, nonpregnant adults ages 19 to 64, especially the six-month reenrollment ban for failure to report changes and the move from annual to semiannual redeterminations. Supporters would likely view these provisions as improving program integrity and ensuring accurate eligibility determinations, while opponents may argue they create barriers to coverage, increase administrative burden, and risk coverage losses for eligible recipients. The proposal to suspend automatic renewals and prepopulated forms may also be controversial because it reduces streamlined renewal processes that help maintain coverage.