Provide hearing aids to children and make an appropriation therefor.
Summary
House Bill 1233 would expand and increase an existing state program that helps pay for hearing-related devices for children. The bill amends South Dakota law governing the telecommunication fund for the deaf to raise the annual continuous appropriation from $200,000 to $500,000 and to direct those funds to the Department of Human Services for cochlear implants and hearing aids for eligible children. It keeps the age limit at under 21 and preserves the requirement that cochlear implants be for children with severe to profound hearing loss, while also allowing hearing aids to be provided when recommended by a certified hearing audiologist.
The bill also clarifies how the money may be used. Funds may cover the full cost of devices for children who are not covered by health insurance or Medicaid, or they may pay the portion of costs not covered by insurance, including deductibles and coinsurance. In effect, the measure strengthens the state’s role in reducing out-of-pocket costs for families seeking hearing treatment for children.
Impact
HB1233 would amend §§ 49-31-50 and 49-31-50.1 of South Dakota law by increasing the continuous appropriation from the telecommunication fund for the deaf and broadening the covered services to include hearing aids for children, not just cochlear implants. It would increase state spending authority for the Department of Human Services and make the fund available to assist uninsured children, Medicaid recipients, and children with private insurance who still face deductibles or coinsurance for hearing devices.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the bill appears to be framed as a supportive, child-focused health access measure. Its stated purpose suggests a generally favorable policy posture toward helping families afford hearing care. No recorded opposition or formal vote history is provided in the materials, so there is no documented public sentiment beyond the bill’s pro-access design.
Contention
The main policy questions raised by the bill are likely to concern the size of the appropriation, the use of a continuously appropriated fund, and whether state dollars should pay for services that may already be covered by insurance or Medicaid. Another possible point of discussion is the expansion from cochlear implants to hearing aids, which broadens eligibility and could increase demand on the fund. However, the provided materials do not include committee debate or recorded opposition, so any contention is inferential rather than documented.