Richard Lugar

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Children's Express Lane to Health Coverage Act of 2003. This bill will give States greater flexibility in the ways they can enroll uninsured children into Medicaid and SCHIP while at the same time increasing government efficiency. Furthermore, it will help States reduce bureaucracy and red-tape. In 1999, 4.4 million low-income uninsured children were in families that received benefits through Food Stamps, the National School Lunch Program, or the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, WIC. Recognizing this, I worked to include a provision in the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000, which allowed schools and school districts to share school lunch information with State health insurance agencies for outreach and enrollment activities. The good news is that this provision has inspired numerous States to share information with Medicaid and SCHIP for the purposes of enrollment and outreach. Some States and communities have gone even further and simplified the health insurance application process by utilizing information provided in another program application to make the eligibility or renewal determination for Medicaid and or SCHIP. Some States would like to go further still, and determine that a child is income eligible for Medicaid or SCHIP based on the fact that they have already been found eligible for a nutrition or other comparable program that operates under similar financial guidelines. Unfortunately, they have found Federal law not flexible enough. The Express Lane Act would give States the option of establishing that their Medicaid or SCHIP financial eligibility rules are satisfied when a family presents proof that their child is already enrolled in another public program with comparable income guidelines. Express lane does not affect other, non-income eligibility requirements and maintains existing quality control measures. If given the ability to adopt automatic income eligibility, as set out in The Children's Express Lane to Health Coverage Act of 2003, States could reach a tangible population of uninsured children, build upon the initiative already taken by families, eliminate multi-agency duplicative efforts to collect and verify income and resource eligibility, and at the same time maintain program integrity.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Children's Express Lane to Health Coverage Act of 2003. This bill will give States greater flexibility in the ways they can enroll uninsured children into Medicaid and SCHIP while at the same time increasing government efficiency. Furthermore, it will help States reduce bureaucracy and red-tape. In 1999, 4.4 million low-income uninsured children were in families that received benefits through Food Stamps, the National School Lunch Program, or the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, WIC. Recognizing this, I worked to include a provision in the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000, which allowed schools and school districts to share school lunch information with State health insurance agencies for outreach and enrollment activities. The good news is that this provision has inspired numerous States to share information with Medicaid and SCHIP for the purposes of enrollment and outreach. Some States and communities have gone even further and simplified the health insurance application process by utilizing information provided in another program application to make the eligibility or renewal determination for Medicaid and or SCHIP. Some States would like to go further still, and determine that a child is income eligible for Medicaid or SCHIP based on the fact that they have already been found eligible for a nutrition or other comparable program that operates under similar financial guidelines. Unfortunately, they have found Federal law not flexible enough. The Express Lane Act would give States the option of establishing that their Medicaid or SCHIP financial eligibility rules are satisfied when a family presents proof that their child is already enrolled in another public program with comparable income guidelines. Express lane does not affect other, non-income eligibility requirements and maintains existing quality control measures. If given the ability to adopt automatic income eligibility, as set out in The Children's Express Lane to Health Coverage Act of 2003, States could reach a tangible population of uninsured children, build upon the initiative already taken by families, eliminate multi-agency duplicative efforts to collect and verify income and resource eligibility, and at the same time maintain program integrity.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished Senator from Wyoming.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, how much time remains on each side?

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, it is my understanding that the distinguished Senator from North Dakota has an amendment. I ask the Chair what the time agreement is on the Dorgan amendment.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I yield myself as much time as required. The argument against the Dorgan amendment, which I will make, is that a budget point of order clearly is applicable against this particular amendment, and at the appropriate time I will raise that budget point of order. I say simply that the bill we are considering, which came through the House of Representatives and is the basis for our debate today, does mention food assistance, and does so generously, as a prevention technique. It is mentioned at several points throughout the legislation. So it has not been overlooked. But the amendment that is being offered by my distinguished colleague clearly approaches appropriations language, as opposed to authorization language, and clearly is in violation of the budget we have adopted. At the appropriate time, I will seek recognition to raise the budget point or order. In addition, the fact is that once again it amends the basic bill we are attempting to pass tonight, which is very important for Members to consider.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, as each one of us discussed amendments tonight, there are ways in which this bill could be perfected. There will be an opportunity in a humanitarian way to try to perfect our work. Our work tonight, however, is to pass this legislation so that our President has a bill at the G-8. In furtherance of that, I note that the pending amendment offered by the distinguished Senator from North Dakota increases mandatory spending, and, if adopted, would cause the underlying bill to exceed the committee section 302(a) allocations. Therefore, I raise a point of order against the amendment pursuant to section 302(f) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote and to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. LUGAR. The President of the United States needs an opportunity to forward our cause. Please give him that opportunity. Pass a clean bill this evening. Please vote against this amendment.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, the Senator from New York has made a very eloquent and important statement, and I appreciate it. My response has to be the one I have made throughout the evening, and that is that it is different, and it will cause conference. In my judgment, there is merit in what she has to say. That has been true of many amendments this evening. But it is something that I must oppose. I am hopeful Senators will vote no on the Clinton amendment.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I have been listening to all of this information. Let me simply say that, throughout the evening, I have asked Senators to vote against amendments. That was based upon the feelings of our colleagues in the House of Representatives, who passed the bill--namely, my friends Henry Hyde, Tom Lantos, and likewise in the course of this debate, I have mentioned conversations with the President himself, who wanted this bill unamended so there would not be a need for a conference and for difficulty. I have not been apprised by anybody at the White House, or in the House leadership, of any other situation. I am perfectly willing to accept, on good faith, the assertions of my colleagues who have had these conversations. But for the sake of the Record, when the voice vote comes, I will vote no because I have asked my colleagues to vote no on each amendment. I will continue in that frame of mind. But I have listened carefully and I understand what, apparently, have been conversations and agreements and I appreciate that. I know of no reason to extend the debate, unless the majority leader has something.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I thank all Senators for their diligence and faithfulness in working to this late hour. I thank our leader, Senator Frist; likewise, Senator Daschle. I always appreciate working with my colleague, Senator Biden. We have a good relationship on the committee, and we are very appreciative that the Senate has given us this bill this evening.

Mr. LUGAR. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I respectfully respond to my colleague that clearly we can pass the bill now, and that would end the session. I would hope we would do that. If Members wish to continue offering amendments, I will do the best I can to encourage each amendment be defeated so we will have a clean bill. In any event, I hope it will not be long, and with the cooperation of all Members we can expedite it.

Mr. LUGAR. I yield to the Senator from Kansas.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask for information now on the time limits on the two amendments.

Mr. LUGAR. On the Dodd amendment?

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. LUGAR

Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise today to highlight for my colleagues an important event occurring in State of Indiana the 100th anniversary of the Shelbyville-Shelby County Public Library. The growth success of the library through the years is a testament to the dedication of the staff and to the Shelbyville-Shelby County community. In 1822, the Shelbyville-Shelby County Public Library was founded with a modest collection of a few hundred volumes. In the years and decades that followed, the collection grew to more than one hundred thousand volumes, and the facility was expanded to meet the demands of the City and County. Today, residents enjoy a state of the art institution. I join, with my colleagues in the Senate and with State and local officials in Indiana, to congratulate everyone who has been a part of the growth of this library throughout the years and who has gathered to celebrate this impressive milestone.