SCHIP Round 2

The Senate passed the latest reauthorization package for the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) despite continued veto threats from the White House. The Senate voted 64-30 in favor of passing H.R. 3963, setting up yet another veto fight in what appears to be the season of vetoes. However, unlike the first time Congress sent SCHP to the President, Democrats are not planning to rush an override vote, opting to take a more subtle approach this time around.

The bill still increases SCHIP funding by $35 billion over five years, offset by a $.61 increase on cigarette taxes. However, the bill contains language that will phase childless adults out of the program in one year, as well as language to ensure children currently covered by private insurance companies stay with their current plans. Republicans, however, are still concerned with the cost, and the bill’s apparent attempts to shift children to “socialized” healthcare. President Bush is still promising to veto the package due to excessive spending. His Administration proposed only a $5 billion expansion earlier this year.

The new bill also includes language that would keep the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) from implementing restrictions on Medicaid payments until January of 2010. This provision is in direct response to efforts by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to place restrictions on Medicaid payments to schools for administrative and transportation costs related to services provided to students under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Congress attached a 6 month moratorium on these restrictions in the conference report of the last SCHIP bill, but that proposal died when the House failed to override the President’s veto.

Thursday, November 1, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee held a hearing on the proposed changes to Medicaid payments. Advocates from various education and health organizations presented their concerns regarding CMS’ efforts to members of Congress. Dennis Smith, Director of the Center for Medicaid and State Operations at CMS attempted to defend his agency’s regulatory efforts, but was met with much skepticism. Members of the Committee, including Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA), viewed CMS’ actions as disrespectful to Congress’ role of oversight and their authority over governmental programs.

Democrats in the House are still 15 votes shy of a veto-proof majority for the SCHIP bill, but have laid plans to bring as much political pressure to their opposition as they can before bringing the bill to the floor for an override vote. Last time, Democrats rushed the House vote, against Republican protests, and suffered for it. This time the Democratic leadership plans to hold off on an override vote long enough to actively campaign for the additional votes necessary. As such, it is not clear when the final override vote will happen, so Congress may end up having more December votes than they anticipated.

Resources:
Drew Armstrong, “SCHIP Clears Again; Talks Continue With Would-Be Supporters in House,” CQ Today, November 1, 2007.
Stephen Langel, “Democrats Stepping Back After Latest SCHIP Defeat,” Congress Now, November 1, 2007.
Mark W. Sherman, “Lawmakers, CMS Official Spar Over School Medicaid Dollars,” Education Daily, November 2, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

Secretary of Education Amends ACG and SMART Grant Regulations

The Secretary of Education recently amended the regulations for the Academic Competitiveness Grant (ACG) and National Science and Mathematics Access to Retain Talent Grant (National SMART Grant) programs. The purpose of the amendments is to reduce administrative burden for program participants and to clarify program requirements. The new regulations are effective as of July 1, 2008. The amendments were announced on Monday in the Federal Register. 72 Fed. Reg. 61248 (Oct. 29, 2007).

There are a number of changes to the applicable higher education regulations, 34 CFR Part 691, as a result of the regulations, some very minor, while others more substantial. Among the changes are the following:
• Requiring an institution in which a student is currently enrolled to determine the student’s academic year progression based on the student’s attendance in all ACG and National SMART Grant eligible programs only at that institution.
• Adding a new provision to require that when determining the appropriate academic year for a transfer student, the institution to which the student transferred must count both (a) the number of credit or clock hours earned by the student at prior institutions that are accepted for the student, and (b) an estimated number of weeks of instructional time completed by the student.
• Adding a new provision requiring three alternative methods to determine the weeks of instructional time for a student’s academic year progression, and to provide that an institution choosing to use one of these alternative methods must do so for all students enrolled in the eligible program.
• Clarifying that when determining academic year progression for a student, an institution may not assign any weeks of instructional time to certain credit or clock hours accepted toward a student’s eligible program if those credit or clock hours were earned from Advanced Placement (AP) programs, International Baccalaureate (IB) programs, testing out, life experience, other similarly earned credits or credits earned while not enrolled as a regular student in an ACG or National SMART Grant eligible program, or coursework that is not at the postsecondary level, such as remedial coursework
• Clarifying that an institution must assign weeks of instructional time to determine National SMART Grant eligibility for periods in which a student was enrolled in an ACG-eligible program before declaring, or certifying his or her intent to declare, an eligible major.
• Clarifying that, for purposes of eligibility for ACG and National SMART Grants, an institution that assesses grade point average (GPA) on a numeric scale other than a 4.0 scale must ensure that its minimum GPA requirement meets the same numeric standard as a cumulative GPA of 3.0 or higher on a 4.0 scale.
• Clarifying that institutions are required to calculate a student’s GPA for determining second-year ACG eligibility as follows:
o For a student who transfers to an institution that accepts into the student’s ACG eligible program at least the credit or clock hours for one academic year, but for less than two academic years, the institution must calculate the student’s GPA using the grades from all coursework accepted into the student’s ACG eligible program.
o For a student who transfers to an institution that accepts less than the credit or clock hours for an academic year into the student’s ACG eligible program, the institution must calculate the student’s GPA by combining the grades from all coursework accepted into the student’s ACG eligible program with the grades for coursework earned at the current institution through the payment period in which the student completes the credit or clock hours for his or her first academic year.
• Adding a new provision to require that, for a transfer student who transfers from one institution to another institution at which the student is eligible for a National SMART Grant, the subsequent institution determines that student’s eligibility for the first payment period using one of two methods, depending on whether it incorporates the grades from the student’s previous coursework that it accepts on transfer into the student’s GPA at the subsequent institution.
• Extending eligibility for a first-academic-year ACG to any student who enrolls as a regular student in an ACG eligible program while in high school provided that the student is beyond the age of compulsory school attendance.
• Requiring an institution to document a student’s eligible major and progress in the eligible program and major by maintaining documentation, such as the following:
o Documentation of the declared major, including written declaration of intent to declare an eligible major provided by the student; and
o Written documentation showing that the student is progressing in coursework leading to a degree in the student’s intended or declared eligible major; and
o Written documentation that the student is enrolling in the courses necessary to complete a degree in the intended or declared eligible major.
• Providing a process for institutions of higher education to request additional majors to be added to the list of eligible majors for National SMART Grants.

The Federal Register notice stated that there were no significant differences between the Department of Education’s original Notice of Public Rulemaking and the final regulations resulting from public comment or legislative action.
You can view the Federal Register notice at http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/finrule/2007-4/102907a.html.

Author: CWP

Read More...

Summary only...

Congress Ready to Send “Mini-Bus” Appropriations to President

Thursday, November 1, Congressional conferees voted to send the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill for fiscal year 2008 (FY08) to the President as part of a “mini-bus” package that includes the Veterans Affairs and Military (VA-Mil) construction bill. The package originally included the Department of Defense appropriations as well, but was dropped due to controversial Iraq provisions. The conference report is ready for floor consideration, though it is unclear if the proposal will make through the Senate.

The conference report includes $150.7 billion in discretionary spending for the three departments (Labor-HHS-Education) and several independent agencies, notably the Social Security Administration. A number of discretionary programs received increases this year in both bills, including Title I, special education, and Pell grants. The final conference report also includes a $25 million increase for career and technical education. Total spending in the Labor-HHS-Education portion of the bill is $608.3 billion, including entitlements such as Medicare and Medicaid. The conference report’s discretionary total for Labor-HHS-Education is $1 billion less than in the House-passed bill and $841 million more than in the Senate version. It is $9.8 billion more than Bush requested.

The VA-Mil and the Labor-HHS-Education bills were combined as way of further politicizing the appropriations fight between Congressional Democrats and the White House. Republicans in Congress are criticizing the majority for attempting to use veterans funding as a political tool against the President. Forty-four Senate Republicans sent a joint letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) condemning the decision to package the two bills together. Some Senators are already planning to take further action against the mini-bus package.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) stated her intention to bring a point of order against the conference report, which she claims violates Senate Rule XXVIII. The new Senate rule is intended to prevent “airdropping” earmarks into conference reports. Sen. Hutchison claims that since conferees were only appointed to work on the Labor-HHS-Education bill, adding the VA-Mil bill constitutes an earmark, since it authorizes funding for projects not originally in either version of the Labor-HHS-Education legislation. Under Senate rules, the Chair must decide to accept the point of order to preclude further action on the bill in violation of Senate rules, which is unlikely.

President Bush is already threatening to veto the mini-bus, which may be exactly what Democrats are hoping for. By vetoing the total legislative package, Democrats can not only accuse the President of vetoing the largest domestic spending bill (Labor-HHS-Education), but also for vetoing funding for veterans programs, statistically a large Republican base. Although the President is issuing threats, the final votes in the House and Senate will be the deciding factor. If Congress is able to pass the conference report by veto-proof majorities, however unlikely that might be, the President just may refrain from vetoing the bill.

Resources:
Scott Cox, “Hutchison Targets Labor-HHS and MilCon Bill With Point of Order,” Congress Now, November 1, 2007.
Alex Wayne, “Measure Boosts Spending for Domestic Priorities, but Veto Threat Looms,” CQ Today, November 1, 2007.
Frank Wolfe, “Conferees Approve$60.7 Billion for Education,” Education Daily, November 2, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

Collecting and Reporting Ethnic Data

Two week0s ago, the United States Department of Education (ED) released final guidance on maintaining, collecting and reporting ethnic data to ED. 72 Fed. Reg. 59266, (Oct. 19, 2007). The final guidance details how educational institutions and other recipients of grants and contracts from ED will:


• Collect and maintain racial ands ethnic data from students and staff;
• Aggregate racial and ethnic data when reporting those data to ED; and
• Report and aggregate those data under No Child Left Behind (NCLB).

In brief, ED will require the use of a two-part question. The first question will be whether or not the respondent is Hispanic/Latino. The second question will ask the respondent to select from five racial groups. If, in the case of an elementary or secondary school, the individual or parents do not self-identify their race or ethnicity, the regulations allow the institutional agent to use observer identification.
Once collected, the reporting to ED will be in seven categories:
1. Hispanic/Latino of any race; and, for individuals who are non-Hispanic/Latino only;
2. American Indian or Alaska Native;
3. Asian;
4. Black or African American;
5. Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander;
6. White; and
7. Two or more races.

The final guidance will affect reporting under NCLB. It stipulates that state educational agencies (SEA) will continue to have discretion in determining which racial and ethnic groups will be used for accountability purposes, yet that discretion comes with conditions. If an SEA makes changes to the racial and ethnic data categories, swapping native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander for Asian/Pacific Islander for example, then it must submit an amendment to its Accountability Workbook. If it does not change its major racial and ethnic groups, it may be necessary to “bridge” the previous data collection groups to the new reporting groups in order to maintain reliable data over time and to facilitate uniform data gathering and maintenance practices. Bridging involves adopting a method for being able to link the new data collected using the two-part question with data collected before the publication of this guidance. For example, an SEA may ‘‘bridge’’ the ‘‘two or more races’’ category into single race categories or the new single race categories into the previous single race categories.

However an SEA chooses to reconcile its collection and reporting practices, the new final rules reminds the SEA that ED, always steward of the federal dollars, will closely scrutinize any changes. “During the Department’s routine monitoring of Title I programs, we expect to ask States … the extent to which they may relate to any changes in the demographic measurements that may have been brought about by the changes in the final guidance.” 72 Fed. Reg. 59266, (Oct. 19, 2007) at 59272. The guidance’s implementation date will begin with reporting data from the 2010–2011 school year.

Resource:
Racial and ethnic data standards; collection and reporting requirements, 72 Fed. Reg. 59266, (Oct. 19, 2007), http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a071019c.html.
Author: DAD

Read More...

Summary only...

2007 Farm Bill Ready for the Senate Floor

Thursday, October 25, the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee finally approved the 2007 Farm Bill, nearly three months after the House passed its own version of the reauthorization legislation. The two-day mark up came to an end after Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-IA) was finally able to strike a deal with opposition to a change in certain farm subsidy programs. The committee report includes an expansion of the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP), contingent on available funds.

Sen. Harkin’s proposal for the FFVP includes expanding into all 50 states, though the bill does not set concrete funding levels for the program. Instead, the bill directs $225 million for FY08, if the funding is available. From there, it calls for annual appropriations to dictate the spending levels, though Harkin claims it will lead to about $1.1 billion over five years. Each year, each of the 50 states will receive 1% of the available funds for the program, with the remaining funds allocated based on states’ proportion of students eligible for free or reduced price lunch under the National School Lunch Program.

State educational agencies (SEAs) are directed to allocate the funds to schools where at least 50% of their students are eligible for free or reduce price lunches. Per student spending at an individual school must be between $50 and $75. If there are an insufficient number of schools that meet the 50% requirement, SEAs are directed to give priority to schools with higher proportions of student eligible for free or reduced price lunches. SEAs are also directed to give priority to schools that combine efforts under the FFVP program with additional nutrition and healthy living programs.

Debate slowed when Sen. Harkin found himself at odds with other members regarding his plan for changes to certain farm subsidies. Farmers would have the option of opting out of the current system, based on cyclical payments around a minimum price level for crops, choosing instead payments based on state’s targeted price levels. Harkin brokered a deal where farmers would have a two year period to make the transition, a compromise that took the committee over the last divisive issue, clearing the bill for approval.

There is no clear timeline for when the Senate will consider the legislation, though Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has said that the Senate will not consider any more appropriations bills until the President vetoes or signs the Labor-HHS-Education bill, freeing up additional time on the Senate calendar. Reid and Harkin originally planned to push the Farm Bill through the Senate in September, but the appropriations schedule pushed most other bills to the bottom of the priority list. Now, that Reid has cleared the schedule, at least for the next few weeks, the Senate is free to consider the farm bill, possibly as early as next week.

Resources:
Catharine Richert and Michael Teitelbaum, “Senate Panel Approves 2007 Farm Bill,” CQ Today, October 25, 2007.
Geof Koss, “Senate Agriculture Panel Clears Farm Bill After Deal on Key Amendment,” Congress Now, October 25, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

House Passes SCHIP Bill...Again

Thursday, October 25, the House passed H.R. 3963, the latest State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) reauthorization bill, by a vote of 265-142. Once again, the House fell short of the 289 votes necessary to override a Presidential veto, casting doubt over this new proposal’s chances of becoming law. The override vote tally, however, is not clear due to the number of California Congressmen who were in their home districts monitoring local fire relief efforts, as well as the absence of a few other members of Congress.

Like the previous reauthorization bill, H.R. 3963 proposes a $35 billion expansion over five years, and still tries to offset the costs with a $.61 increase in cigarette taxes. This time, Democratic leaders attempted to assuage some Republican concerns over the coverage provided under the bill. Childless parents, which were slated for a more gradual phase out, would be phased out in one year under the new bill. The bill also directs private insurance companies to work towards ensuring that children would not be forced to alter their plans under the new SCHIP expansion, another White House concern.

A critical change to the new bill includes a longer moratorium on the ability of the Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS), in the Department of Health and Human Services, to restrict Medicaid reimbursement payments to schools. The new language reads as follows:

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) shall not, prior to January 1, 2010, take any action (through promulgation of regulation, issuance of regulatory guidance, use of federal payment audit procedures, or other administrative action, policy, or practice, including a Medical Assistance Manual transmittal or letter to State Medicaid directors) to restrict coverage or payment under title XIX of the Social Security Act for rehabilitation services, or school-based administration, transportation, or medical services if such restrictions are more restrictive in any aspect than those applied to such coverage or payment as of July 1, 2007.

The conference report for the previous SCHIP bill, H.R. 976, provided a similar moratorium, but only through May 2008. This provision would provide more long-term security for schools in danger of losing funds for school related rehabilitative, administration and transportation costs for students currently eligible under the Individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Earlier this year, the CMS issues proposed rules that would eliminate CMS’ obligations for these payments. Education advocates have been and continue to call for a legislative block to the proposed payment restrictions.

As stated above, the House fell 24 votes short of the required number for overriding a veto, but 26 members of Congress missed the vote, a fact that Republicans tried to use to delay debate on the issue. There were a number of Republicans included in that number, so it is unlikely that all 26 votes would have gone in favor of the bill. However, the bill is now headed to the Senate, giving Democratic leaders in the House more time to lobby their Republican colleagues. In the end, if the House is not able to gain a veto-proof majority, the moratorium langue will need to find another vehicle for passage.

Resources:
Stephen Langel, “House SCHIP Bill Again Fails to Secure Veto-Proof Majority,” Congress Now, October 25, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...

DREAM On

On Wednesday, the Senate moved to consider S. 2205, the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act of 2007 (DREAM Act), which was introduced on October 18. The move sought to secure 60 votes for cloture, which cuts off debate on a bill and avoids the practice of killing off a bill through a litany of amendments or a filibuster. The vote failed and Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL), the bill’s sponsor, will now have to find another vehicle for the bill in order to pass it during the 110th Congress. Sen. Durbin has advocated for the matter over the last five years and Majority Leader Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) carried the torch on Wednesday. “I very much appreciate the hard work of Senator Durbin and Senator Hatch to bring this legislation to the floor. They have worked tirelessly to ensure this important bipartisan bill does not go away. We must now invoke cloture and pass this bill. Vote cloture and move to this legislation. If we do, we will put the American dream within the reach of far more children in Nevada and across America who want nothing more than a fair chance at success. That will be an accomplishment of which we can all be proud.” The effort, however, was without success. The result was announced – yeas 52, nays 44. Three-fifths of the Senators did not vote in the affirmative and the motion was rejected.

Resources:
Congressional Record, Daily Digest, Senate, Chamber Action, p.S13300-06.
Author: DAD

Read More...

Summary only...

Labor-HHS-Education Bill Heads to Conference

Tuesday, October 23, the Senate passed H.R. 3043, the fiscal year 2008 (FY08) Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill, by a veto-proof majority of 75-19. After four days of debating amendments, the bill is now ready for conference with the House, after which the President will have his first opportunity to follow through on his veto threats of any appropriations bills that exceed his funding requests. Congressional leaders plan to send the Labor-HHS-Education bill, the largest domestic spending legislation, to the President as soon as possible.

The Senate bill includes $606 billion in FY08 for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and the Education. The $149.9 billion in discretionary spending, which is $5.4 billion over FY07, is over $9 billion more than the President requested in his budget proposal. Within that number, the Senate increased the U.S. Department of Education’s (ED) budget to $58 billion, $2 billion above FY07. A number of ED’s programs also received sizable increases.

The Senate bill increases Title I education grant funding by $1 billion, Pell grants by $826 million, special education funding by $528 million and funding for the Head Start program by $200 million. The House bill contains a $25 million increase for career and technical education (CTE). Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) proposed a similar amendment to the Senate version, but the Senate tabled the amendment, opting to level fund CTE programs. The CTE Congressional Caucus is lobbying for the House’s increase to appear in the final conference report.

The bill now heads to conference with the House, which provides about $2 billion more than the Senate. At a stakeholder’s meeting two weeks ago, Sen. Harkin said he hoped to come out of conference with levels closer to the House’s proposal. Congressional leaders expect a speedy conference, tentatively scheduled for next week. If negotiations proceed according to plan, President Bush may have the bill on his desk by the first full week in November, at which time most members of Congress are expecting him to issue a veto.

The Labor-HHS-Education bill is usually one of the last bills to make it through both chambers of Congress, but not this year. It will be the first to reach the President because the Democratic leadership knows he will veto it and they want to capture any political advantage that it may provide. Democrats will attempt to contrast the veto to the spending in Iraq and use this battle to shift the focus from Congress’ failure to pass all twelve spending bills by the start of the fiscal year, which was a major campaign promise of the Democratic majority. Once the President vetoes the bill, appropriators will go to work on either a large omnibus bill, or a few “minibus” bills, which will include multiple spending measures lumped into larger packages.

Meanwhile, the current continuing resolution (CR), which authorizes funding for government agencies at the previous fiscal year’s spending levels, runs out in mid-November. Congress will need to pass an additional CR to keep the government running through December, at which point leaders hope to have the final omnibus finished. While this process leaves time for additional changes, the final bill, in whatever form, will likely contain numbers similar to the conference report appropriators turn out next week.

Resources:
Alex Wayne, “Senate Passes Labor-HHS-Education Spending Bill,” CQ Today, October 23, 2007.
Kelsey Lamb, “Senate Passes Labor-HHS Spending Bill With Unexpected Ease,” Congress Now, October 23, 2007.
Author: SAS

Read More...

Summary only...