Children's Health Insurance Accountability Act of 1998
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 20, 1998
Children's Health Insurance Accountability Act of 1998 - Amends the Public Health Service Act to require, if a group health plan (or a health insurer in connection with health insurance) requires or permits an enrollee to designate a participating primary care provider for the enrollee's child: (1) that the enrollee be permitted to designate a pediatrics specialist; and (2) if the enrollee has not designated the child's provider, that the plan consider pediatric expertise in mandatorily assigning a primary provider. Mandates that a plan or insurer, when required, refer a child to a participating specialist (or, if no participating specialist is available, to a nonparticipating specialist) with extensive experience or training who is available and accessible regarding the condition involved. Mandates a procedure for designation of a specialist as a primary provider for a child needing prolonged specialized care. Mandates standing referrals and treatment plans in certain circumstances. Requires that the plan or insurer ensure a sufficient number, distribution, and variety of providers. Requires that, if a plan or insurer provides emergency service coverage for children, that the coverage be without prior authorization, whether or not the provider is participating, and without regard to any other term or condition of coverage, subject to exception. Requires that the existence of an emergency medical condition be judged from the standard of a prudent layperson. Mandates coverage of otherwise-covered services provided as maintenance or post-stabilization care covered under the guidelines of title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act. Prohibits an insurer from imposing cost sharing for pediatric specialty services that exceed the cost sharing for other specialty care. Requires special consideration for children with special health care needs. Mandates continuity of care when a contract between an insurer and a provider is terminated. Requires an insurer to: (1) maintain an ongoing internal quality assurance program and conduct utilization review activities, both meeting specified minimum requirements; (2) maintain a complaint and appeal system; (3) provide for an independent external review process; and (4) provide specified information to enrollees, prospective enrollees, and the public. Allows State provisions at least as stringent on insurers as the requirements of this Act. Amends the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) to apply the amendments above to ERISA as if they were incorporated into ERISA. Mandates studies and reports regarding: (1) unique characteristics of illness, disability, and injury in children; (2) the development of measures of quality of care and outcomes regarding children's health care; (3) children's access to primary mental health services and the coordination of managed behavioral health services; (4) the structure and performance of non-governmental health plans, Medicaid (title XIX of the Social Security Act) managed care organizations, Medicaid plans, and the program under title XXI (Children's Health Insurance) of the Social Security Act serving the needs of children with special health care needs; (5) the structure and performance of non-governmental plans in serving children's needs as compared to Medicaid managed care organizations; and (6) the emphasis that private managed care plans place on primary care and the control of services as it relates to care and services provided to children with special health care needs.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.1808 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.1808 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.1808 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.1808 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.