PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 9, 1998
Children's Lead Prevention and Inclusive Treatment Act of 1998 (or the Children's Lead PAInT Act) - Amends title XIX (Medicaid) of the Social Security Act to provide for a reduced Federal medical assistance percentage for States that fail to meet specified minimum blood lead screening rates established by this Act, subject to waiver by the Secretary of Health and Human Services in the case of a State that has performed during a fiscal year such a significant number of lead blood level assessments that the State reasonably cannot be expected to achieve the appropriate minimum blood lead screening rate. Requires the State Medicaid plan to provide for reporting to the Secretary: (1) the number of children who are not more than two years of age and enrolled in the Medicaid program; and (2) the number and results of lead blood level assessments performed by the State, along with demographic and identifying information consistent with the recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) with respect to lead surveillance. Requires each contract between the State and an entity responsible for provision of medical assistance under the State plan to provide for: (1) compliance with mandatory screening requirements for lead blood level assessments commensurate with guidelines and mandates issued by the Secretary through the Administrator of the Health Care Financing Administration; as well as (2) coverage of appropriate qualified lead treatment services, as prescribed by CDC guidelines, for children with elevated levels of lead in their blood. Allows reimbursement for qualified lead treatment services for children with elevated blood lead levels. Amends the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 and the Head Start Act to mandate lead poisoning screening for an infant or child to be eligible to participate in either the special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children, or early Head Start programs.
People & committees
Sen. Torricelli, Robert G. [D-NJ] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S12165)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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
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.
Analyze S.2598 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.
Examine S.2598 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.
Examine S.2598 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.
Examine S.2598 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.