PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 29, 2008
Responsible Expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program Act of 2008 - Amends title XXI (State Children's Health Insurance) (SCHIP) of the Social Security Act, as amended by the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007, to revise, reauthorize, and extend the SCHIP program through FY2013.
Requires the state SCHIP plan to specify how it will achieve coverage for 85% of eligible targeted low-income children in the state.
Prohibits payment for child health assistance for a targeted low-income child in a family whose income exceeds 300% of the poverty line. Sets forth special rules for children with family income between 200% and 300% of the applicable poverty line.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Applies Medicaid citizenship documentation requirements to SCHIP.
Terminates SCHIP coverage for nonpregnant adults.
Requires the Comptroller General to report to Congress on the best practices by states in addressing the substitution of SCHIP coverage for private coverage (SCHIP crowd-out).
Directs the Secretary to arrange with the Institute of Medicine to report to Congress on: (1) the most accurate, reliable, and timely way to measure the rate of public and private health benefits coverage among low-income children; and (2) SCHIP crowd-out.
Directs the Secretary to publish in the Federal Register and post on the Department of Health and Human Services public website: (1) recommendations regarding best practices for states to address SCHIP crowd-out; and (2) uniform standards for related data collection.
Requires each state with a SCHIP plan to submit to the Secretary a plan amendment describing how the state will address such SCHIP crowd-out and incorporate recommended best practices.
Amends the Internal Revenue Code to: (1) provide that any compensation deferred under a nonqualified deferred compensation plan of a nonqualified entity shall be taken into account for purposes of income taxation when there is no substantial risk of forfeiture of the rights to such compensation; and (2) add special rules for partners providing investment management services to partnership.
People & committees
Sen. Dole, Elizabeth [R-NC] · R–NC
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.
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 14, 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.2936 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.2936 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.2936 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.2936 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.