PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2701-2702)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 10, 1993
Amends title XIX (Medicaid) of the Social Security Act to allow the participation in home- and community-based care programs of functionally disabled elderly individuals with: (1) incomes of up to three times the maximum amount allowed under the Supplemental Security Income program, at the State's option; and (2) two of five (currently, two of three) impaired activities of daily living. Exempts small community care settings which are not providers of home- and community-based care from survey and certification requirements. Requires case managers who have been properly trained to review such small settings for compliance with applicable requirements. Revises program funding provisions to: (1) guarantee States with a certain amount of funding over one year's election period; and (2) allow remaining funds to be carried over to the next fiscal year. Requires: (1) a State to notify the Secretary of Health and Human Services of its intention to provide home- and community-based care in order to receive Federal funding for it; and (2) the Secretary to notify each State which has submitted such a notice of the Federal funding amount available to it for the fiscal year. Requires the Secretary to evaluate and report annually to specified congressional committees on the provision of home-and community-based care by States. Revises the definition of developmentally disabled individual with respect to eligibility for community supported living arrangements program services. Allows program funds remaining at the end of a fiscal year to be carried over to the next fiscal year. Requires the Secretary to evaluate and report annually to specified congressional committees on the provision of community supported living arrangement services by States. Amends the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986 to reauthorize Alzheimer's disease demonstration projects.
People & committees
Sen. Graham, Bob [D-FL] · D–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2701-2702)
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2649-2650)
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: Jan 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.552 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.552 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.552 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.552 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.