Family Protection Act of 1979
Latest action. Referred to House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.
Family Protection Act of 1979 - Establishes a minimum monthly benefit amount under part A (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) of title IV of the Social Security Act. Sets the minimum monthly benefit amount furnished to any "assistance unit" at 70 percent of the projected official nonfarm poverty line minus the sum of the unit's income for such month and the average value of the food stamps for which an assistance unit of the same size would have been eligible during the last preceding July if the total income of such unit for such July consisted solely of payments made under a State's AFDC plan. Defines the term "assistance unit" to mean, a dependent child or children and the relative with whom such child is living who are claiming aid, and any other individual in the same home whose needs should be considered in determining the need of such child or relative. Establishes a new formula for determining Federal payments to a State under part A based on either the "Federal public assistance percentage" or the "alternative Federal public assistance percentage," multiplied by the amount expended by the State under the AFDC program, but subject to certain maximum limitations on the Federal matching rate. Sets forth a formula for determining the maximum State monthly benefit subject to Federal matching payments. Defines terms used in computing such payments. Permits States to pay under part A reduced benefits in the case of an AFDC child living with a relative who is not legally responsible for such child by pro-rating the costs of shelter and utilities for such child among household members. Limits the amount which may be disregarded from income as child care costs in determining eligibility for part A benefits based on income to $150 per month for one child or $300 per month if the applicant has more than one child. Limits the amount of financial resources which an assistance unit may own and still remain eligible for aid under part A to $1,750 or $3,000 if two or more persons in a unit are over age 60. Requires a State plan to make AFDC payments to an assistance unit with a low-income parent. Considers a parent to have a low income if the income of the assistance unit was such that the unit would be eligible for AFDC payments because there is a "dependent child" as defined in part A, in the unit. Permits States to exclude such individuals from the benefits provided under title XIX (Medicaid) of the Social Security Act. Requires a State to maintain, under part A, a benefit level for an assistance unit of at least the level paid to a unit of the same size and income level in March 1979. Directs the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare to pay to a State in addition to other payments now required under part A an amount equal to the excess, if there is an excess, of the "adjusted non-Federal share" for any fiscal year prior to 1986 which exceeds the "adjusted base year amount" for such State. Defines the terms "adjusted non-Federal share" and "adjusted base year amount. Directs the Secretary of the Treasury to pay under part A to a State, at the option of a State: (1) 90 percent of the expenditures for development of mechanized claims processing and information retrieval systems to provide for the effective administration of the State plan under such title; and (2) 75 percent of State expenditures for the operation of such systems. Provides for an additional reimbursement to a qualifying State based on the State's "negative case action error rate." Defines the term "negative case action error rate" to mean the total of the negative case action error rates for: (1) incorrect denials of applications for assistance or other incorrect dispositions of applications without determinations of eligibility; and (2) incorrect terminations of assistance. Directs the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare to set forth the rights and responsibilities of AFDC applicants and recipients including, among others: (1) requiring a State to determine eligibility within 30 days of receiving an application; (2) the right of an assistance unit to protest any agency action; and (3) requiring a State to replace a lost or stolen check within five days. Directs the Secretary to conduct a study of the desirability and feasibility of raising the minimum benefit amount under AFDC to 100 percent of the official nonfarm poverty line, and of raising the maximum benefit amount subject to Federal matching to an amount in excess of 100 percent of the official nonfarm poverty line.
Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Introduced in House" stage on May 16, 1979. It describes the bill, it is not the legal text.
Where is it in the process, and what happens next?
4 steps remain before this bill could become law.
The record's latest action, on May 16, 1979: Referred to House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.
- Clearing the committees it was referred to, and being scheduled for a floor vote
- Passage by the House
- Passage by the Senate
- The President's signature. If the President vetoes it, two-thirds of both chambers must vote to override.
How likely is it to become law?
Civibrief does not forecast outcomes and this page has no opinion about this one. What the record supports is a base rate, which is a fact about the whole pile, not a prediction about this measure.
In the 96th Congress (1979-80), 613 of the 12,581 bills and joint resolutions introduced became law, about 4.9 percent. That count covers every measure at every stage, including the many that never left committee.
This one is not there yet: 4 steps are still outstanding, listed above.
Has anyone actually voted on it?
No. No roll call in this Congress cites this measure. That is the ordinary outcome: most measures never reach a recorded floor vote, and a committee ends most of them simply by not acting.
A vote is not the only thing that happens to a measure. Hearings, markups, and referrals are all recorded actions, and none of them is a vote of the full chamber.
Who is behind it?
CHARLES RANGEL (D-NY) introduced it on May 16, 1979. No cosponsors are recorded.
Cosponsoring is a formal signature on the text. It is not a commitment to vote for the measure, it does not bind anyone's party, and a long list of cosponsors is a measure of attention rather than of prospects.
How long has it been in play?
It was introduced on May 16, 1979, 17284 days ago. The most recent recorded action was 17284 days ago, on May 16, 1979.
Measures do not carry over. Anything the 96th Congress has not finished by January 3, 1981 dies when the term ends, and has to be introduced again from the start in the next Congress.
Every answer above is assembled from this measure's own record on Congress.gov and from published counts of what Congress has passed before. Civibrief does not predict outcomes and takes no position on any measure.
Vote history
- HouseIn committee, no floor vote yet
- SenateAwaits House passage
- PresidentAwaits both chambers