Week 8 of the 2026 Session

• Home
• Articles

Week 8 of the 2026 Session

During Week 8, legislative committees returned to a full schedule of bill and informational hearings. Lawmakers worked and passed bills related to income eligibility for the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), scope of practice for physical therapists and pharmacists, updates to the interstate compact for the placement of children, Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) licensing requirements, and law enforcement authority for taking custody of children under age 18.

This edition of Health at the Capitol looks at health-related policy issues addressed by the Kansas Legislature the week of March 2.

Health at the Capitol is a weekly summary providing highlights of the Kansas legislative session, with a specific focus on health policy related issues. Sign up here to receive these summaries and more, and also follow KHI on Facebook, X, LinkedIn and Instagram . Previous editions of Health at the Capitol can be found on our ARCHIVE PAGE.

On Monday, March 2, the Governor's Office released the monthly revenue report showing total tax collections at $506.3 million, which was $58.4 million, or 10.3 percent, below the estimate.

On Wednesday, March 4, Gov. Laura Kelly announced that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) had approved Kansas' Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Food Restriction Waiver. She noted that Kansas has now joined 21 other states that have implemented restrictions on candy and soda purchases with SNAP dollars. The approved waiver will go into effect on Feb. 15, 2027, the date recommended by the USDA during the approval process. Candy and soda are defined by the state's food and sales tax laws within the Kansas Retailers' Sales Tax.

• Candy is defined as a preparation of sugar, honey or other natural or artificial sweeteners in combination with chocolate, fruit, nuts or other ingredients or flavorings in the form of bars, drops or pieces. Candy does not include any preparation containing flour and shall require no refrigeration.

• Soft drink beverages are defined as nonalcoholic beverages that contain natural or artificial sweeteners. Soft drinks do not include beverages that contain milk or milk products, soy, rice or similar milk substitutes or beverages that are greater than 50 percent vegetable or fruit juice by volume.

The Kansas Department for Children and Families (DCF) had previously released a request for proposals (RFP) to bring on a contracting partner to help manage the waiver implementation plans and process. The RFP closed on Feb. 17, 2026, and a contract is expected to be in place by April 2026.

House Committee on Health and Human Services
(Rep. Will Carpenter, Chair)

On Monday, March 2, the Committee heard an informational presentation on maternal health care access from David Jordan, president and CEO of the United Methodist Health Ministry Fund, and Dr. Karen Weis, Dean of the School of Nursing and Director of the Rural Maternal Obstetrical Management Strategies (MOMS) program at the University of Kansas Medical Center in Salina. The presentation focused on findings from a report mapping maternal health care access across Kansas that examined the full continuum of care, including prenatal services, inpatient obstetrics and postpartum care, and assessed the availability of each component of the provider team required to deliver that care. Dr. Weis highlighted several key findings, including:

• Women today are twice as likely to die during pregnancy than they were 20 years ago, driven by increasing rates of hypertension, diabetes, obesity and advanced maternal age. Longer travel distances further worsen outcomes.
• In Kansas, 41 percent of counties lack direct access to prenatal care and 59 percent lack access to inpatient obstetrics, with 13 percent of ZIP codes located more than 30 miles from inpatient maternity care.
• In Kansas, 61 percent of counties have no obstetrician or gynecologist and the state has only 330 pediatricians, limiting the pipeline for subspecialists such as neonatologists and maternal-fetal medicine physicians.

Jordan outlined several policy opportunities the Committee could consider, including:

• Maximizing telehealth services and ensuring reimbursement covers all appropriate provider types and payers for maternity care
• Expanding collaborative regional health networks using hub-and-spoke models
• Addressing transportation barriers for prenatal and postpartum care
• Developing innovative Medicaid reimbursement models specific to obstetrics
• Adding new workforce roles such as community health workers, community paramedics and peer support specialists

Committee members asked questions regarding whether the access map improves when adjacent states are taken into account (Weis said northern Kansas hospitals near the Nebraska border do draw on Omaha for tertiary care, and western Kansas draws on Denver, but those distances are still very long and cross-state insurance coverage creates additional complexity); what midwife access looks like in Kansas (there are approximately 81 certified nurse midwives licensed through the Board of Nursing but lay and professional midwives were not mapped because they are not licensed in Kansas); whether outcome metrics such as infant and maternal mortality are tracked (Kansas ranks in the middle nationally on those measures and has used that data to secure grants from the Health Resources and Services Administration, but Jordan added that Kansas ranks last in the nation for maternal mortality among African American women, and that significant rural disparities also exist); whether the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) tracks outcomes by county (Weis confirmed KDHE has a county-level dashboard and noted the MOMS program could map the data in an accessible format for the Committee); and how grant-funded programs can be made sustainable (Jordan said grant dollars should be used to test models and demonstrate efficacy and that sustainability requires both Medicaid and private-payer reimbursement for evidence-based services).

The Committee also held a hearing on Senate Bill (SB) 271, which, as amended by the Senate, would change the household gross income eligibility requirement for CHIP from 250.0 percent of the 2008 federal poverty level (FPL) to 250.0 percent of the current federal poverty income guidelines with coverage subject to appropriation of funds and eligibility requirements. The bill passed the Senate on Feb. 18 on a vote of 40-0.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponents, including Christine Osterlund, Deputy Secretary of Agency Integration and Medicaid Director at KDHE, stated the bill would remove outdated statutory language to raise the CHIP income limit to 250.0 percent of the current year's FPL and each successive year. There was no opponent or neutral testimony presented.

Committee members asked questions regarding whether the Senate floor amendment changing premiums from per child to per family was consistent with federal rules (Osterlund confirmed that both per-child and per-family premiums are permitted under federal law as long as the total premium does not exceed 5 percent of household income); current premium tiers ($0, $20, $30 and $50 per month based on income level); and whether families who cannot pay premiums have any recourse or income reassessment options (families are obligated to notify the state of income changes, which can trigger a reassessment. While disenrollment during the year is now prohibited, unpaid premiums accumulate and must be paid at renewal or the child cannot complete re-enrollment).

The Committee then worked the bill, amended it to clarify that verification of pregnant Kansas children by the Secretary would be as allowed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and passed it favorably out of committee.

On Wednesday, March 4, the Committee held a hearing on SB 327, which, as amended, would change the meeting time of the Robert G. (Bob) Bethell Joint Committee on Home and Community Based Services and KanCare Oversight to meet once in each quarter, while retaining the requirement for the meetings to be two consecutive days in the third and fourth quarters. The bill passed the Senate on a vote of 38-0 on Feb. 5. As there was no conferee testimony. The Committee worked the bill and passed it favorably out of committee.

The Committee also held a hearing on SB 430, which, as amended by the Senate, would permit licensed physical therapists to perform certain capillary blood tests. The bill passed the Senate on a vote of 40-0 on Feb. 18.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponents stated that blood glucose and lactate testing via finger stick is a practical patient safety tool that gives physical therapists an additional data point to monitor exercise tolerance and adjust treatment in real time, particularly for patients with diabetes or cardiac conditions where standard markers such as heart rate are unreliable. Opponents, including Susan Gile, Executive Director of the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts (KSBHA), argued that there is no evidence-based information that this expansion of the scope of physical therapy practice is beneficial to the provision of physical therapy services and that no clinical protocols, education standards or decision-making guidelines currently exist for physical therapists performing these tests. No neutral testimony was presented.

Committee members asked questions regarding how a physical therapist would select which patients to test (American Physical Therapy Association representative said it would not be used for every patient, only those where it is clinically appropriate); how the testing would improve treatment planning (American Physical Therapy Association representative said it gives another data point to know whether to advance or modify a patient's program and allows identification of which exercises generate the lactate response needed to trigger the hormonal benefits for muscle tissue growth); potential liability if a patient with an abnormal result refuses to follow the physical therapist's advice (Gile said that if the physical therapist's advice was sound, liability would generally fall on the patient); whether codifying the test as an available tool would create a standard of care obligation even though the bill uses "may" rather than "shall" (Gile said an adverse event combined with a failure to test could still form the basis of a disciplinary action); whether the KSBHA would look more favorably at the bill if it included recordkeeping and decision-making guidelines in statute (KSBHA representative said that would address some concerns and requirements could be placed either in statute or in board rules and regulations); and whether protocols similar to those governing pharmacist point-of-care testing could be developed by KSBHA to resolve the concerns (Physical Therapy Advisory Council representative said such protocols would need to come from statute rather than KSBHA rules alone).

The Committee subsequently worked the bill on March 5, amended it to require that a physical therapist obtain written consent from the patient or patient's representative prior to performing point-of-care testing, and passed it favorably out of committee.

On Thursday, March 5, the Committee held a hearing on SB 328, which would permit pharmacists to distribute epinephrine delivery systems to schools for emergency medication kits and amend the definition of "medication" to expand the type of epinephrine that a pharmacist is allowed to distribute to a school, from epinephrine auto-injectors to epinephrine delivery systems. The bill passed the Senate on a vote of 40-0 on Feb. 10.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponents stated the current statutory term locks schools into needle-based devices, that the FDA has already approved a needle-free nasal spray option with a sublingual form anticipated and that newer delivery systems are more temperature-stable for rural settings where medications may sit on buses during field trips or athletic events. No neutral or opponent testimony was submitted.

The Committee also held a hearing on SB 448, which would authorize the use of expedited partner therapy (EPT) to treat sexually transmitted diseases. The bill passed the Senate on a vote of 40-0 on Feb. 18.

Proponents, including Sen. Bill Clifford and Ashley Goss, KDHE, stated that Kansas and South Dakota are the only states that do not authorize EPT, that untreated partner reinfection is a primary driver of recurring sexually transmitted infection (STI) cases and that preventing and treating STIs in pregnant women reduces the risk of preterm birth, stillbirth and serious newborn complications. There was no opponent or neutral testimony presented.

Committee members asked questions regarding whether the singular use of "partner" in the bill limits treatment to one person (Revisor said that treating multiple partners would be within the provider's judgment); whether the abstinence guidance in the written materials is enforceable (Revisor confirmed it is guidance only, not an enforceable requirement); and whether there are concerns about prescribing for a patient the provider has not examined (Rep. Bryce acknowledged he and others have done this in practice, and Goss confirmed the liability protection clause in the bill addresses situations where the provider acted in good faith with the information available).

Senate Committee on Public Health and Welfare
(Sen. Beverly Gossage, Chair) 

On Tuesday, March 3, the Committee held a hearing on Substitute for House Bill (HB) 2250, which would include administering an emergency opioid antagonist as a protected act immune from criminal prosecution if the person rendered aid reasonably appeared to need medical assistance or requested medical assistance from law enforcement or emergency medical services as a result of the use of a controlled substance. The bill would also define "emergency opioid antagonist" and permit the administration of an emergency opioid antagonist up to 10 years past the product's expiration date. The substitute bill passed the House on a vote of 120-1 on Feb. 19.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponents, including Rep. Pat Proctor and representatives of KDHE and the Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services (KDADS), stated that naloxone, the most widely used emergency opioid antagonist, remains highly effective beyond its labeled expiration date, and that cost savings would be significant for law enforcement and distribution programs. A representative of the Kansas Association of Chiefs of Police, Kansas Sheriffs' Association and Kansas Peace Officers Association requested an amendment to extend the liability protections in the bill to anyone administering the emergency opioid antagonist, including first responders and anyone licensed by the Board of Emergency Medical Services. Written-only opponent testimony was submitted by a representative of Biotechnology Innovation Organization, who raised patient safety concerns and argued there have been no comprehensive clinical studies establishing that opioid antagonists remain safe and effective when used beyond their FDA-approved expiration dates. There was no neutral testimony submitted.

The Committee subsequently worked the bill on Wednesday, March 4, and amended it to:

• Specify that an emergency opioid antagonist may be used to treat overdose up to 10 years past the expiration date
• Add civil liability protection for first responders regarding expired opioid antagonists
• Specify that pharmacists, health care providers and school nurses cannot prescribe, dispense, distribute or furnish an expired emergency opioid antagonist.

The bill was then passed favorably out of committee, as amended.

The Committee also held a hearing on HB 2562, which would add physical therapists, licensed to practice under the Physical Therapy Practice Act, to the list of authorized practitioners who can certify to the Kansas Department of Revenue, Division of Vehicles, that an individual has a disability for the purpose of issuing a special license plate or permanent or temporary placard for a person with a disability. The bill passed the House unanimously on Feb. 18.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponents stated that physical therapists are specifically trained to evaluate the mobility limitations referenced in the statute and that physicians routinely consult physical therapists and rely on their documentation when certifying disabilities. No neutral or opponent testimony was submitted. The Committee subsequently worked the bill on Thursday, March 5 and passed it favorably out of Committee.

The Committee also worked HB 2557, which would enact the Interstate Compact for the Placement of Children (ICPC) and repeal the current ICPC, and passed it favorably out of Committee.

On Wednesday, March 4, the Committee held a hearing on HB 2478, which would require an applicant for an advanced practice registered nurse (APRN) or certified registered nurse anesthetist (CRNA) license to be fingerprinted for state and national criminal history record checks. The bill passed the House on a vote of 117-4 on Feb. 11.

Proponent testimony from the Kansas State Board of Nursing stated the bill would consolidate authority for fingerprinting and criminal background checks into one statute and that obtaining both state and national criminal history for all APRN and CRNA applicants seeking licensure would provide needed public protection. There was no neutral or opponent testimony submitted. On Thursday, March 5, the Committee worked the bill and passed it favorably out of committee.

The Committee also held a hearing on HB 2509, which, as amended, would amend the Health Care Provider Insurance Availability Act to add APRNs to the list of health care providers participating in the Health Care Stabilization Fund. The bill passed the House on a vote of 89-33 on Feb. 19.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponent testimony was provided by a representative of the Kansas Medical Society (KMS), who argued that the Healthcare Stabilization Fund Oversight Committee recommended adding APRNs into the Fund following the expansion of prescriptive authority for APRNs in 2022. Written-only opponent testimony was submitted by a representative of the Kansas Advanced Practice Registered Nurse Association, who argued that while some of their concerns about the bill were addressed by amendments adopted by the House Committee on Health and Human Services on Feb. 16, some concerns remain. These include limited plan options for ARNPs offered by the Fund; the requirement for physician oversight, along with an annual surcharge, which could drive APRNs to seek costly alternative coverage or relocation; and the lack of representation for APRNs on the Fund's Board of Governors. Neutral testimony was provided by a representative of the Fund, who stated that Kansas consistently ranks among the top five states with the least expensive annual malpractice liability insurance rates.

Committee members asked questions regarding what rates APRNs would be charged (KMS representative said rates would be determined actuarially based on practice type, as is done for the approximately 18 physician classifications, and that rates are reviewed annually so that no provider type subsidizes another); whether the original intent of the Fund has shifted given that APRNs can already obtain coverage on the private market (KMS representative stated that a public benefit lies in standardizing minimum coverage and equal liability requirements across provider types with prescriptive authority); and whether there would be two nurse representatives on the Board of Governors following this change (Fund representative confirmed that a CRNA already serves on the board and this bill would add an APRN seat, bringing the Board to 12 members).

On Thursday, March 5, the Committee held a hearing on Sub. for Sub. for HB 2132, which would amend law in the Revised Code for Care of Children (CINC Code) concerning when a law enforcement officer may take a child under 18 years of age into custody. The bill would make it discretionary for a law enforcement officer to take a child under 18 years of age into custody when the officer:

• Reasonably believes the child will be harmed if not immediately removed from the place or residence where the child has been found
• Reasonably believes the child is experiencing a behavioral health crisis and is likely to cause harm to self or others

The bill passed the House on a vote of 119-0 on Feb. 12. (Note: Current law makes it mandatory for law enforcement to take a child into custody when the above circumstances exist.)

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponent Rep. Cyndi Howerton stated the bill is a "technical clean-up," changing the word "shall" to "may" in the CINC Code. She also stated that law enforcement had requested the "may" language to allow officers discretion on scene, including the ability to arrange for a child to go to a grandparent or other safe placement without formally exercising Police Protective Custody, and that the statutory requirement for DCF to respond within 24 hours provides the assurance officers previously lacked. Opponents, including representatives of the Shawnee and Johnson Counties District Attorney offices, argued changing the mandatory language to "may" gives police officers "mixed signals" regarding when to remove a child at risk and makes it more likely that an officer will conclude removal is not required, which is dangerous for children. There was no neutral testimony submitted.

House Committee on Child Welfare and Foster Care
(Rep. Cyndi Howerton, Chair)

On Monday, March 2, the Committee received an update from Secretary Laura Howard, DCF, on the agency's child welfare programs, data trends and ongoing initiatives. She reported that DCF has moved from the discovery phase into the design phase of implementing the new Comprehensive Child Welfare Information System (CCWIS), which will consolidate multiple existing information systems used by DCF and its contracted case management providers into a single platform with a projected go-live date of November 2028. She also described the "A Home for Every Child" federal pilot initiative, which would allow participating states to transition from the existing Child and Family Services Review (CFSR) program improvement plan process to a more outcome-focused, data-driven accountability model. Howard stated Kansas has expressed interest in participating.

Committee members asked questions regarding average length-of-stay data (Deputy Secretary Tanya Keys stated the average length of stay for all children leaving foster care is 26 months, including approximately 12 months for children who reintegrate with their families and 43 months for children exiting through adoption); what factors contribute to the longer timelines for adoption (Secretary Howard noted that timelines can vary by region, court system and judicial district, and concurrent case planning and more frequent court reviews may help accelerate permanency decisions); which round of the CFSR program improvement plan Kansas is currently in (Kansas is in its fourth round and was among the first states to enter that round); and the caseload summary showing foster care spending increased between fiscal year 2024 and 2025 despite a decrease in the number of children in care (the increase is primarily attributable to rate changes, including increases to placement rates for relative caregivers, and higher placement intensity among the remaining children in care).

On Wednesday, March 4, the Committee held an informational hearing on HB 2742, which would enact the Family Rights in Medical Investigations Act, provide requirements for the reporting of suspicions of abuse or neglect of a child by medical professionals, and require a medical professional to provide notice to a parent prior to conducting any nonemergency examination or interview related to suspected abuse or neglect and notice of the right to obtain an independent second medical opinion.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

A private citizen spoke about her family's experience with a suspected child abuse investigation at Children's Mercy Hospital, which motivated her to request the bill. She stated that HB 2742 addresses a gap between medical suspicion and legal accusation, and that providers should be required to document consideration of alternative medical explanations, parents should be informed of the investigation and have access to medical records, and an independent second opinion should be sought. Written-only testimony was also submitted by three additional private citizens.

Deputy Secretary Tanya Keys, DCF, testified regarding the Child Abuse Review and Evaluation (CARE) referral process, which went into effect statewide in May 2023 following a pilot period in some counties. Keys explained that the purpose of CARE referrals is to connect children and families with medical professionals to receive recommendations regarding medical treatment. She reported that as of January 2026, DCF had made approximately 7,600 CARE referrals statewide. Of those, 74 percent resulted in a recommendation that no medical or forensic evaluation was required, while 12 percent resulted in a recommendation for examination by a CARE provider.

Committee members asked questions regarding whether a CARE exam might have already occurred before DCF becomes involved (Keys confirmed this is possible, explaining that when a medical resource center is also the CARE exam provider, the exam may have already taken place by the time DCF receives the report); and whether a hotline call from a hospital expedites the referral process (the three-business-day timeline is DCF policy rather than current law, but a recent statutory change requiring DCF to respond to law enforcement reports within 24 hours means CARE referrals would be made sooner in those circumstances).

Sara Hortenstine, Division Chief, Youth Services Division, State Child Death Review Board, stated that for over 30 years, the Board has reviewed more than 13,000 child fatalities in Kansas and identified the CARE program as among the most impactful child protection laws Kansas has enacted. She also stated that 83 percent of child abuse homicides reviewed by the Board showed evidence of prior abuse that likely would have been identified through timely medical evaluation and expressed concern that the HB 2742 requirements could delay child welfare determinations at times when children may be unsafe. She noted that parents already have the ability to seek independent medical opinions within existing timelines.

Kerri Weeks, M.D., FAAP, Kansas CARE Network, spoke regarding the role of child abuse pediatricians and the CARE program and emphasized that mandated reporting and CARE are separate processes. CARE is triggered only after DCF receives a report, assigns a worker, the worker makes a referral to the medical resource center, and the initial referral results in a determination of whether additional medical evaluation is needed rather than a diagnosis. She noted that the majority of children who receive a CARE exam are not ultimately diagnosed with physical abuse and stated that there is no financial incentive to diagnose abuse through the program.

Emily Killough, MD, FAAP, Kansas CARE Network, testified that fewer than 50 percent of the cases she evaluates result in a diagnosis of abuse, and that she has evaluated children whose injuries resulted from accidents, genetic conditions and self-injurious behaviors. She echoed that mandated reporting and CARE are distinct processes and that CARE is not involved in court proceedings or legal determinations. She described the CARE program as an important tool for connecting children in rural Kansas with medical expertise in their communities.

Committee members asked about instances where a CARE exam may have already occurred before a DCF referral is received and Killough acknowledged that the process is not always linear, noting that referrals sometimes arrive weeks or months after a child has already been seen, including cases where a parent self-refers to her clinic or where a child is admitted to a hospital where a child abuse pediatrician is already on staff. Members asked about the billing structure and Killough explained that providers bill the state rather than the child's insurance for CARE-related services, as children who may be victims of a crime should not be billed for their medical evaluation.

At the close of the hearing Chair Howerton indicated the Committee would reconvene on March 9 to discuss potential safeguards and next steps and noted the topic may be taken up again by the Joint Committee on Child Welfare System Oversight.

Other Bills With Action During Week 8

HB 2223, as amended by the Senate Committee of the Whole, would amend the optometry law regarding scope of practice. The bill was enrolled and presented to the Governor on Tuesday, March 3.

Substitute (Sub.) for HB 2299, as passed by the House Committee of the Whole, would have declared antisemitism and antisemitic acts to be against public policy and establish a statutory definition of such terms. The Senate Committee on Education passed Senate Sub. for Sub. for HB 2299 on Wednesday, March 4, which would require each school district and accredited nonpublic school, as defined in the bill, to adopt policies and procedures regarding the use of personal electronic communication devices (personal devices, including cell phones) and social media platforms. The bill also would provide indemnity for lost or damaged devices, exempt virtual schools, and add language regarding nonpublic school accreditation and the rights of certain accredited nonpublic schools. The original provisions were removed from the bill. The Senate Committee of the Whole amended the bill to:

• Require a national or regional accrediting agency to be recognized by the State Board of Education in order for the nonpublic school to have the same rights as a nonpublic school accredited by the State Board
• Add language requiring that national or regional accrediting agencies recognized by the State Board, on or before March 1, 2026, cannot lose such recognition without the approval of the Legislature

The bill, as amended, was passed by the Senate on Thursday, March 5, on a vote of 32-4. (Note: The House concurred with the Senate amendments and passed the bill on a vote of 84-39 on March 10.)

HB 2412, as passed by the House Committee of the Whole, would increase the penalties for the crimes of endangering a child and aggravated endangering a child when such child is less than 6 years of age. The Senate Committee on Judiciary amended the bill on Thursday, March 5, to make it effective upon publication in the Kansas Register and passed it favorably out of committee.

HB 2635, as passed by the House Committee of the Whole, would create the Pregnancy Center Autonomy and Rights of Expression Act. It would make several findings related to pregnancy centers and the services provided at such centers, and would prohibit regulations policies, procedures or other measures that would prohibit a pregnancy center from taking certain actions or requiring that a pregnancy center take specific actions. The Senate Committee on Federal and State Affairs passed the bill favorably out of committee on Wednesday, March 4.

Sub. for SB 315, making and concerning supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 2026 and appropriations for fiscal years 2027 through 2030 for various state agencies. The bill was amended by the Senate and passed on March 4 on a vote of 21-19.

SB 363, as amended by the Senate Committee on Government Efficiency, would establish data matching and eligibility verification requirements for the Secretary of DCF and the Secretary of KDHE for certain public assistance programs; require quarterly and annual reporting to the Legislature on certain programs; establish continuous eligibility provisions for select individuals; prohibit certain exemptions, waivers and self-attestation; and require redeterminations for certain public assistance programs to occur quarterly. The Senate Committee of the Whole amended the bill to:

• Add clarifying language that the state data sets used in the data-matching agreements required by the bill would be data sets that indicate a change in circumstance that may affect eligibility
• Add individuals who are 19 years of age or younger to the list of those who would remain under the Kansas Medicaid Eligibility Standards in effect on June 30, 2026.

The bill was then passed on Thursday, March 5, on a vote of 25-12.

SB 368, as passed by the Senate Committee of the Whole, would enact the Health Care Sharing Ministries Tax Deduction Act, providing a subtraction modification for taxpayers for qualified health care sharing expenses (contributions for medical expenses and fees of the health care sharing ministry) and amount of qualified health care share received (amount received as a member of a health care sharing ministry) by taxpayers. The bill was passed by the House Committee on Taxation on Wednesday, March 4.

SB 497 would add 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH), a derivative of kratom, and mitragynine, the primary psychoactive component of kratom, to Schedule 1 of the Uniform Controlled Substances Act. The bill also would make conforming amendments to the definition of "fentanyl-related controlled substance" in the Kansas Criminal Code. The Senate Committee of the Whole passed the bill on Thursday, March 5, and it was referred to the House Committee on Health and Human Services on Friday, March 6.