Why Bush resists child health bill

[rodeodance]

Source: csmonitor

Why Bush resists child health bill

By Gail Russell Chaddock Mon Oct 1, 4:00 AM ET
.............

A 12-year-old boy delivered the Democratic response to Mr. Bush's radio address this weekend, and children pulling red wagons are expected to deliver 1 million petitions supporting renewal of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP) to the White House on Monday.

Explaining a vote against healthcare for poor children is not the issue that Republicans wanted to take into the November 2008 elections. Last week, 18 Republicans in the Senate and 45 in the House broke with Bush to support the pending S-CHIP bill, and Democrats say they need to flip only 15 more House Republicans to give the Congress a veto-proof majority.
............."

A presidential veto of the S-CHIP bill in its current form is "a sure thing," says White House spokesman Tony Fratto. Bush will risk the political fallout because the policy is wrong. He adds, it "doesn't focus on the core population that needs to be served," that is, children in families earning less than 200 percent of the federal poverty level. (For a family of four, that's an annual income of $41,300 or less.)

............

Republicans who back Bush are still looking for a concise answer to the issue raised by 12-year-old Graeme Frost. "I don't know why President Bush wants to stop kids who really need help from getting CHIP," Graeme said in the Democratic radio address Saturday. He told listeners that S-CHIP funding helped him recover from a "really bad car accident."

Read more: Why Bush resists child health bill

[supernova]

1. Link?

[auburngrad82]

2. It's probably more about race than anything else

Since it's mostly minority kids who would benefit. It's similar to the GOP's animosity to the minimum wage hike. Since minorities would benefit from it the GOP doesn't like it. If it ain't white it don't float with the GOP.

But that's just my opinion.



Liberal bumper stickers

[The Count]

3. Answer: Halliburton needs a new pair of shoes Link:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1001/p01s03-uspo.html

[Arkansas Granny]

4. This is apparently one of the sticking points, according to Bush:

By stripping out a requirement that S-CHIP cover 95 percent of the neediest children before extending it to higher-income children, Congress is undermining a key intent of the program, Mr. Fratto says. "We think this is a good program, and Congress should keep it focused on what it was intended to do."

The US Department of Health and Human Services estimates that some 794,000 children in these lowest-income families are eligible for S-CHIP and are not currently covered.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1001/p01s03-uspo.html

I think a target of 95% coverage of neediest children would be very hard to reach. I can't say for sure why children of eligible children don't enroll them, but in my part of the country, there are a lot of people who qualify for benefits or one kind or another that won't accept or even apply because they don't want the government involved in their personal lives anymore than it already is.

[MissMarple]

6. Many people don't know about S-CHIP. Some states and regions are better about enrolling kids.

Others...not so much. Enrolling kids through the schools, emergency rooms, or social services seems like obvious routes. Not everyone will be enrolled, even then. Some will be enrolled who may not fall under the guidelines. But in the end, how bad is that?

It is, perhaps, not surprising that a congress critter from Tennessee is holding firm against the bill. Would that be because the tobacco lobby may be pushing against higher taxes on cigarettes? And, then the quite telling comment that the insurance industry might lose "millions", how damning is that? My cynicism about these people continues to deepen. They refuse to think their way out of a paper bag.

Corporations protecting their bottom lines by denying health care to kids. What kind of nation have we become? This is just barbaric.

[WoodyD]

5. I recall reading about something Dubya did

way back when he was governor of Texas. Can't recall where I read it -- probably in something by Molly Ivins or Jim Hightower, or some other Texas chronicler of Chimpy's early political career. He wanted to be able to say that he had reduced the number of kids who were on CHIP or a similar program, but he didn't want to do it by cutting funding or changing eligibility requirements. So he cut the funding for activities that helped inform people about the program. Bottom line: people didn't enroll because they didn't know about it. Improving children's health, Dubya-style.

[MissMarple]

7. It is in David Corn's "The Lies of George W. Bush" published in 2003.

It may be in Molly's book about shrub as well. He fought to limit eligibility, and then didn't implement the program for five years. About that time Dan Rather asked the shrub about the abysmal record of Texas' health insurance coverage, ranked 50th for children and 49th for women, and he said the statistics were wrong and anyway he didn't know the details.

It was all about the bottom line and providing tax breaks for deep pockets.

[WoodyD]

8. Thanks for the details,

Miss Marple. You truly are a sleuth. I cannot believe that anyone with even a passing knowledge of his abysmal record in Texas could ever have voted for the chimp. Then again, "ignorant" pretty much defines his infamous "base."