Anyone still naïve enough to believe that the SCHIP legislation being pushed by congressional Democrats is about children should read this in the NYT:
Eight senators told Democratic leaders this week that they could not support any bill if their states lost money for the coverage of parents.
Never mind that SCHIP is supposed to be a program for low-income kids. These guys want to use it as a Trojan horse for a “universal health care” system. As Senator Max Baucus recently put it at the Health Affairs policy summit:
SCHIP should be viewed as the first step in a uniquely crafted American solution to providing universal health care coverage.
But that evil Bush and his mean-spirited Republican accomplices just won’t play along:
President Bush and Congressional Republicans say that covering adults, including parents, violates the purpose of the program, which is to cover children.
It’s bad enough that the Democrats want to cover children from families living well above the poverty line. It is a true perversion of the SCHIP program to insist on adult coverage.
Comments 6
It’s about covering parents, which is is crucial to family wellbeing and to enrolling more children. So now you’re anti-family values too. And the ‘well above the poverty line’ angle has been comprehensively trashed - it was only in the most expensive places like New York that up to 300% was mooted.
Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 2:59 pm ¶It’s about covering parents, which is is crucial to family wellbeing and to enrolling more children.
It’s hard to believe that even you have fallen for that preposterous canard.
Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 3:52 pm ¶So, is not true that the majority of SCHIP adults were/are to be parents?
Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 4:51 pm ¶You’re crawfishing, Marc. You’re earlier assertion was that “covering parents … is crucial to family wellbeing …” Even if you had some stats to prove that, it’s a red herring.
The “C” in SCHIP stands for “children.” These people are trying to hijack a program meant for low-income children. It’s dispicable.
Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 6:33 pm ¶Didn’t read the text of the letter, but I think you over-state the implications of the letter. My read of the article implies that the senators don’t want to lose “flexibility” (which I read as “money”) to cover the adults (”Parents”) under medicaid.
Anything beyond that is inference. If they are advocating actually putting adults under SCHIP, please provide more evidence.
Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 7:48 am ¶I read “flexibility” to mean “vote buying.” They fully intend to enroll adults at the expense of low-income kids. In fact, they are already doing it. Why? Because adults vote and kids don’t.
Posted 19 Nov 2007 at 2:35 pm ¶Post a Comment