Health Care BS

Comments 6

1. Marc Brown wrote:

   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 ¶
2. Catron wrote:

   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 ¶
3. Marc Brown wrote:

   So, is not true that the majority of SCHIP adults were/are to be parents?

   Posted 15 Nov 2007 at 4:51 pm ¶
4. Catron wrote:

   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 ¶
5. shadowfax wrote:

   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 ¶
6. Catron wrote:

   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